This argument is of course very attractive in many ways, and Plaid are sincere, I’m sure, in pushing it.

However this thesis also has its weaknesses.

In pushing for ‘civic’ nationalism, Plaid purports to be ‘blind’ to ethnic and linguistic differences. But the problem is that some language and ethnic identities in Wales are stronger than others. Being ‘blind’ to ‘identity’ can mean taking a sort of 19th century liberal laissez-faire attitude towards things (i.e. strongest wins). Is it a coincidence that Plaid’s shift towards ‘identity-free’ nationalism has occurred at the same time as a ‘cooling’ of its support for the Welsh language? Given that the Welsh language is a minority language, is this necessarily a good thing?

Historically Welsh-speakers have been more supportive of a Welsh State than other groups because they have been persuaded that it would grant them ‘rights’ denied to them by the British State. In this sense, statehood for Wales is attached to identity, at least for some in the population.

I suggest Plaid tread carefully here. It is enough to say that a Welsh State will create citizens who are equal.Creating a ‘civic’ State with ‘equal’ citizens does not mean denying ethnic and/or linguistic identities. I’ll give one very simple example. In a polity (independent Wales) in which 20-25% speak a minority language, there would have to be more language legislation in order to ensure linguistic equality for citizens.

Adam…I don’t think it is possible to divorce the issue’ of ‘culture’ and identity from the political argument. If there wasn’t a linguistic divide then the aims of Plaid and/or the Lib Dems would be lesser issues. The fact is there is a cultural issue and for some it is of great importance. If it could be proven that by exiting the UK we would be better off by £3,030 per person then the case would be easier. But at the present exiting the UK could cost £3,030 per person. The difficulty is that the move is driven by a cultural awareness and an often made statement that national identity is of greater importance than money! Can I be forgiven thinking that ‘nats are nuts’. If the problem of improving the economy can be positively resolved, who knows, I might think the ‘nats have nounce’.

It would be a shame if this thread turned into a rehearsal of what are now very familiar arguments about whether nationalism per se thrives by creating and sustaining tribal loyalties and, if so, how suitable this is to the modern world. That’s a topic worth going over again, but perhaps at a different time?

In truth though this does appear to be almost an exclusively Plaid preoccupation, after all, if your party was relaxed about the idea of “Wales” in the UK, you would focus your energies far more on real world, “bread and butter issues” which are the concerns of the vast majority of families the length of the country.

Plaid’s mega problem is that it has to keep creating difference with “others” and to look inwards in order to have any credible currency going forward. In a global economy we should be looking outwards and co-operating with others, rather than always trying to contrast Wales with England and frantically searching for some contrived contemporary grievance laced with 700 years of history.

And so, in all this backward-looking Plaid narrative, where is the creativity, the innovation, the internationalist, the co-operative spirit, much needed if Wales is to thrive in the future?

David Llewellyn: “I am respectfully unconvinced with your statement that nationality is not central to the debate of aspirational statehood for Wales. I believe that it is the opposite, that the self-identification of “Welsh ethnicity” (regardless of and separate from language) as revealed in the survey is central to that question. However, I do recognize that there are exceptions”.

I’m not sure that we’re that far apart here. Certainly, for some people, identity is central to their politics, but the fact that there are any exceptions at all sems to me to confirm that basic point that there is no necessary connection between the two. Discussing the constitutional issues as though there were a dependency is an exclusive, rather than an inclusive, approach; it is an approach which almost forces people to confront and deal with the nationality question before engaging with the question of how Wales should be governed. And that is an unnecessary pre-condition.

“I think a significant issue facing Plaid quite frankly is that these issues (Independence and nationality) dominate the party. Most people want to know how kitchen table concerns like employment, healthcare, and education. How would Plaid policies affect those concerns?”

Actually, no they don’t. We spend far more time debating the other issues you mention, although it certainly is true that we believe that the best way of addressing those issues is through having more control over them here in Wales.

Len Gibbs: I understand the way some people feel about the linguistic divide – as one who has learned Welsh, I’d like to think that I understand the different perspectives. Most of my family are monoglot English speakers; but I don’t regard them as being any the less Welsh for that. And I agree that economics is central to any debate about futures. (But the example you chose is a poor one; not because you’re necessarily wrong to question the priority given to the North-South air link, but because even if you’re right, one poor decision – or even a series of poor decisions – by the Welsh government of the day does not invalidate the case for self-government. If it did, then poor decisions by the government of the day in London would equally invalidate the case for the union). “Nats are nuts” is a nice piece of sloganising, but I think we can discuss issues in a more comradely form than that.

David Phillips: “Building a sense of nationality -> Plaid Cymru -> Independence for Wales”. Where to start? Lord Cledwyn says something, so it must be so, and therefore the corollary is also true? In a way, your response neatly sums up the fear which many in the Labour Party have often shown when it comes to questions of nationality. That has reflected itself in an uncertainty and lack of confidence about Wales, and in some cases, a reluctance to support and grow Welsh-medium education, despite parental demand, in case it turned out more nationalists. It’s an unnecessary and ungrounded fear. Despite all the growth in national identity and feeling, and all the increases in Welsh-medium education, the proportion of the populace supporting Plaid’s constitutional aims remains resolutely around the 12 – 15% mark. There is no need to suppress Welsh national feeling to engage in – or even win – the argument about Independence.

John Tyler: There is much that I could say, but it would be straying too far from the point of the original article, so I’ll save it for another debate in the future. Just one small point on your “Plaid nationalists that would sunder the union and create a republic for their narrow political objectives”. The reason we want to see an independent Wales (and, just by the way, Plaid’s aims do not talk about a republic, although that’s certainly what I would like) is because we believe it’s the best way to address the bread and butter issues.

Respectfully, I did not write that “Plaid pay[s] lip service” to bread and butter issues. I wrote that issues of nationality and independence obscure Plaid’s economic critique. Plaid members need to be proactive and express their economic critique clearly. Why would voting Plaid be better then other? Undoubtedly, independence within the framework of the community of nations, in partnership with the European Union, is the long-term goal of Plaid policy. This is unambiguous tenet of the party, and those that vote for Plaid are not unaware of this.

Well, perhaps Asghar was. *shrug*

I completely agree that Wales has the potential to regain a leading role throughout the world “building bridges and looking outward”, as it did when Coal was King. Then, Wales was the Kuwait of energy production with Welsh coal fueling the economic engine of world economies. However, when Coal was King profits were largely siphoned off outside of Wales rather then invested inwards into education and infrastructure. Dr. DJ Davies was a proponent of the Tennessee Valley Authority as a template to the economic rejuvenation of Wales. The more I study that public-private corporation the more I am convinced it is a solid template for Wales. Even today, Wales should be a net exporter of energy, energy that could be sold abroad on the international electric grid for profit, reducing electric bills for households and businesses throughout Wales. The programme would provide long-term jobs for Welshmen ande women, and attract or retain engineers, technicians, and other professionals to Wales. The key to this however is far more home rule for Wales, and perhaps independence.

You ask what the point of Plaid is; well Plaid provides a home for those who have the best interests of Wales at heart, and who look for solutions to the challenges facing Wales from a distinctly Wales point of view.

… reminding people that the ultimate goal of Plaid is an Independent republic of Wales is always relevant, it puts things into political perspective.

Whilst people (of all political persuasions) might consider a republic as an alternative to the constitutional monarchy we have in the United Kingdom, it is only the Plaid nationalists that would sunder the union and create a republic for their narrow political objectives, you might like to explain Plaid’s intention towards “Decentralised Socialism” to Mr Llewellyn above, no mention of a Royal family in the Plaid constitution, Welsh (Aberffraw) or otherwise.

Spin Mr D, spin, CP has the rights of conditions in Wales today where he writes It’s jobs and the economy that needs addressing not the concept of nationalism and Welsh identity … … get on with your neighbours and support the national rugby team in its everlasting battle with England … etc