There’s a running theme going on here, that the No vote in 2014 was an anomaly – a rare victory of progressive, internationalist, inclusive politics over the anti-establishment, isolationist, separatist politics we’re now seeing in the wake of the EU referendum and now the election of Donald Trump. This was the case back even before and just after the independence referendum, where the Scottish Independence movement was being compared to the far-right populist movements of England, France, and the Netherlands:

At the beginning of this essay, we outlined that populism can be seen as a corrective if political parties see it as a signal to address the representative gap that has developed between citizens, public institutions and mainstream politics. However, it was acknowledged that this effort is hampered by the extremely difficult task of bridging ‘representative’ and ‘responsible’ government in a more complex era…

…These dilemmas all takes place against the backdrop of movements for Scottish independence, for the UK to leave the European Union and the steady rise of UKIP. If the economic and political status quo is maintained, populists look set to continue to prosper from the growing gap between representative and responsible government, presenting a clear and present danger to the established order.

– Michael McTernan & Claudia Chwalisz Most commentary has been focused on UK politics. This is too parochial. The real significance of the No lies at European level. The result dents the hopes of other separatist movements in Spain, Italy and Belgium. The less obvious point is that we have witnessed another defeat for populism at the hands of the emergent Europe-wide grand coalition…

… Populism has been popping up all over Europe since the financial crisis. England’s version is the United Kingdom independence party. Last Sunday, the anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats doubled their share in the national parliament, while the anti-European Alternative for Germany party won seats in two more regional parliaments. In France, opinion polls suggest that the National Front’s Marine Le Pen has a serious shot at the presidency in 2017. The Dutch have Geert Wilders. Greece has Golden Dawn.

What all these different populists have in common is nationalism – along with a rather fishy admiration for Vladimir Putin, the Russian President and a model for the chauvinism-plus-authoritarianism combination that is the essence of populism in power.

– Niall Ferguson Everything of course changed just a few years later. Now, as Europe’s crisis has moved from modifier to modifier – financial and economic becoming firmly political – its effects have spread outward and upward. Discontent takes various forms. There are familiar if updated manifestations of nationalism – UKIP in the United Kingdom, France’s National Front – and the pitch of anti-immigration leaders such as Geert Wilders in the Netherlands. There are protest parties such as Beppe Grillo’s Five Stars Movement in Italy that corral the contempt of younger voters who feel left behind by the ruling class.

The Scottish vote amalgamates both these currents. Listening to the Yes voters and reading the placards still pinned up around Edinburgh, you don’t get the sense of a single unifying platform: The referendum for many became the chance to issue a catch-all protest vote.

– Joel Weickgenant

Of course, the alternative view is rather simpler – that perhaps the forces that won the EU referendum and 2016 presidency also won the independence referendum.

(WARNING: While I’m not going to reproduce any of the material or quotes from some of the individuals or groups listed below on the site, I will be including archived links. While I disagree with many of the views to the most profound degree, neither do I wish to pretend they do not exist: I also want to provide sources for my conclusion as to where they stand on any of the three campaigns. Keep this in mind before you click.)

Let’s have a look at some of the individuals or organisations who were involved with, or supportive of, the winning side in the Scottish independence referendum, EU referendum, and Trump presidential campaigns.

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

Scottish Independence: NO

EU membership: LEAVE

Trump for President: SUPPORTIVE

You may think it unfair to tarnish the anti-independence movement by association with the above organisations and individuals (not that such unfairness ever stopped No supporters from doing just that to Scottish independence supporters, of course): after all, plenty of professed left-wing, socialist, anti-war folk supported No, Leave, and Trump – George Galloway being the most infamous example. Likewise, there are plenty of people who support only one or two of the above, and found themselves on the losing side of at least one referendum or election. Of course not every No/Leave/Trump supporter is a racist, or fascist, or any other kind of -ist, any more than every Yes/Remain/Non-Trump supporter was uniquely saintly: the vast majority of people are reasonable, thinking, compassionate human beings who voted they way they did because they thought it was best for them, their family, and their future.

The key difference is that those people have no control over the direction of what happens next. We aren’t getting Super-Devo-Plus-Max, because the parties & individuals interested in such a settlement have no power or opportunity to deliver it. We’re not getting a “Lexit,” because the left-wing Leave advocates have no power in the UK or Scottish Governments. Even in his first few days as President Elect, the likelihood of a tempered Trump is dropping by the day. (Which is not to say there are no anti-EU, pro-Trump individuals who also advocate Scottish Independence: when it was perceived as bad news for the EU or a perceived soft UK, or they just wanted rid of subsidy-junky Scotland, tons of Euroskeptics like Arron Banks, Paul Joseph Watson, and others seemed perfectly fine with it, even encouraging: on the other hand, I doubt Jim Sillars is a big Trump fan despite advocating a Leave vote.)

The people and organisations listed above are 3 for 3. Those above are the ultimate winners, because for God’s sake look around you. Look at the post-indyref UK Government: it sure wasn’t the government Scotland or progressives in England, Wales, & Northern Ireland voted for. Look at the post-EUref UK Cabinet: full of Leave campaigners and the most right-wing elements of the party. Now look at the US cabinet: same story, magnified. Who helped get them there? Who looked to gain the most? Who are the people most antithetical to everything we hold dear?

Either Blair MacDougall, Ian Smart, and others really, truly believe that the movement for Scottish Independence really is the same as the rhetoric which fuelled a Leave vote in the UK and Trump in the USA… or they don’t, and just lie about it. And let’s be unflinchingly clear: even the “moderates” in the “mainstream” parties, not to mention the official No campaign, were not above using their language.

This is on you, Better Together. You preyed on fears of “kith” and “kin” becoming “foreigners,” appealed to shared “bloodlines” and “ethnicity,” talked of the turmoil of “borders” and the loss of “our land.” Then your parties and newspapers continued it in the General Election campaign with your Immigration Mugs and tough talk on refugees. You use “foreign” as if it is a curse, an affliction, an undesirable trait – which is exactly what the far-right believes, isn’t it? You do this, and you have the gall to act surprised at the result of the General Election & EU Referendum, and utterly fail to see the same forces at place across the ocean?

And it looks like you haven’t learned a bloody thing.

Twiterstorm tonight. Apparently many Nats don’t undersatand(sic) that “independence” would mean that their English realtives(sic) would be foreigners.

– Alex Gallagher, 6th October 2016 enjoying SNP supporters on my timeline arguing that if we were independent, the English wouldn’t be foreigners

– The UK’s Greatest Economist, 6th October 2016 SNP would turn English people living in Scotland into foreigners in their own country. Of course it’s uncomfortable for them

– Ruth Davidson’s favourite blogger, 15th October 2016

A No vote didn’t stop the forces who were victorious in 2016. In 2014, the No Campaign rode that tide to victory – indeed, you spurred it on with the evocation of its very language – because preserving the United Kingdom was worth any cost. Even if it means turning a blind eye to the deluge looming darkly over the horizon.