Radical Independence Conference a missed opportunity

Over 700 people attended the Radical Independence Conference (RIC) held in Glasgow on November 24. The large conference turnout highlighted the continuing evident trend of radicalised layers of Scottish society, particularly young people, looking towards independence as a way out of the nightmare of austerity; this was also present in the 10,000 strong YES demonstration in Edinburgh in late September. (see here)

The conference was organised by the International Socialist Group (ISG) (a split from the Socialist Workers Party in Scotland) with the involvement of academics and intellectuals around the journal Scottish Left Review. Conference organisers said the RIC was aimed at “all those who are to the left of the Labour and SNP leadersip.”

Many Scottish National Party (SNP) members attended as well as Greens, left groups including the Scottish Socialist Party (SSP), Solidarity etc. There was also significant numbers of young people. However, there were only  a small smattering of trade unionists participating. The Conference stated aim was to start a “Scottish Spring” and articulate a “radical vision” for an independent Scotland.

However, this conference provided no strategy or opportunity for real debate and discussion on building a movement that could win a majority of the working class and youth behind a YES vote in 2014. Far less debate a strategy for defeating austerity and promoting a socialist alternative to the capitalist crisis.  

Virtually absent from the radical rhetoric of the speakers was criticism of the SNP’s record of implementing austerity cuts and the official YES campaigns relationship with big business. The impression was that this Radical Independence Campaign was in fact, going to give the SNP-led YES campaign a radical cover.

Lack of democratic debate

The conference was structured to avoid discussion and debate and any criticism of the ideas put forward by the conference organisers. SNP and Green councillors, some of whom have voted for or proposed austerity cuts, were also presented as friends and allies.

The conference was organised around two plenaries, one dealing with Scotland, the second an international rally. There was no discussion allowed following the top-table speakers.

Instead, conference broke immediately into workshops that contained up to five platform speakers with only half an hour for discussion, with speakers were often limited to one minute. Towards the end of the conference, a number of young workshop participants raised the undemocratic nature of proceedings and the lack of opportunity to challenge the organiser’s proposals. This was responded to by assurances that people would report back from the workshops in the final plenary.

As the conference overran a number of workshops didn’t even get this report back. There was no opportunity to discuss, amend or vote on the organisers proposals in front of the entire conference. Delegates were just given a standing order form for Radical Independence and a list of forthcoming events and action organised by Radical Independence, this will include a mass blockade of the Trident nuclear base in spring 2013.

One Scottish people?

The perspective was put forward, and applauded and unchallenged by the left organisations present, that the only by a Yes Vote in the 2014 referendum could austerity be stopped. The “British State and Westminster” cannot be defeated otherwise.

The urgent need for a 24-hour general by the working class across Britain did not feature in the discussion. The only people to raise this were members of the Socialist Party Scotland.

Permeating the conference was the idea that the “Scottish people” exist as one homogenous progressive entity. Therefore independence will guarantee Scotland moving in a more progressive direction.

This was epitomised in a declaration from the conference organisers, read out by Pat Kane of the band Hue and Cry

“We believe the success of a country comes from the hard work and commitment of all. We believe that a good country is one in which all share fairly the success of good times and all share fairly the burdens of bad times. We believe that the people who run a country should reflect and represent the people of that country. We believe Scotland belongs to us all and that neither this land nor its people should be exploited only for the profit of a few. This is what the people of Scotland believe too. At election after election Scots have used the ballot box as a loudhailer to ask for a better country. But at every turn the path from here to that better country has been blocked by the alliance of wealthy people who run British for their own benefit. The more Scots have voted for justice the less just Britain has become. Instead we have corrupt wars, a corrupt media, corrupt bankers, corrupt corporations, and corrupt politicians. But a path to a better Scotland is open once more, one that does not require us to ask the permission of those who do not want us to reach our destination. In an independent Scotland the only thing holding us back will be ourselves.”

This is an attempt to cover up the deep class divisions that exist in Scotland between pro-independence advocates among Scottish big business like millionaires Brian Souter and Tom Hunter who want a low tax haven for “enterprise” and the working class, the unemployed and the poor, many of whom look to independence as a route out of poverty and cuts.

SNP leader Alex Salmond and the SNP leadership are intent on maintaining capitalism and the deep class divisions inherent in the system, including keeping the monarchy, being tied to the interest rates of the Bank of England, remaining in NATO and lowering corporation tax. Although criticism of these pro-business ideas was highlighted there was no discussion about how the SNP leadership could be challenged by a “radical mass movement” or the “radical Scottish people” post-independence.

The conference organisers, particularly the ISG, continuously raised the idea that a YES vote would represent a “break-up of the British state” and therefore an end to British Imperialism and the “empire”.

There is no doubt that Independence for Scotland would be a major blow to the capitalist class in Britain in terms of their international weight and prestige. But Salmond and the SNP’s vision of an Independent Scotland would see many of the features of this “British state” left intact including a shared defence policy and membership of NATO.

The capitalist class in an Independent Scotland like all capitalist classes would use a state machine to protect its interests and control over the wealth in society. Yet the building of a genuine left and socialist alternative to challenge the SNP leadership was not raised for discussion by the conference organisers.

Many of the discussions took place based on the assumption that a YES vote would be won. And that an independent Scotland would be under the control of the “radical Scottish people” who could do what they wanted regarding the economy and foreign policy.

This was particularly seen in the “ethical foreign policy” workshop with the impression being given that an Independent Scotland, would automatically cut ties with Israel and pursue a boycott, divestment and sanction policy.

The model of Nordic capitalism

The conference proposed “an environmentally sustainable economy, a modern republic, a social alternative to cuts.” These laudable ideas were presented as possible without the need for a radical break from free market crisis ridden capitalism.

This was expressed by Green Party leader and MSP Patrick Harvie who argued that Britain was structurally and culturally incapable of any kind of reform and therefore the only prospect of change was through a YES vote in 2014.

He outlined his vision of a “Scotland of the many” based on small co-operative businesses, and co-operative banks in the Nordic Model, a mixed economy with as much “people control” as possible. This illusion presupposes a progressive form of capitalism which is ruled out given the economic crisis and savage austerity.

There was only notional discussion on convincing workers and young people who are wary and sceptical towards the idea of capitalist independence. The attitude of some of the conference organisers bordered on dismissive. ISG speakers at the international rally and the “strategies for independence” workshop claimed the debate in society over independence was a split between “the left and the right” and that the trade unions had just picked the wrong side. There was no discussion or ideas presented on how the trade unions could be persuaded to change course.

This was despite Susan Archibald a disabled activist who spoke at the opening rally who gave a real flavour of the mood in many working class communities “people want to how how a Yes vote will affect their lives, their jobs, their services, and I’m not sure how to convince them”.

Class struggle absent

Despite the conference taking place only ten days after the general strikes and mass demonstrations across Europe on N14, discussion of these events was virtually absent from the contributions of the speakers at the international rally.

The speakers also echoed the vague idea that a better form of capitalism is possible with the representatives of Syriza and Front Le Gauche putting forward the slogan of a “Social Europe” rather than a socialist Europe.

This was particularly present in the speech of Stelios Pappas, Syriza’s European Policy Co-ordinator who called for renegotiation of Greece’s debt with the IMF, ECB and EU. In contrast, Xekinhma the Greek sister party of Socialist Party Scotland calls for non-payment of the crippling debt and the nationalisation of the banking system. Pappas called on the Troika to be forced to provide a 1945 Marshall Plan style new deal for the country.

The “strategies for winning Independence workshop” exposed the conference organiser’s soft attitude to the SNP and Salmond’s pro big business orientation. The SNP and the YES campaign were only criticised for not being anti-imperialist and their pro NATO and Monarchy stance. No mention of cuts and the wage freeze for public sector workers.

There were assurances that the Radical Independence would be a “movement in the movement” and would feed into the SNP-led YES campaign.

Echo for socialist ideas

Socialist Party Scotland activists received a warm response to our ideas, despite our critical approach to the conference. Our material called for an Independent Socialist Scotland with clear demands for public ownership of the economic levers and for the need for a mass campaign giving an independent voice for the working class in Scotland based on trade unionists and young people, demanding the powers of Independence are used to break from capitalist austerity. We also called for a political alternative to the parties of austerity with a mass party that would fight for the interests of workers and young people not just in words like some of the SNP and Green politicians at the conference, but in deeds.

We challenged the illusion that a “Nordic Model” represents an alternative to the austerity of the capitalist class, pointing to the structural nature of the crisis that rules out the possibility of a return to the social democratic consensus of the post war period.

Socialist Party Scotland members Jamie Cocozza representing the Youth Fight for Jobs campaign and Unison activist Ian Leech were loudly applauded in workshops when they called for a general strike. A number of delegates representing trade unions signed our petition calling for a Trade Union and Socialist referendum campaign.

It’s clear the Radical Independence Conference attracted a layer of people looking for a political alternative. However it’s also clear that RIC’s tail-ending approach to the SNP and the official YES campaign will mean this is unlikely to be sustained. Especially as the concrete reality of Salmond’s pro big business approach becomes starker, with the SNP implementing further cuts in the next months.

Alex Salmond even tweeted his support for the event and this was loudly hailed by the conference organisers despite part of his message declaring the need for pro market forces to be involved in the “movement”.

The conference organisers claim this is a “new chapter for the left in Scotland” out of which a “new left project” can be born. One of the ISG speakers also alluded to a “Scottish Syriza” being created.

However the refusal to condemn clearly the politicians who have voted for cuts, including the SNP and the Greens will tend to repel new layers of workers and young people. The urgent need for a campaign for the referendum that puts the interests of the working class centre and an independent socialist Scotland stage is urgent. Unfortunately, this conference failed to offer that alternative.