It is time that Scotland’s social movements learned lessons from Covid about crisis preparation and governance, urges Ewan Kerr.
The pandemic was a profound crisis that exposed pre-existing structural inequalities while reshaping the landscape of social movement activism and crisis governance in Scotland. Drawing on roundtable discussions and interviews with leading social movement activists over a two-year period, this article explores how left-wing movements in Scotland navigated the pandemic’s political challenges. While activists responded rapidly to shifting conditions, the longer-term impact of their efforts remains uncertain. Did the crisis create opportunities for lasting and transformative change? To what extent were these opportunities taken up by social movements?
The article reflects on findings from the ENDURE Project, funded by the ESRC, which examined state-society relations in Scotland, with a particular focus on the tensions between activism and the state, the fragility of crisis-driven solidarity, and the struggle to turn mobilisation into lasting policy change. As we emerge from this crisis, there is an urgent need to assess what worked, what didn’t, and what kind of activism is necessary to meet the crises ahead.
State-Society Relations in Scotland Since 2014
Throughout the research, it has been impossible to separate social movement mobilisation and activism from their broader political context. Understanding and critiquing political practice requires acknowledging its deep social dimensions. A necessary starting point, therefore, is recognising that the Scottish National Party’s (SNP) dominance in government has long been characterised by strategic ambiguity, as it has positioned itself both as a party of national governance and as an oppositional force of protest.
On one hand, the SNP’s prevailing ‘social partnership’ approach has empowered some social movements and civil society organisations to make important demands on what passes for the Scottish state. This is partly due to the SNP’s historic and contemporary links to disruptive social movements. The Yes movement, which coalesced around the 2014 independence campaign, and the earlier influence of organised groupings, such as the 79 Group, both provided the SNP – at least rhetorically – with a strong claim to embody centre-left, social democratic, and even socialist politics. This is reinforced by the party’s longstanding image as a vehicle for protest. The Bute House Agreement of August 2021, which saw the activist-oriented Scottish Greens formally join the Scottish Government, appeared to open further opportunities for progressive social movements to influence decision-making.
On the other hand, the SNP’s political dominance has reinforced a process of depoliticisation in Scotland, prioritising professionalised, consensus-driven politics at the expense of class-based struggles. As Tom Montgomery, James Foley and I have argued elsewhere, nationalist successes have failed to revitalise class-based politics. Since 2014, the persistent focus on constitutional issues has redirected political energy away from movement-building and workplace struggles, further depoliticising social conflict. This shift has channelled popular discontent towards constitutional debates rather than addressing Scotland’s structural challenges. Social movements that have sought to maintain a degree of political autonomy, or that do not align with the SNP’s core vision and ambitions, have struggled to force meaningful policy change. Without the ability to apply sustained pressure, protest activity, grassroots organising and independent institution-building have gradually weakened.
The COVID-19 pandemic and the social upheavals that accompanied it initially raised hopes about a reinvigorated, oppositional politics – one that recognised the opportunities that crises present for deep structural transformations. Crises disrupt established governance practices, exposing the hidden dynamics of power and inequality. As moments of rupture, they redefine and test state-society relations, destabilising hegemonic orders and opening space for ideological contestation. However, the state plays a crucial role in conditioning the terrain on which social movements operate: when movement goals align with state priorities, they are more likely to gain traction, but when they diverge, systematic barriers limit their effectiveness. This raises critical questions about the relationship between activists, social movements, and the state in Scotland. COVID-19 certainly opened up opportunities for lasting and transformative change, but the extent to which this was realised is more ambiguous, with some movements finding new opportunities for engagement – securing funding, influencing policy, or gaining mainstream visibility – and others facing increased restrictions, bureaucratic inertia, or outright suppression.
Crisis, Resilience, Resistance
Criticism of Scotland’s pandemic response is no longer controversial. As James Foley and I (alongside others like Karlo Basta and Ailsa Henderson) have pointed out, the key difference between the Scottish Government’s approach and that of Westminster was one not of substantive policy divergence, but of timing. One civil society leader told us that Scotland’s response was ‘in lockstep with Westminster,’ despite public perceptions to the contrary. The contrast between Nicola Sturgeon’s composed public-facing approach and the visible chaos of Boris Johnson’s administration created an illusion of divergence. The real human costs of the pandemic were documented in agonising detail during the ongoing COVID-19 Inquiry. Scandals surrounding ‘do not resuscitate’ notices, care-home deaths, the excessive enforcement of social distancing, and breaches of lockdown rules by senior officials all underline the failures of pandemic governance in Scotland. Dr Craig Dalziel, of the Scottish think-tank Common Weal, reminds us that in the early stages of the crisis, the Scottish Government dismissed testing as a distraction, and ignored alternative strategies drawn from international best practices and independent scientific advice from SAGE. Former MSPs we interviewed also recalled the difficulties of scrutinising government decisions, describing the way that aloof public health officials dismissed alternative viewpoints. Despite appearances, the Scottish Government did not manage the crisis well, and many questions remain to be answered.
The social movement activists we interviewed reported experiencing significant shocks and challenges in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. A migration and refugee activist recalled increased hostility from local communities, while youth climate activists described how the momentum of previous mobilisations came to an abrupt halt. A senior organiser from the COP26 Coalition noted that the lockdown ‘broke the wave of mobilisation’ that had been carefully built in the months leading up to the summit. Many activists described how the contraction of political space during this period initially confined social movements to online activism and symbolic gestures. As one trade union activist put it, solidarity was equated with ‘being kind’ and complying with lockdown regulations – approached in this way, solidarity becomes simply a social value that is detached from the political struggles through which power is contested, which serves to limit insurgent movement activity.
That being said, online platforms such as Zoom and WhatsApp became vital tools for maintaining activist networks and sustaining political engagement despite physical distancing. These platforms not only bridged the isolation between activists but, in some cases, intensified political activity. A long-standing activist reflected that, far from being a period of demobilisation, the early pandemic months were ‘probably one of the most intense periods of political activism in years.’ A transport campaigner similarly observed that intensive online organising was an effective way to distribute demands for a publicly owned transport network, aligning these with growing public awareness of state intervention’s possibilities.
Moreover, activists did not stop organising physically when the opportunity arose. As restrictions changed, they quickly adapted, producing guidance for in-person protest activities. One interviewee noted that this helped to counteract the ‘dampening effect’ of lockdown restrictions on physical demonstrations. Interviewees involved in two major mobilisations – the COP26 Coalition and the 2021 Climate Camp – highlighted how activists took advantage of shifting conditions to stage large-scale in-person actions. The COP26 day of action was the largest in Scotland since the Iraq War, while the Climate Camp was the first of its kind in over a decade. Both events showcased activists’ ability to navigate government regulations, public health measures, and logistical challenges, demonstrating a strategic return to physical mobilisation despite the constraints of the pandemic.
The trade union movement played a particularly important role in frontline workplace struggles. Activists described how union structures quickly adapted to pandemic conditions – Unite Hospitality led significant campaigns that expanded membership and improved working conditions in some of Scotland’s most precarious workplaces, while officials and reps in EIS, Unite, and PCS rapidly restructured internal organising methods to meet members’ evolving needs. Many trade unionists saw the pandemic as an opportunity to expose where real power lay in society. As one care worker rep put it: ‘We’re not waiting on politicians coming to save us. We need to do it ourselves. And I think that those were good conditions for us to be able to say, right – let’s try to rebuild this society in a better way [because] we really see now who it is that runs the society.’
Activists also engaged directly with the Scottish Government. These lobbying engagements were most successful when their demands aligned with the state’s immediate priorities. The Scottish Trade Union Congress (STUC) reported positive working relations with the government, as trade unions represented essential workers – whose protection was crucial for maintaining social and economic stability. Similarly, the grassroots tenants’ union, Living Rent, played a significant lobbying role to pressure the Scottish Government to introduce temporary eviction bans and rent freezes. However, this success was shaped as much by the government’s imperative to prevent mass homelessness as by the grassroots mobilisation. Living Rent activists recognised these victories as important but also acknowledged their limited scope. These cases illustrate how crisis periods can create openings for social movements, but they also reveal the extent to which movement successes are conditioned by state imperatives rather than purely by activist efforts.
The Future
Social movements quickly adapted to lockdown conditions by leveraging digital tools to maintain networks, coordinate actions, and sustain political engagement despite physical restrictions. At the same time, activists found alternative ways to organise beyond digital spaces, with trade unions restructuring workplace organising strategies to address urgent worker protections and campaigners creatively using socially distanced protests and symbolic demonstrations to maintain public visibility. Rather than leading to demobilisation, many activists described this period as one of intense political activity, where online coordination, workplace organising, and strategic in-person actions allowed movements to sustain momentum and respond effectively to emerging challenges.
However, despite the surge in activism and the heightened expectations for transformative change, many interviewees and attendees at a roundtable event reflected on the persistent challenge of translating crisis-driven mobilisation into a broader, sustained shift in political consciousness. While the pandemic moment amplified the visibility of social movements and reinforced their role in advocating for urgent protections, it did not necessarily generate new or cohesive visions for redistributing power. Instead, activists often found themselves navigating institutional constraints rather than articulating a radical programme that could exist independently of state structures.
Stale Holgerson has recently contributed to left-wing crisis theory in his book Against the Crisis, in which he cautions against viewing crises as opportunities. Instead, he argues that crises are “problems we must fight. We must stop them” (emphasis in original). While not without its limitations, this perspective offers useful insights for social movements in Scotland as they prepare for future crises. Following Holgerson, movements must first develop a sharper analysis of crises, second identify the crisis policies needed for future disruptions, and third, adopt more effective approaches to crisis management. These themes were indirectly reflected in discussions among roundtable participants, which emphasises their relevance to ongoing activist struggles.
For social movement activists in Scotland, crisis critique requires a multi-level analysis of how crises unfold within the specific political and economic structures of Scotland, exposing their class dimensions and how multiple crises—such as public health emergencies, climate breakdown, and economic instability—intersect and reinforce one another. Beyond critique, activists must think creatively about crisis policies, developing strategies that shape future crisis responses in ways that confront structural inequalities and prevent their recurrence. Crisis management encompasses the immediate, practical actions taken to mitigate shocks, protect the most vulnerable, and translate the lived experience of crisis into a deeper class consciousness. A clearer understanding of these three dimensions can provide activists with a framework to assess past responses and strategically prepare for future crises, ensuring that mobilisation efforts address both immediate challenges and long-term structural change.
The COVID-19 pandemic revealed both the vulnerabilities and strengths of social movements in Scotland, exposing structural constraints while also demonstrating the potential for adaptation and resistance. As future crises emerge, the challenge will be to move beyond reactive mobilisation towards a sustained and strategic reorganisation of movement infrastructures. The ability to connect immediate struggles with long-term transformative goals will determine whether activists can shape crises rather than simply respond to them.
Ewan Kerr is an academic researcher with an interest in state-society relations during crisis periods, climate politics, and labour movement studies.