Re-reading George Orwell is a sobering reminder that anything worth saying about politics was said nearly seven decades ago.

His 1945 essay Notes on Nationalism is not only well worth digesting in the wake of the independence referendum, but includes one highly pertinent observation.

"All nationalists have the power of not seeing resemblances between similar sets of facts," wrote Orwell. "A British Tory will defend self-determination in Europe and oppose it in India with no feeling of inconsistency.'

Although the description "British Tory" is problematic in the early 21st century, Orwell's point nevertheless still stands. Fresh from condemning - often in histrionic terms - the Yes campaign's bid for independence, many Eurosceptics (both within and beyond the Conservative Party) have moved, with no feeling of inconsistency, to making similar arguments in support of a "Brexit".

Decisions about Britain, argue Ukipers, are best taken in Britain; with ties to Brussels cut, they claim, the UK can become the Hong Kong of northern Europe; and far from being a retrograde step, an "independent" Britain will be able to forge a new relationship of "equality" with the other nations of the European Union.

Much of it is immune to facts and rational arguments. Just as most independent economic commentary highlighted the extent to which Scotland benefited from being part of the UK, most analysis shows immigration (the leitmotif of the Kippers) has been - on balance - a good thing for the domestic population.

It's also striking how mainstream such views have become. A few years ago I was in the audience for David Cameron's Bloomberg speech, and at the time it struck me as a strongly pro-European statement of intent, albeit one with significant caveats.

But these days the PM's capture by the right of his party (together with his fear of Ukip) is so complete that it's often difficult to discern between Cameroon and Faragist rhetoric. Even otherwise moderate Tory MPs like Rory Stewart speak of being up for the "buccaneering" task of engineering an exit.

This mood music has not gone unnoticed on the Continent, where such statements unnerve even the most Britophilic of observers. On a brief visit to Madrid and Lisbon last week I was asked constantly about the prospects of the UK leaving Europe within the next few years, and to say they find such an outcome baffling would be an understatement.

At the same time, my Iberian excursion served as a sobering reminder that "ever closer union" is far from a harmonious experience. For all the talk of austerity in a UK context, the Spanish and Portuguese have been experiencing pay cuts and tax rises for several years now, and black humour about this lasting until the 2030s punctuate conversations.

The strain goes beyond economics. During a visit to the Spanish Congress on Tuesday, the Spanish Constitutional Court ruled against a formal independence referendum in Catalonia. Yesterday the unofficial two-question "consultation" went ahead regardless, and whatever the rights and wrongs of that process it'll have furrowed brows in Brussels.

Orwell's observation about inconsistency naturally applies to Scottish Nationalists as well as those of a British bent. While Cameron emerges as a separatist in a reversal of referendum roles, the outgoing SNP leader has suddenly become a scaremongering Unionist, warning of a threat to Scottish jobs and prosperity if Scotland is "dragged" out of Europe against its will.

Indeed, Salmond and his successor now repeat the line "I don't think the EU is perfect, far from it" ad nauseam, adding that it "badly needs change and reform". They both believe an in/out referendum, which they oppose, now seems inevitable, but therein lies Orwell's inconsistency: if the EU is far from perfect then why not leave it? After all, there's less to unpick in that 42-year-old Union than the much older Anglo-Scottish partnership.

In the second volume of Gordon Wilson's absorbing history of the SNP, Scotland: The Battle For Independence, Salmond's predecessor as leader provides an illuminating account of early tensions over Maastricht, probably the last time the party seriously engaged with the European dimension. Although initially supportive, Wilson came to view "ever closer union" as clashing with the SNP's twin goals of sovereignty and decentralisation.

Wilson's book also serves as a reminder that the SNP supported John Major's Conservative government in its efforts to ratify the Maastricht Treaty. Although it was an article of faith that Tories were beyond the pale, the party's three MPs were offered beefed-up Scottish representation on a new Committee of the Regions and dutifully marched through the Aye lobby.

The reaction was such that Salmond's fledgling leadership of the SNP came under assault from future ministerial colleagues and party officials, although he easily survived a motion of no confidence, adding useful context to the First Minister's current outrage about Labour working "hand-in-glove" with the Conservatives during the referendum campaign.

But then, as Orwell observed all those decades ago, the Nationalist mindset dictates that actions "are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits, but according to who does them". In other words, if Labour co-operates with the Tories it's contemptible, but if the SNP chooses to do so then it's in Scotland's best interest. The UK, meanwhile, is denigrated for being unequal and undemocratic even though both criticisms apply to the EU in spades.

As ever, Salmond et al get away with it largely because their opponents are in such disarray. It is no exaggeration to say that Unionism, be it British or European, is in intellectual crisis, and if the "Britain in Europe" campaign resembles Better Together redux in a few years' time it would be no surprise to watch those in favour of UK "independence" becoming a solid majority (even in Scotland). Legitimate warnings of the consequences will be dismissed by Nigel Farage, Salmond-like, as "scaremongering" and will most likely prove counterproductive.

All across the Continent, anti-EU and anti-austerity parties of the left and right are enjoying rising support. In Portugal Socialists are ahead in the polls for next year's general election while in Spain Podemos is also piling up support. Across the Irish Sea, Sinn Fein has begun to edge ahead of Fine Gael and Finna Fail. Yet for all the beguiling simplicity of their prospectuses, such movements (the SNP included) rarely offer credible solutions to legitimate concerns.

This past weekend was full of symbolic anniversaries that ought to strengthen the intellectual basis of the European project, not least the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall and the centenary of the Great War, yet somehow it doesn't feel that way. One suspects George Orwell would have had something to say about that.