If you thought the
above headline signalled a party political blogcast, rest easy –
this is instead about a lesson from history.
For most of my
lifetime, the Scottish political scene has been a two-horse race.
There was a brief period before 1979 in which the Scottish National
Party was securing around 30% of the vote but, for decades, Labour
and the Conservatives had dominated the vote with the majority of
seats going to Labour.
Having lived through
the Margaret Thatcher years, I saw support for the Tories evaporate
and Labour secure what seemed an unassailable position of political
supremacy.
But the two graphics
posted tell a remarkable story: from 56 Westminster MPs in 2001 to
just one in 2015; from a party that was able to lead a Holyrood
administration for the first eight years of the Scottish parliament
to one facing predictions of a near wipe-out in just over six weeks
time.
The details of
Scotland's changing political landscape and the complex issues are
various but one common accusation remains: that Labour thought
Scotland would always vote Labour, regardless of its message or
policies, because Scotland always HAD voted Labour.
Political allegiance is
usually more complex than simply assessing lists of candidates and
policies. For many, it is tribal, sentimental, to do with family
traditions, even “in the blood”.
Many of those who
abandoned Labour did so with a heavy heart. “I didn't leave Labour;
Labour left me”, was a common defensive cry from those facing
accusations of disloyalty – even treachery – giving succour to
their political enemies. The very need to explain exposed a deep-felt
sense of anguish – sometimes guilt – in abandoning the party that
had once represented their parents' and grandparent's interests when
no one else would.
But, for huge numbers
of those who believed in a set of values, the party's shift to
accommodate modernism and “new realities” represented a betrayal
– and the rational conclusion that if the party no longer held true
to its founding principles and ideals, then it was no longer worthy
of support.
And yet this logical
outcome was something that the party's leaders, political strategists
and communications professionals apparently believed would never
happen.
It beggars belief that
a party that could be so strategically successful in its campaigning
in the Scottish Independence Referendum could at the same time
finally exhaust the patience of those who had long doubted their
political integrity.
But the reality is as
stark and sobering an example as it is possible to get of the folly
of taking people for granted. Labour's tactics, communications and
cooperation with parties it claimed to oppose was for many the final
nail in its coffin.
Yet there is room for
suspicion that Celtic's directors and chief executives are similarly
complacent.
While many, if not
most, Scottish football supporters deem the Scottish Football
Association to be corrupt, flying in the face of its own rules and
the principles of fair play in order to maintain an establishment
club in the Premiership, Celtic have stood by.
As the team, players
and fans were cheated, Celtic at no time formally complained or
protested publicly.
As a new club was
entered into the bottom division – one which did not meet SFA
criteria for membership, depriving qualified applicants a place –
Celtic approved. And, infamously, they took no part in preventing the
Ibrox Newco being admitted to one of the top two divisions, leaving
the fight for integrity to the laudable actions of Turnbull Hutton.
Raith Rovers leading
the way where Celtic apparently feared to tread.
And now we have
Resolution 12, which seems almost certain to fail, and on which the
club could have acted years ago.
And, for all this, they
expect continued support – primarily with cash – from supporters
they no longer defend, appear to care for or even represent.
So what is Celtic? A
club that plays in the same colours at the same ground as the one
graced by Tully, Johnstone, McGrain, Burns and Larsson? Its
continuity as the entity founded by Brother walfrid is in no more
doubt than that of the Labour party of Keir Hardy.
But it's values can no
longer be seen as being in any way consistent with those that once
bonded together a “Celtic family”. Celtic fans are being asked to
support a club that no longer values fair play, the communities from
which it has gained its support or playing football for the fans in a
way to thrill and inspire.
And without those
values, does the name, strip and ground alone entitle the club to the
continuing support of people who have agonised over its decline?
When Labour found
common cause with Tories and LibDems to oppose Scottish independence,
the sharing of a platform with a Tory-LibDem coalition, as well as
some cynical tactics, were too much for even its most faithful
supporters.
But you could easily
replace Labour's Jim Murphy, John McTernan and Blair McDougall with
Dermot Desmond, Ian Bankier and Peter Lawwell, standing with the SFA
and the Ibrox regime, led by a convicted criminal.
It appears that they do
so in the belief that a promise here, a discount there and a
“heartfelt plea for unity” are all that are needed to keep the
tills ringing for yet another season; employing naïve hope in the
aftermath of crushing experience.
But when trust has been
damaged beyond repair, can supporters Keep the Faith?
--
