Scottish nationalists are proposing a new code of conduct for their movement and, given they’ve come up with the idea during the jubilee, I have a suggestion for what the code’s first rule should be. It would go something like this: Relax. Calm down. The jubilee is just some people you don’t agree with having a good time. And Diana Ross is singing Chain Reaction. What’s not to like? Why are you being so negative and angry? Chill, man.

I appreciate my rule may not make the code’s final cut, but I also note that the phobias the code says should be avoided at all costs include Anglophobia. The problem with this – and it’s the problem with any written code or constitution – is how you define such a term. But I'm perfectly prepared to say that the nationalists’ crabby and abusive reaction to the jubilee was motivated in part by the idea that the monarchy is “English”. So there we are: the code has already been broken.

However, you may also have noticed there was an exception to the rule in Nicola Sturgeon whose comments were well judged. Whether you’re a monarchist or a republican, she said, it’s possible to respect the Queen. The First Minister also said she had personally benefited from the chance to speak to the monarch in private and wanted the Queen and her successors to remain head of state if Scotland ever becomes independent.

Now, the First Minister may genuinely believe what she says, but there’s also some interesting synchronicity going on here. Nicola Sturgeon – because she’s canny – is always aware that she’s speaking to people who voted Yes but also people she needs to vote Yes in the future, and her respectful and nuanced remarks on the Queen are part of that. She knows that the hysterical and angry approach demonstrated by other nationalists would be counter-productive and so, quite rightly, she dials it down.

The synchronicity kicks in with the fact that the new code, drawn up by a group in Aberdeen, is trying to address a similar problem. The primary focus of the Yes movement, it says, should be “to engage those who are yet to be convinced of the positive case for Scottish independence” and that Yes supporters should therefore make their case “politely and positively at all times” and “without rancour and bitterness”. It’s effectively an admission that nationalists have often got it wrong with their language and behaviour and that it’s damaged their campaign.

However, the launch of the code and the reaction to it suggests many Yes activists still aren’t really ready to accept responsibility. Take a look, for example, at what the MP Stewart Hosie said at the launch: “It’s absolutely vital that we cannot allow our political opponents to pick out individuals, single words that someone may have once said inadvertently or angrily on Twitter or Facebook, to bring down the tone of our campaign and the enthusiasm of our movement across the country.”

It's worth looking at that in more detail. Mr Hosie apparently believes the problem amounts to “single words” that people have said “inadvertently” which are then picked out by “political opponents”. In other words, there’s more than a whiff of “it’s not our fault really”, with Mr Hosie suggesting, a little bitterly perhaps, that the real problem is unionists picking on accidental slip-ups to damage an otherwise joyous civic celebration. I respectfully refer Mr Hosie to the words of his own code: “without rancour and bitterness”.

There are other obvious problems with the code, including the idea that there will be zero tolerance of prejudice including Anglophobia and transphobia – how on earth do you police it? The word “transphobia” also raises an awkward problem – Mr Hosie says there’s no schism in his movement and yet we know there is division over the idea of transphobia itself, with some saying the opponents of the SNP’s gender laws are transphobic while the other side say they’re not transphobic, they’re just standing up for women’s rights. So how do you enforce a code on transphobia when there isn’t even agreement on what transphobia is?

Mr Hosie’s claim that the code is for a movement that’s totally united was also rather undermined by the fact that the groups that helped draw up the code did not include Alba. There was also frustration among some nationalists that the code looks like another footering delay and distraction from a second referendum, as well as some resentment over a small group in Aberdeen dictating what others should or shouldn’t say. Again: how honest is it really to say there is no schism?

The idea of honesty also touches on another of the synchronicities at work here – you might even call it a strategy of which the code is supposed to be a part. What the code says is that Yes activists should avoid intemperate language and be respectful in their arguments, but it’s also being issued at the same time that the First Minister paid tribute to the Queen and the Finance Secretary Kate Forbes warned us Scotland faces a very difficult financial position and the Government will need to be canny with its spending to grow the economy. None of this – the tribute to the Queen, the words of financial restraint – is by accident.

So, given the new code is aimed at winning another referendum, let me give a bit of advice – indeed, let me suggest my own version of the code that might be useful in converting people like me. First, do more of the kind of honesty Kate Forbes was doing about the economy. People know the creation of an independent Scotland would be deeply difficult financially, so be honest about that. Have a zero tolerance approach to talk of utopias because people will just scoff and be less likely to believe what you say.

Second, accept that there is an Anglophobia problem in your movement and stop blaming evil unionists for focusing on the bad stuff – they wouldn’t be able to focus on it if it wasn’t there. And while we’re at it, don’t use language such as “those who are yet to be convinced” or “once we’re independent” because that assumes independence is inevitable and undermines the agency and opinions of people who are opposed to it. It looks arrogant and patronising, so have a zero tolerance for those things too.

And finally – and this might be the most important bit of any code – avoid talk of “Scottish values” or “the voice of Scotland” or even the word “Scotland” as if we all share the same opinions. We don’t. Lots of us have enjoyed the jubilee. Lots of us appreciate and respect the Queen. And lots of us – perhaps including the First Minister herself – want her as head of state, independent or not. Respect that reality. Come to terms with it. Don’t get bitter about it. And perhaps – albeit slower than you’d like – you will finally advance your cause.

Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.