Love the UK Day and the Unity Referendum: The Importance of Framing

Alistair McConnachie with Loch Lomond and Ben Lomond in the background. Pic copyright Alistair McConnachie

Bookmark and Share

How a matter is "framed" for people to see and consider, is crucial to ultimately determining the decision that people will make.

There are too many people thinking about voting "Yes", often on a whim, because far too much of the national debate has been conducted within a Scottish nationalist frame which focuses on Scotland alone, and not enough on the relevance and importance of the UK as a nation…which is of immense value to us all, and to the world, says Alistair McConnachie. Article posted 28 August 2014.


Most of us do not take the long-view in politics. Even many of us who are "interested in politics" only react on a day-to-day basis, often directly to what we read in the newspaper, see on TV or hear on the radio, that day.

We often struggle to remember what happened in politics last week, let alone last year, and many of us do not consider and nor are we necessarily able, to figure out the consequences of certain courses of action.

Furthermore, many of us just change our opinions "on a whim". We don't have any strongly held opinions or principles.

This is not a criticism. It is just how many people are. Indeed, if everyone had strongly-held opinions, then modern life might get quite difficult – considering that we all have to live together in such close proximity!

So, while this is not meant as criticism, it does mean that many people can momentarily and temporarily think something is a good idea.

By the time they realise it was actually a very bad idea, or a completely cranky idea that had somehow taken on the mantle of credibility and a head of steam (Scottish exceptionalism and nationalism within the context of a United Kingdom, for example) then it can be too late to reverse it.

This seems to be what is happening with some of those people who – at the moment – appear to think breaking up the UK is a good idea. We hear them say "Let's give it a try?" Or, "Why not have a go?"

These are astonishingly flippant comments; as if this is a General Election where you can change the government in 5 years time if you discover you don't like it.

Into this vulnerable state of the public mind can come powerful political techniques which can manipulate the way we see and understand a political matter in the first place and consequently the decision we make, based upon what we have "seen".

We will talk about the "science" – more a black art – of "Opinion" Polling (which has been hugely relevant in this referendum campaign) at a future date. But for now, let us speak about "framing".

THE TECHNIQUE OF FRAMING
A political "frame" is "the frame" through which we view a particular political matter. Like looking through a window frame, the matter we view exists within that frame and is bound (framed) by the language we use.

We have the power to set the boundaries of that frame by the language we use. The language we use can be deliberately chosen to define the debate for our political purposes.

The frame presents the political matter to the eyes, and the brain, in the first place.

How a matter is "framed" for people to see and consider, is crucial to ultimately determining the decision that people will make on that matter - because it will have been largely based upon what they have been able to see and consider.

If you can set up the context in the first place, then you will have a degree of control over their decision and your preferred outcome!

For example, if the choice is between the first 5 letters of the alphabet, but you successfully narrow the frame to your desired outcomes of "A" and "C", then you know that once the decision is made, if you don't get your first choice of "A" then at least you will get your second choice of "C".

DON'T ALLOW the OPPOSITION to SET THE FRAME
If things are not going well for you then maybe it is because you are not properly controlling your frame.

Maybe you are caught in the opposition's frame – you are on their ground, arguing on their terms. Or perhaps you are allowing yourself to be drawn into their frame – finding yourself being drawn into enemy territory where they control the high ground.

Maybe that is because you don't have a frame of your own! Perhaps you have not set your political matter in a context which is favourable to your desired outcome.

How is this relevant to us today?

It is relevant because when we look at the behaviour of the pro-UK politicians and parties and campaigning groups, we can see that too often they have kept the debate bogged down in a context which is favourable to the nationalists' preferred outcome.

For example, arguing about how successful Scotland can be in the UK is an important and winnable point, but it keeps the argument entirely upon Scotland – a context in which the nationalists can speak endlessly. However, if we change the frame to how successful the UK can be with Scotland then we enter a context - the value of the UK - in which the nationalists have absolutely nothing to say; a context in which they can only remain speechless and lose.

This latter frame has not made much of an appearance in this referendum debate (except throughout our work and this website!) yet it is hugely winnable for us.

We can also spot areas where the pro-UK side has used the opposition frame or allowed themselves to be drawn into it, and thereby allowed themselves to become compromised and their message to become confused and corrupted. For example, the obsession with "more powers" - see below

Let us compare and contrast the pro-UK Frame and the typical anti-UK Frame.

OUR PRO-UK FRAME
We laid out some fundamental principles of our Pro-UK frame when we started this Project. The UK is a Union of Nations and a Nation of Unions

We pointed out that as pro-UK people, we see Scotland within a relationship called the UK. We can think of it as a Union of Nations, and/or we can think of it as a Nation of Unions.

And like all relationships, sometimes Scotland will get what is "best" for it some of the time. Other times, it will not get what may have been "best" for it specifically. Sometimes what is best for the UK will also be best for Scotland. Sometimes what is best for the whole of the UK will not be "best" for Scotland, when seen from a particularly Scottish angle.

However, an important distinction between those of us who are committed to the UK relationship and those who are Scottish nationalists, is that for us pro-UK people, Scotland is not our only concern. The whole of the UK is also our concern.

Therefore, just like in any relationship we take the rough with the smooth because we know it all sorts itself out in the UK-mix at the end of the day.

THE ANTI-UK SCOTTISH NATIONALIST FRAME
The nationalist frame is divorced from the concept of a relationship.

Rather than considering Scotland in a relationship with the UK – like a person involved in a marriage who is responsible for the other spouse – the nationalist frame is to consider "Scotland living on its own as a single person". A singleton who is only responsible, for good or bad, for his or her own situation.

Now, that is one way of looking at things. But if one's aim is to keep a relationship together then it is not the first way of looking at things!

We who want to keep the UK together and who want to promote a No Vote, need to concentrate heavily on the relationship which we put at the heart of our concerns – the relationship with the rest of Britain.

The nationalist aim is to break up the marriage, so they want us thinking about Scotland's interests alone; Scotland's interests apart from the rest of the UK.

Our aim is to keep the marriage together so we want to concentrate minds on how important the relationship is, not just for us in Scotland, but for everyone in the UK...and the world.

Unfortunately, too much of the debate has been framed upon the question of Scotland on its own; "Scotland living on its own as a single person".

For pro-UK people to concentrate on this "Scotland living on its own as a single person" frame is risky. All it really does is further legitimise the idea of Scotland being on its own.

Sure, it means that we can make the case that "Even if all you care about is Scotland, then Scotland is still best served within the UK relationship". Certainly, that is a valid and true point. And it is obviously winnable for us.

However, it also means that we risk forgetting to make the case for the UK relationship. We risk encouraging people to miss the big picture of Britain – to forget what Scotland can do for Britain and what Britain can do for Scotland.

And we miss out on, or we relegate, the importance of Britain…as a nation…in the world…and the importance to the world…of Britain. These are huge matters which have not been articulated in this referendum campaign to the extent that they should have been!

If the Yes side is polling far too highly then it is because the big picture of Britain is missing out. It is not properly in the frame.

WHAT WE SHOULD FOCUS UPON
For us pro-UK people, the debate should also concentrate heavily around Scotland's relationship with the rest of the UK; our duties and our responsibilities to the rest of the UK; and the role of, and the importance of, the United Kingdom itself, as a nation…in the world…which is one of the truly great nations…of the world…which has so much to offer humanity. That's the British Frame.

Unfortunately, we don't have many politicians who can articulate that frame particularly well. To be fair, David Cameron has done his best to make an effort, as has Ruth Davidson.

The Labour Party is leading the No campaign in Scotland but, hitherto, the Labour party has not exactly been a champion of "Britain, the Nation". As far as devolution and its inevitable dangers to the unity of the UK is concerned, the Labour Party has played, and is playing, the role of both the Poacher and the Gamekeeper! The Lib Dems, also!

We spoke about this in our speech in London on 4 June 2014 entitled "21 Reasons why England should Care about Scotland Separating". We pointed out that Labour has not had, in its recent past, a moral or intellectual philosophy of British Union and it is only now, to an extent, learning about its importance and how to develop it. In that regard, Gordon Brown is to be congratulated for trying to introduce some of this thinking into the Labour Party, as far as he can.

We Frame our Pro-UK Position by Asking Questions such as:
How do we do what is best for everyone in Britain, not just for people in Scotland? How can Scotland strengthen the entire UK? How can we avoid being unfair to the rest of the UK? What are our duties and responsibilities to the rest of the UK and how can we best exercise them? If we are to have devolution, how can we organise it in order to maintain the logic of the Union? If we are to have devolution, how can we protect it from separatist domination? How do we ensure the stability of all our Islands? Should (not could) Scotland be independent? And so on…

Those are the kind of questions we ask if we want to maintain the UK relationship.

This is in contrast to Scottish nationalists, who don't consider the rest of the UK. They don't consider our duties and responsibilities to anyone, or anything in the UK, outside of the Scottish border.

They do not believe Scotland needs to give any thought to the principles of a United Kingdom, or the attitudes and approaches and political conventions which help to ensure its cohesion.

They frame their position by asking such questions as: How does this benefit Scotland alone? How can Scotland get more powers? How can Scotland get the best deal regardless of how it impacts upon others? Could Scotland be independent? And so on...

Those are the kind of questions they ask because they consider things from the point of view of a singleton alone.

OTHER SCOTTISH NATIONALIST FRAMES in which PRO-UK PEOPLE can get TRAPPED
"More Powers": We advised every single pro-UK MP and MSP in Scotland, about the dangers of promising "more powers" to Holyrood – back in February 2014 when we sent them each a hard-copy of our booklet, "'More Powers'" Debate: Principles, Guidelines and Strategies for Unionists".

We advised them that such new powers will do absolutely nothing to appease the insatiable tiger of Scottish separatism. We advised them that if they promise "more powers" then the SNP will maintain the whip-hand over the pro-UK parties to its electoral advantage, even if it loses the referendum. We advised them that such powers, if granted by the next UK government, will risk further undermining the logic and integrity and cohesion of the UK and risk creating a crisis in England. We advised them of all of this, and more.

Still they promised "more powers" and now they find themselves, and will undoubtedly find themselves in the future, being drawn defensively and to their disadvantage into unwinnable arguments on the matter by the nationalists. How ridiculous to watch them getting into defensive shouting matches over how sincere they are in promising "more powers"!

"Could" not Should: Arguing that Scotland "could" be an independent country is the frame of the nationalists. By speaking too much about whether we "could", we only end up encouraging people to vote on a whim because "yes, we could". Our frame, our domain, is whether Scotland "should". Thankfully, that is also the question on the ballot paper!

IN CONCLUSION: The way we frame things; leads to the questions we ask; which leads to the things we talk about; which leads to our eyes and brain focusing only on those things; which leads to the conclusions we draw; which leads to the actions we take.

A frame which is entirely focused on "Scotland" will tend to get people missing out on, or relegating, the Big Picture of Britain and our UK relationship. This will tend to lead them towards a Scottish "independence" position and a "Yes" vote.

A frame concentrating on the United Kingdom and Scotland, and Scotland's value to the UK and the UK's value to Scotland, and the UK's value to the world, will tend to focus our thoughts on our duties and responsibilities to the UK relationship, and the importance of the UK, and thereby lead people towards a pro-UK position and a "No" vote.

In short, there are far too many people thinking about voting "Yes" because too much of the national debate has been conducted within a Scottish nationalist frame which focuses on Scotland alone and not enough on the relevance and importance of the UK as a nation…a nation which is of immense value to us all, and to the world.


The following material was published on this site on 15 September 2012 and is directed specifically at how to "frame" the matter of the referendum itself.

We've noticed some pro-UK people on the internet making a basic mistake. They are allowing themselves to use the language and the "frame" of our political opposition.

A political "frame" is "the frame" through which we view a particular political matter. Like looking through a window frame, the matter we view exists within that frame and is bound (framed) by the language we use.

We have the power to set the boundaries of that frame by the language we use. The language we use can be deliberately chosen to define the debate for our political purposes.

If people want to debate with us then they need to enter into our frame. They need to use our language and see the matter in our terms. This means we have a natural advantage.

What we should never do is use our opposition's frame as if it were our own.

The Nationalists have framed the referendum as "the Independence Referendum" - the referendum for Scottish "independence", from the rest of the United Kingdom.

"Independence" is a word which often has positive connotations - a positive vibe can be associated with it. It can be a feel-good word.

If we talk about the "Independence Referendum" then we are using our opposition's frame.

If we use this term to describe the referendum for the highly negative purpose of trying to Break up Britain, the referendum to Separate and Split up the UK, then we are giving that dismal aim a somewhat "positive" appeal.

Instead, we must "frame" the referendum in a positive way for our purposes.

Here are some ways of doing that.

POSITIVE FRAMES
The Unity of the UK Frame
The referendum is an opportunity for us to demonstrate our dedication to the continued unity of our Islands. We are voting for Unity, not Separation. Therefore we can refer to it as:

The Unity Referendum
The Yes to the UK Referendum
The Yes-UK Referendum

The Together Frame
It is an opportunity for us to re-affirm that Britain is indeed Better and Stronger and Safer Together. So, we can talk about:

The Together Referendum
The Love the UK Day
The Better Together Referendum
The Keeping Britain Together Referendum
The Staying Together Referendum
The Together Forever Referendum
The upcoming Referendum to keep us all Together

The Re-affirming our Support Frame
Like re-affirming our marriage vows, the referendum is an opportunity for the Scots to re-dedicate themselves to our common bond on these Islands. It is an opportunity for us to re-affirm our relationship with the United Kingdom. To reaffirm our support for it. An opportunity for us to re-commit ourselves to this relationship. It is also a great opportunity to make the case for Britain. We can speak about it as:

The Referendum to re-affirm our Support for the Union
The Referendum for Scots to re-dedicate themselves to the Union
Pledging our Support for the UK Referendum
Our Recommitment to the UK Referendum.

The above are all positive frames. No doubt we can all think of others in this vein. We can also use negative frames where that is appropriate. For example:

NEGATIVE FRAMES
The Divorce Frame
The pro-"independence" people are really about destroying our relationship with the UK, and England in particular - breaking up our political marriage. That's the tragedy and no good can come of it. We already know that the Nats conceive of the UK Union as an abusive marriage. So they shouldn't have any problem with us if we speak about it as:

The Separation Referendum
The Referendum to Separate from the rest of the UK
The Referendum on a UK Divorce
The Referendum on whether we get a Divorce from the rest of the UK

The Anglophobic Frame
This is where the debate is framed as opposition to England and the English - which, to be true, is the unfortunate position of quite a few of the Nats. This can be effective in some cases because it strikes at one of the weakest points of the Nats which is an underlying anti-English/Englandness and puts them on the defensive. We can speak about:

The Anti-England Referendum
The Anti-English Referendum
The Separating from England Referendum

If you don't want to use any of these terms, then just refer to it as the Referendum.

Whatever you do, don't call it the "Independence" Referendum. Whatever you do, don't use the Nats' frame!


If you like what we say, please support us by signing-up to receive our free regular Update email - which will keep you informed of new articles and relevant pro-UK information - by entering your details in the 'Subscribe' box at the top right of this page.
You can find out more about us at the About page. And here is a link to Alistair McConnachie's Google Profile.

Bookmark and Share