Nasty passions have been unleashed in debate over whether Scots should support England, writes Joyce Mcmillan

packing up and leaving; and always in the background, since the Brexit vote, there is the sad narrative of those from other European countries who thought they had found a lifelong home here, but who now say that they no longer feel welcome in Britain.

Now of course, the EU referendum was far more formal and serious, in its nature and consequences, than any sporting event; just consider the huge apparent impact of the London Olympics of 2012 – with its portrayal of Britain as a modern,

diverse European nation at one with its new role in the world – and how brief that effect turned out to be.

Yet still, the serious hurt I can see among people bruised by the national passions of this World Cup seems like a high price to pay for some supposedly “harmless” fun; and it does invite us to revisit once again the rules around national identity which help to keep its more crazed and brutal aspects in check, and to enable us to enjoy our cultural and national differences without feeling threatened by them.

And so far as I can see, the rules are these. In the first place, we should always build into our thinking the powerful insight of the great Scottish theorist of nationalism, Tom Nairn, who described the idea of national identity as a “Janusfaced” phenomenon, capable of being both immensely progressive – as in great struggles against oppressive colonial power – and immensely reactionary. Our job is not to try to ignore those identities, or to indulge in futile hopes that they will just disappear, but to keep any nation or group in which we are involved on the progressive and inclusive path.

Then secondly, in order to achieve that,