Why there is *still* no grassroots pro UK movement

Andrew Neil was wondering whether there was some kind of credible pro Union grassroots movement rising in Scotland when he tweeted that but there is, in truth, little sign of one.

Beyond the embarrassing Orange Walks and the still tiny group Scotland in Union, which despite its easy access to cash from wealthy benefactors has only really managed a bit of shopper bothering and a bit of secret newspaper letter writing (but shhh, don’t tell anyone about that). There is still no grassroots pro UK movement- for 3 main reasons:

They get by without one. As Andrew Neil, himself, pointed out during the 2014 indyref campaign the Yes side were fighting a “ground war” (genuine engagement and grassroots activity) whilst BetterTogether were reliant on an “air war”- that is to say relying on the work of the British media. This was true then and it hasn’t changed since. The mainstream media is overwhelmingly Unionist. A lot of older people rely on those traditional media sources for news and analysis. Thanks to the British media any Unionist campaign will always have a huge advantage.
There is no positive pro Union vision to inspire people. Rather, the message is ‘this is as good as it gets,’ ‘danger, danger, danger’ and ‘this is our identity, how dare you question it’. They lazily believe questions of transition, mainly about the currency are insurmountable because they’ve been repeated enough. Who needs anything else.
The lack of vitality on their side. The no vote is an aging demographic. Not necessarily a bad thing, older people are more likely to vote, but when it’s paired up with the lack of a positive vision it is great for producing a lot of surprisingly nasty, bonkers, old keyboard warriors. Not so great if you want something real world, vibrant and appealing.

It’s easy to see why Neil’s air war by the British media is so vital to the Union and its hollowed out, reactionary, Unionism. Tony Blair’s decision to reserve control over Scottish broadcasting to London has prolonged London’s editorial control of coverage and with that, the existence of the UK.