No More Heroes
Alex Salmond has died at the untimely age of only 69. He leaves a contested and complex legacy. There is no doubt that he carried the SNP and the wider cause of Scottish nationalism from a position of only three MPs in 1987 to returning to lead the SNP (2004), then forming the first SNP government (2007), then repeating it with a landslide majority (2011), negotiating a referendum and then bringing the forces of independence close to victory (2014). By any measurement, this was a remarkable political achievement.
It is difficult for younger people to realise the extent to which Scottish nationalism was a fringe political view as recently as the 1980s. Such is the dominance that the SNP have had electorally over the past twenty years, and so mainstream is the idea that Scotland should be an independent country, especially among people under 40, that it is almost unimaginable how rogue that view used to be. To a huge extent that is down to Alex Salmond.
But his success was born not just of charisma, energy and passion, as some accounts have over-emphasised, but also by strategic nous. Kenny Farquharson had written in The Times of his three great achievements.: “One, he dismantled the widespread belief that it was a Protestant party, befriending Cardinal Tom Winning, who would invite him for pasta dinners at his residence. Two, he built bridges between the SNP and Scotland’s Asian community, undermining the view that nationalism was always nativist and ethnic. And three, he defeated the fundamentalists within the SNP who saw devolution as a cul-de-sac. Salmond set the party on a gradualist path that would eventually lead to power.”
The tributes are flowing today, from a wide and (very) varied source of politicians and journalists. Some border on hagiography, others treat him as an idol and an icon. I think there are greater and deeper lessons to be learned here than the ‘Great Man view of history’. For me, the greatest lesson from 2014 was the experience of multiple points of leadership emerging from the campaign for independence. This was the emergence of a real movement, one that was brimming with ideas, energy and releasing pockets of previously unreleased potential in areas of society that had been oppressed or marginalised. The problem with idolising a figure such as Alex Salmond is not just that it airbrushes his own flaws, but it reduces an entire movement, and an entire period of history to the personal feuds between a few individuals.
The reality is that Salmond’s greatest attributes — his charisma and force of personality — had a shadow side — and to deny that is to deny complexity and to reduce him to a sainted martyrdom. This may be expedient for some — but it is worthless for anyone wanting either an understanding of human nature or a political strategy going forward.
Get Mike Small’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Salmond’s passing is not, as some political opponents have hoped, the death of the case or the cause for Scottish independence. For, in reality, despite the massive contribution he made in the past, he has long since been a significant player in developing the argument for self-determination. The harsh reality is (and this can never be acknowledged by his followers) that his Alba Party would never have formed without him, but equally could never be a success with him at its helm. Whether you like it or not, whether you agree or not, the brutal reality is that what was revealed about his conduct was unacceptable behaviour to a great many people in Scotland.
It is difficult to tell whether Salmond’s passing will lead to groups and tendencies within the independence movement healing divisions or uncovering old wounds, I hope for the former but suspect the latter. The instinct for romanticism and re-writing of history to avenge perceived grievance will be very strong amongst some people.
I’m more with Dick Gaughan or Jean Jacques Burnel and Hugh Alan Cornwell on the issue of Heroes. The reality is people can be both inspiring and disappointing at different times, we probably all are. Ultimately the case for independence, to which Alex Salmond dedicated his life, is about treating ourselves as adults, as grown-ups with the responsibilities that come with such status. Adults don’t idolise individuals or reduce them to saints.
To eulogise Salmond without reference to his personal behaviour is to belong to a different era in time, when men’s conduct was brushed-over and condoned or ignored. It is not possible in the 21C to continue such commentary with any credibility. It is not possible to separate personal and political conduct.
Equally, while we may celebrate Salmond’s monumental political achievements, you can’t also examine his misjudgments. Alex Salmond has been getting the credit for shaping Scottish nationalism into a progressive left-wing movement. Yet he also has to take some responsibility for containing that same movement within some fairly strict constraints of neoliberalism, of constitutional monarchism and a very cautious and conservative approach to the currency question. As his colleague George Kerevan has written: “His was a personalised politics that — in the end — always placated the conservative elements of Scottish bourgeois and petty-bourgeois society.” His decision to use the Kremlin-backed RT channel for his own tv programme was a highly dubious one, and his more recent online programmes show an individual with diminishing returns, showcasing fringe characters and completing the descent into a nationalist subculture.
The great irony for those of his supporters who will froth and foam about Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership, is that all of the accusations against her: of control, centralisation, and iron-discipline she inherited from her mentor. All of the dire and debilitating aspects of her time as ‘Great Leader’ were learned directly from Salmond.
British and Scottish politics has gone through extraordinary changes in the years since 2007, and the era of charismatic politicians and parliamentary politics seems like from a different age. Salmond’s career shows the power of personality, charisma and sheer energy, but it also shows the limitations of parliamentary politics, the constraints of the independence movement and the dangers of believing in idols.
