If you’ve been watching Scottish Twitter these last two days then you will have come across the sudden debate on currency around Scottish independence. The reaction is down to Andrew Wilson’s most recent article in The National titled “Next Scottish White Paper will learn from 2014 – and from Brexit“. His article details the importance of laying out a framework for Scottish independence (which is absolutely right) and learning from the mistakes of the last referendum. Sadly it seems Wilson is keen to repeat the same mistakes of 2014, suggesting that Scotland having its own currency sooner than later means we would become “a Marxist revolutionary state”.
I hardly watch Question Time anymore, largely due to the repeated mantra from all the political parties that participate in the show. About 90% of the arguments we hear have been repeated before on other media outlets. And although last night’s Question Time did not present anything new, it did highlight something incredible.
Take note of the following tweet.
In the last week the Yes movement has seen much discussion around how we achieve independence. Much of it is focused on the process of getting a Section 30 order from Westminster to hold a referendum. Others have argued that Holyrood should hold an election on an independence manifesto. There is also serious consideration about holding an advisory independence referendum.
These are valid discussions that need to be had. However before we have these discussions I believe we need to establish two things. First, the independence movement needs to identify where we are within the UK neoliberal paradigm. Second, the independence movement must also identify where we want to go.
So this apparently happened.
[NOTE: This blog response to Gordon’s second MMT article is very long. Gordon has, sadly, rehashed the exact same points from his first article. For the sake of saving yourself time you are better to read my first response by clicking here. However if you want to to see me demonstrate my point that Gordon is either acting maliciously to undermine MMT or he’s economically illiterate on this subject then by all means read this blog post. Grab a cup of coffee. Open your snacks. It’s a long and boring ride. No seriously, it is.]
I was about to enjoy a quiet night in until I came across a second article by Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp on Modern Monetary Theory. You can find it by clicking here. I do encourage everyone to read it.
Many of you may have come across an article in The National by Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp titled “Hot new economic theory is just one piece of the puzzle”. It is a critique of Modern Monetary Theory, an economic prism which I have advocated for almost a year now. Gordon’s article shows he has a deep misunderstanding of MMT and it is advisable he does more academic reading into it (which I shall link at the end with introductory reading for those interested).
Before you read this blog post I encourage everyone to give his article a read by clicking here. I fully welcome his article as it brings more attention to MMT and allows for healthy debate. I’ve also followed Gordon’s work for some time since 2014 and I hope this friendly critique may encourage him to take further research into the points raised.
Anyone who sits down in the social media realm of Scottish politics for more than five minutes will have certainly come across the term “virtue signalling”. Although all sides of the spectrum use the term it is most frequently used by those on the right (particularly the far-right) and by unionists to attack the Scottish government, independence supporters or anything that is perceived as progressive. Or they use it to defend themselves without any real argument.
So what actually is virtue signalling?