CommonSpace columnist and Common Weal director Robin McAlpine examines why Scots appear to be more optimistic about the future than people elsewhere in the UK
PG WODEHOUSE famously wrote: "It has never been hard to tell the difference between a Scotsman with a grievance and a ray of sunshine."
Apparently he was wrong – because in fact it is the combination between sunshine and grievance which may just turn out to be the single most important resource Scotland has in the near future.
Certainly that was my conclusion after I was briefed on progress with a large research project I'm involved in which commissioned research on attitudes across the UK. I must admit that even I was a bit surprised with some of the initial conclusions.
When the researcher reported back on initial findings, one was that there was a consistent and marked difference between the Scottish interviewees and those from south of the border.
The project is a substantial one being run by the New Economics Foundation in London. The aim of the project is to look at the different ways the right and the left frames the economy and why it is that the right seems to be more effective in describing its economic philosophy than the left (even on issues where people tend to favour leftwing arguments).
One of the initial phases involved in-depth one-to-one interviews with a sample of people in five places across Britain. It is important that I am clear that this research isn't intended to be published separately from the larger project.
It's also important that I point out that in each city there were only eight interviews (though each lasted for two hours or more). But equally, it is important to know that these were carried out by a professional research company and participants were carefully selected to be representative.
One of the cities was in Wales, one in the English midlands, two in the north of England – and one was Glasgow. When the researcher reported back on initial findings, one was that there was a consistent and marked difference between the Scottish interviewees and those from south of the border.
On a number of subjects, almost everyone from Scotland said something different from almost everyone from England and Wales. I expected one of them to be immigration which I have never believed was the same kind of issue up here – and I was right.
The researchers found that in Scotland economic inequality was seen much more as the cause of other problems while in England and Wales immigration or other issues tended to be raised more.
I also wasn't surprised by the fact that economic inequality was a much bigger issue in Scotland than elsewhere – although it was regularly raised in England and Wales and definitely seen as a problem, it was much less seen as the root problem and there was a lot more general resignation.
The researchers found that in Scotland economic inequality was seen much more as the cause of other problems while in England and Wales immigration or other issues tended to be raised more.
But that wasn't the main finding the researcher reported back. What she said struck her most from the transcripts was a markedly different level of optimism.
Put simply, the Scottish interviewees genuinely seemed to believe that the future could be better than the present, that we were capable of doing better than we're doing. That seems to have applied irrespective of constitutional view (though again I should warn about the sample size).
The English and Welsh interviewees responded differently. Almost all of them expected the future to be worse than the present. For them decline was a given and adapting to it was the only option.
But that wasn't the main finding the researcher reported back. What she said struck her most from the transcripts was a markedly different level of optimism.
I explicitly asked how marked the difference was. I was told it was clear – that almost everyone in Scotland expressed some degree of optimism while almost all the other participants expressed mainly pessimism.
What is interesting for me (and yes I'm extrapolating a bit) is that it's not a lack of 'Scottish grievance' which is leading to our sunny disposition, it is where our grievance lies. There is a feeling in Scotland that there is an economic system which is rigged against the public.
What is important is that this seems to mean that people believe that fixing the system could bring proper public benefit. "That which is broken and making things worse can be fixed. The future is not a done deal."
The pessimistic alternative experienced in England and Wales seems closer to "everything is broken irrevocably and so its about how each of us can get the biggest share of whatever is left".
The idea that "immigrants are coming here, taking our [insert whatever…]" makes more sense if you see the future as finite, as a scramble for what little can be salvaged for each individual from collective decline.
There is a feeling in Scotland that there is an economic system which is rigged against the public.
Which also explains another aspect of the findings from south of the border. These interviews involved an absolute minimum of prompting. The idea was to hear what people say spontaneously. And repeatedly English and Welsh respondents articulated comparators which would probably seem odd to our ears.
Phrases like 'compared to Africa', 'it's better than Victorian times' and others similar kept popping up. It suggests that England's frame of reference is becoming inherently pessimistic.
So what's causing this difference? One of the other members of this project's steering group expressed surprise because he didn't think Scotland and England looked all that different in British Social Attitudes surveys.
I've long been critical of reading too literally from social attitude surveys. That you might think or feel something is miles away from whether you'd act on it or act in a certain way. That Scots also express anti-immigration sentiment simply hasn't meant they'll vote Ukip (or turn up for Scottish Defence League demos or whatever).
So where does the difference lie? Setting aside any debate about the long-term question of whether Scotland is more left wing, I think there are two current reasons why Scots seem to see the future differently.
What is important is that this seems to mean that people believe that fixing the system could bring proper public benefit. "That which is broken and making things worse can be fixed. The future is not a done deal."
The first is straightforward. Recently I've been down to the north of England quite a few times, talking to groups about devolution. When the subject of London's economic mismanagement of the economy of the north is raised, people often say "it's OK for Scotland, you can just leave. We're stuck here".
The simple fact that Scotland even could, even might become independent means there is an alternative. There is something other than resignation, if you want it.
Even for unionists this has an impact. It is simply true that all of us come to believe things that we say often enough. Because independence supporters have talked about an optimistic alternative future, Scottish unionists have talked about an optimistic future status quo. They've had to.
And so despite talking about the same economy, the same political culture as the English and Welsh, they describe it differently, more positively, more optimistically.
The second reason is simply that the independence debate has created a different political culture and a different national narrative. Again, we all absorb what we hear, whether we completely agree with it or not.
The pessimistic alternative experienced in England and Wales seems closer to "everything is broken irrevocably and so its about how each of us can get the biggest share of whatever is left".
So when the independence movement made substantial play of economic inequality as at the heart of why the UK is failing, everyone absorbed it one way or another.
And since much of the independence movement put forward explanations of how that problem could be overcome, how a more economically equal future could benefit everyone, the concept that failure was not inevitable is something that everyone would absorb to some extent.
This is incredibly important. I have said many times that as a political strategist I would much rather take strong underlying feelings which push in the direction I hope people will go over statements of intention which are not fundamentally linked to deeper hopes and feelings.
So better to have, say, 75 per cent of the public believing that the future can be better than the present than have 51 per cent of people say that we're all doomed so we might as well be doomed as an independent country.
If this resource (Scottish optimism) is again successfully tapped into by the Yes movement it offers the most promising route to a Yes vote in the next referendum.
The way to grow this optimism is to feed it. And since we're now facing a referendum in the very near future, we better start feeding fast.
Britain is barely pretending that the future is bright. If we play this right, we're fighting the next referendum not on optimistic Britain versus optimistic Scotland (no grinning Cameron this time) but fatalistic Britain versus optimistic Scotland.
The way to grow this optimism is to feed it. And since we're now facing a referendum in the very near future, we better start feeding fast.
Small-c conservative government isn't going to do that. Timidity isn't going to do that. Excuses won't help any. Packaging up the same old same old and calling it progress is positively counterproductive. And devising a new Scotland which looks exactly like the present Scotland is simply a mistake.
I grow weary of voices saying that 'conservative realism' is what we need to project to get over the winning line for Scottish independence. It's absolutely, definitely not.
Small-c conservative government isn't going to do that. Timidity isn't going to do that. Excuses won't help any.
Perhaps the world is indeed going to shit. Perhaps all us shiny, happy Scots are genuinely mental. Perhaps expecting decline is more rational. Perhaps we should just pack up our foolish hopes for our children and vote for Ruth Davidson instead.
Or perhaps we should fight and fight hard to make the future actually better. I have no doubt that only by choosing to fight that fight will we persuade waverers to join us. And right now, we're just not fighting hard enough.
But I'm confident we will.
Picture courtesy of Robin McAlpine
Check out what people are saying about how important CommonSpace is. Pledge your support today.
