Yes: The Radical Case for Scottish Independence by James Foley and Pete Ramand ***

13 August 2014 | , ,

Reading dates: 22 June – 11 August 2014

Note: This is just a review of the book, a few notes for my future self on what I thought about it. It is not a cogent argument on the referendum (which I keep calling Independence day and know I need to analyse that). In fact, it is not even a cogent text on the book, as my reviews are sketches, impressions, feelings, orientations on the text, more than its context or content. There are many people out there writing excellent works on the referendum and I would not want to put my writing on the same category than texts that are well researched, beautifully written and argued. If you are in Scotland, though, and can vote on the 18th September, please do get informed, find those writings, read compulsively, discuss compulsively. This is the chance of a lifetime to decide on our future. It is a big deal.

Perhaps start here:


We read this book for our DiaMat gathering, hosted by Ellie, who has a work on the referendum on show at the Talbot Rice Gallery in Edinburgh.

Apart from the book, we reviewed a variety of campaign materials from both sides of the argument. Despite this being a gathering of four YES voters, I think there was a bit of pessimism around the book. I found it good, in fact, very interesting and informative, but not convincing, at least not for the people it needs to convince. I think only yes voters will read the book and have their arguments affirmed (I found it illuminating to learn about history and economics). But undecideds will most likely rely on other materials. Sadly, I found the 10 reasons leaflet from Better Together to be compelling in its format, accessible, speaking to the buzzfeed crowd of lists. Don’t get me wrong, we discussed each of the 10 points listed and found them to be devious, simply not true. But engaging in politics, although our responsibility, is also hard. I am not sure many people will find information and get involved in the debate other than through what gets through their doors. Yet, I was tired, maybe I had a pessimistic day and felt humanity to be a little stupid. In a previous gathering, I bet money, in favour of a yes outcome, with one of the other members of the group. I still stick to that and will continue dreaming and talking of a better future until the 18 September. Then, I hope to be able to work for that future.


One good exercise we did was to think what single issue has persuaded us to vote yes. Mine was Scottish governance, the fact that it is another country. We also thought what would make us change our minds and vote NO. I thought that if Westminster came up with a programme of nationalisation of key services (health, transport, energy, mail, education), I may consider it. It has to be persuasive, robust and true (not like the LibDem promise not to implement top up fees). We also had abolishment of the royal family and establishment of a republic and, if I remember right, implementation of the last chapter of YES for the whole of the UK.

Next time we meet will be to discuss Julia Kristeva’s ‘Revolt, She Said’, my choice, after reading about it in a previous DiaMat book. Whatever happens on the 18 September, whether I win that bet or not, a little revolt and psychoanalysis will never go amiss. Exciting times.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Dialectical Materialism