Disagree? I’d march against him in a heartbeat

AT no point, surely, in any of our lifetimes, has it been easier for Scots to find fellow citizens with whom to disagree. I see people I disagree with when I am queueing at traffic lights. It’s the Yes stickers in their rear windows that give notice to our differences. In spite of them, we accord each other the same consideration we do all other road users.

I’m pretty sure some of the baristas in my local coffee shop are nationalists. For all that I am not with them on the constitutional question, the coffee they serve is the same stuff they give independence supporters. Their welcomes and cheerios are no different either.

I encounter Yessers at social occasions. They’re living on my street, sitting at the next table in restaurants, inspecting my boarding pass at airports... heavens, I’m probably no more than a few feet from one right now.

So we disagree. But the wheels of society turn more freely when we avoid steering them into an entrenched debate in which the vast majority of us chose our sides long ago and ain’t budging.

Yes, we are divided politically but, in the day to day, even the diametrically opposed muddle through together in the interests of keeping the show on the road.

Offensive

Unless, that is, you are an elected representative for the SNP so bent out of shape on the constitutional question that you cannot represent those who disagree with you on it.

Step forward John Mason, MSP for Glasgow Shettleston – or should that be MSP for those in Glasgow Shettleston who see things his way?

Fittingly, it was on Twitter that Mr Mason declared he would not speak up for constituents who disagreed with him on issues such as taxation, Orange marches and keeping Scotland in the UK. Fitting because Twitter is where all the most extreme and offensive views are now to be found. But what a pity that a politician paid handsomely from the public purse should be adding to them.

What appals is not simply Mr Mason’s failure to grasp that it’s his job to provide fair representation to all constituents, irrespective of their views on the issues he mentions. No, what grates like a molar on rusty metal is the political apartheid that men like Mr Mason espouse.

While all around in the real world families, friends, colleagues and neighbours have to rise to the challenge of putting their differences to one side for the common good, frothing politicians like Mr Mason refuse – indeed, think only of encouraging division.

Is this really how it must be? That, while the rest of the population strives for harmony in spite of the political discord, elected representatives such as Mr Mason promote antagonism?

I rather hoped that people got into politics to improve their communities rather than to act as lightning rods for friction in them.

I fondly imagined it was just obvious that with elected representative status came certain responsibilities – for example, to ensure that one’s conduct is an example to constituents rather than an embarrassment to them.

Yet, in Mr Mason and other elected representatives who seem to think the job is about picking fights on Twitter, an embarrassment is what many constituents have.

People will agree or disagree about our country’s constitutional future. But it should not be a political statement to say the last thing Scotland needs is people being ostracised for their views on the Union. That a politician should publicly suggest this as his modus operandi for naysayers is simply breathtaking.

Sinister

Some may find comfort in the fact Mr Mason is hardly among the most esteemed political philosophers of his day. It was he who tweeted a few years ago that he had boycotted Barrhead Travel because its chairman was a No supporter in the independence referendum. ‘Got euros elsewhere,’ the MSP reassured his followers, because ‘they’re on the No side.’ The implication being that, where a Nationalist is aware of Unionist leanings in a company with which they propose do business, they should walk away.

The MSP’s latest tweet – ‘I will not be speaking up for constituents who want lower taxes, Orange marches, keeping Scotland in the UK etc’ – mines the same sinister seam. It is them and us in Scotland now, goes this terrifying brand of moral absolutism: if you are not with us, then you are the enemy. It is to the nation’s enormous credit that the vast majority of Scots do not see the constitutional question this way. Most are tolerant of sincerely held views that differ from theirs.

But politicians such as Mr Mason know well that in Twitter’s bowels lurk thousands more bottom feeders intent on polluting society with their contempt for all that challenges their beliefs. They know their militant dogmatism feeds into the foul banners and loutish chants seen and heard on independence marches such as the one in Glasgow last weekend.

And they persuade themselves that, in setting out to have half the country wash its hands of the other half, their time is well spent.

I don’t do political marches but I’d march against politicians like this in a heartbeat.