Using Lady Liberty to get a controversial point over

There are ways of doing things, some better than others. I'm thinking particularly about seeking to win over sceptics and convince them of the case you want to make. This will come to the fore in a big way if and when a second referendum on Scotland's future takes place.

Last time around, public discourse about the issue was actually pretty good on the whole. It was good to see passion about politics again; it was particularly encouraging to witness the involvement of young people who cared about the future of their country.

In towns and villages up and down the country, people discussed, in a civil manner, what kind of Scotland they wanted to live in. It was heartwarming to see this.

In other spheres, though – in social media for instance – civil discourse was not the order of the day. Anonymity emboldened zealots to attack people who disagreed with them in a vicious manner.

Angry, divisive rhetoric – on both sides of the debate – created a rancorous atmosphere. The wells of public discourse were poisoned.

I've never understood how some people imagine that hurling insults at opponents will persuade them to change their minds.

There have to be other ways. Such as? A brilliant example came from the White House last week. Irish taoiseach Enda Kenny demonstrated how it's possible to get one's point over on a controversial issue without divisive rhetoric.

Kenny could have opted to either say nothing about the contentious issue of immigration or to be discourteous to his hosts and make a hectoring speech directed at President Trump.

He elected to do neither. Yet he made his point in a way that was both courteous and unambiguous. How did he do it? He told a story. But what a story.

Speaking in the East Room of the White House, as part of St Patrick’s Day celebrations in the US, Kenny spoke about Irish immigration throughout the country’s history.

“It’s fitting that we gather here each year to celebrate St Patrick and his legacy," he said. “He too, of course, was an immigrant – and though he is of course the patron saint of Ireland, for many people around the globe he’s also a symbol of, indeed the patron of, immigrants.

“Here in America, in your great country, 35million people claim Irish heritage, and the Irish have contributed to the economic, social, political, and cultural life of this great country over the last 200 years.

“Ireland came to America because, deprived of liberty, deprived of opportunity, of safety, of even food itself, the Irish believed – and four decades before Lady Liberty lifted her lamp – we were the wretched refuse on the teeming shore.”

With President Trump looking on stonily, the taoiseach continued: “We believed in the shelter of America, in the compassion of America, in the opportunity of America.

“We came, and we became Americans. We lived the words of John F. Kennedy long before he uttered them. We asked not what America could do for us, but what we could do for America – and we still do."

This was pure class. The referencing of the words on the Statue of Liberty was a masterstroke.

Without naming President Trump, Enda Kenny allowed the compelling words of liberty, known throughout the world, to make a critique of current US immigration policy.

The message was not lost on President Trump, or indeed the many people throughout the world who watched.

Stories have great power. They can be truly subversive. The story of people fleeing Ireland because of starvation and destitution – set against a contemporary background of refugees fleeing from war zones – made a humane point more tellingly than a hectoring lecture would have.

Jesus of Nazareth didn't give long lectures. He told stories. People who went to hear him speak were drawn in closer to find out how the stories would end.

His popular stories were subversive of the received order. It's no wonder that the drumbeats of death were sounding from the early days of his public ministry.

Back to the White House and the Scottish referendum.

How are we to live in this world? We need to have better stories and better songs than at present. More humane stories, more inspiring songs: stories that include, rather than reject, songs that may even be described as divine.

“Angry, divisive rhetoric – on both sides of the debate – created a rancorous atmosphere. The wells of public discourse were poisoned