As regular readers will be aware, I have spent the last five years or so trying to persuade people that the Scottish Government being indispensable to Scotland’s cause and the SNP being the party of government meant that the only logical course of action was to put all our effort into trying to get the SNP back to being the ‘party of independence’ it was when I joined more than 60 years ago.
I readily allow that I enjoyed little success. Almost entirely because as hard as I tried to convince people we still needed the SNP no matter how much damage had been wrought by Sturgeon and her successors, the party leadership put even more effort into turning the SNP from a vehicle for independence into a vehicle for their own aggrandisement.
There comes a point where failure must be acknowledged. Despite everything that went before, I still clung to the hope that John Swinney might halt or at least slow the SNP’s transformation into a party entirely adapted to the British political system. That hope has been dashed by everything Swinney has said and done since his elevation – up to and including the disassociation of the party’s identity from the idea of independence on the ballot.
The SNP leadership is now actively abandoning and betraying Scotland’s cause. Where I previously urged people to accept the necessity of keeping the SNP afloat, I cannot in good conscience ask people to turn a blind eye to the treachery of the clique that has hijacked the party. To vote for the SNP is to condone this treachery and endorse the greater perfidy to come. No true Scottish nationalist can tolerate that.
I have been a Scottish nationalist all my life. For the last thirteen years, I have devoted my time, energy and meagre resources to Scotland’s cause. There have been many occasions when I was on the verge of giving up. Always, I found some reason to keep going as I swung between faint hope and profound despair. I have always been able to imagine a way out of whatever blind alley the SNP Scottish Government took the campaign for independence into. No matter how much free rein I give to my imagination, I can now see no way forward for Scotland’s cause.
The last straw was John Swinney’s decision to ignore the party leadership’s own resolution passed by conference – still supposedly the SNP’s ruling body – and disassociate the party’s identity from the idea of independence on ballots for the 2024 UK general election. As we would expect, dumb SNP loyalists have insisted this is a trivial matter. Which speaks volumes about the ambivalence of their commitment to independence and their determination to put party before cause.
Compared to the party leadership’s stated intention to compromise the sovereignty of Scotland’s people by acceding to the sovereignty of the British parliament, I suppose removing the word ‘independence’ from beneath the SNP logo might seem a small matter – if all you see is a typographical alteration. What I see, however, is a party leader prepared to disregard an explicit instruct from the membership in his desire to distance the SNP from the idea of independence. If the party leader is prepared to do this, I ask myself, what else would he be willing to do? Is there anything he would not do? Given the power that the party leader possesses, is there anything that might prevent him completing his betrayal of party, cause, nation and people?
That small part of my mind that is still looking for a way out reminds me that party manifestos have yet to be published. There is surely no chance now that the SNP’s offering on the constitutional issue will be anything other than the treachery of a Section 30 plea thinly disguised as a ‘strategy for independence’. There remains the vanishingly remote possibility that Alba Party might yet adopt a real #ManifestoForIndependence and thus fulfil its promise to ‘hold the SNP’s feet to the fire’.
Politically, it would be the smart thing to do. As I have explained before, ‘fringe’ parties such as Alba have one huge advantage over the more credible contenders for electoral success in that those ‘mainstream’ parties have to be cautious about the positions they take while ‘lesser’ parties are free to be relatively radical in the ‘solutions’ they offer, knowing they are not going to be be in a position where they’d be expected to implement those ‘radical solutions’. Alba has nothing to lose by adopting a #ManifestoForIndependence, and potentially much to gain in terms of electoral support.
Conversations I’ve had with people who have quit or been expelled from Alba Party lead me to conclude that there is no real chance of them rocking the devolution boat. As with the SNP, the Alba Party leadership is mainly focused on seats, salaries, status and short money. Independence is just an electioneering slogan.
There is no outcome to this election that doesn’t leave Scotland’s cause in a worse place than it is now. Given where it stands right now, that is very bad news indeed.
Peter A Bell 
Deletion seems to be the manifest strength of the current leader of the SNP.
Added to his personal characteristics of duplicitousness and deceitfulness the First Minister of Scotland has well earned, and is most certainly deserving of, his epithet Dishonest John, the Redactor Man.
This upcoming election is the one in any voting jurisdiction that I have the least interest in, and engagement with, since I first became in any way politically sentient as an 8 year old when the June 1970 British General Election took place.
It looks like I’ll be voting for the #EndTheUnion party for the foreseeable future.
LikeLiked by 4 people
That was a waste of my time reading that waffle Peter.
Normally, I look forward to your emails & enjoy their content.
Can you please share your thoughts instead, on how we can instruct the SNP, on the basis of how they should legally go about bringing this Union to an end?
Yours for Independence
Robert Bruce (Sovereign Scot) Borthwick 07966 017632 KY11 9AA
Sent from my Galaxy
LikeLike
Done that. Didn’t help.
I can do no other than state my sense of the situation honestly. If it is my considered view that Scotland’s cause has been brought to death’s door by the SNP leadership, how might I say otherwise? I sincerely trust you don’t imagine I get any satisfaction out of being so pessimistic. I would dearly love to have some reason to be optimistic. If you have such a reason, please share.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hi Peter.
Has there been any developments with the Stirling Directive?
I’ve not heard anything of late.
Wasn’t there supposed to be a Court Case in Europe demanding Scottish Government act on Independence?
LikeLike
Aye Peter, it is difficult to see the SNP elite as anything other than weel pensioned-aff agents of the British state, Cesaire’s ‘watchdogs of colonialism’; all following the decolonization template of course.
The only positive on the near horizon might be some Scottish national success at the Euros, where we will at least see a real demonstration of national consciousness similar to those we witnessed in earlier pro-liberation mass marches; 200,000 Scots in kilts maks a bonnie sicht, an nae a Union flag in sicht either!
Nothing upsets our colonial oppressor more than Scottish successes in the international sphere, which also reminds everyone that Britain is never a Tory ‘one-nation’. Success would also boost Scottish national confidence, as well as national consciousness, reminding us of who we are and our rightful place in the world, which is increasingly at risk so long as our sovereignty remains stolen from us.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Aye alfbaird, but no twa hunner thoosan mairchin elated effter a guid result at the fitba’, mair like angered by the ‘heinous treachery’ brocht upon the peoples o’ this nation by the rogues wha continue tae spout Independence in order they keep a shine on the erse o’ thair troosers in the service o’ thair colonial maisters.
Thon same twa hunner fowk mairchin in anger on Holyrood is whit is needed, no some public park ony whaur else in Scotland. Thon sae ca’ed democratic ‘gowd standard’ the traitors wid hae us believe in MUST be the sword by which they fa’.
#End The Union!!!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Just while I’m “here” Alf, and if for the sake of argument you’re extreme with your view of Scotland being a colony, well, I posted immediately after that infamous UKSC “judgement” (in inverted commas as reasonable judgement it certainly wasn’t), that the judgement meant that whatever the status before, Scotland was now being treated indeed, as a colony. Denied the right to hold a referendum on Independence, and hence our right to self-determination internally within the UK. See my posting below.
Well, extreme or not, that view of “colony” is being expressed by more and more people including some quite surprising ones, and it’s therefore entering the mainstream. Perhaps approaching what happened with Independence itself during the first Indy Ref. From that point of view, your own efforts are bearing fruit. I think it’s possible it’s getting into the SNP, and not just some of the membership. No longer just the nutcase fringe.
Now then – the next stage is, of course, what to do about it? Like the UN, or like the ICJ. And the thing is this: with the UK’s stance on a whole range of things including Gaza, it ain’t very popular with the likes of the UN or the international community. Take Ireland and Portugal for instance.
It seems that some ducks might be swimming into a row.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, the SNP ScotGov could and should have focused much more on our right to self-determination. In Doun-Hauden I suggested that Mike Russell as Const. Secr. should be knocking on the UN door instead of wasting his time knocking on the door of No. 10/our oppressor. The SNP elite has been very slow to figure out that self-determination independence means decolonization, also according to the UN itself.
LikeLike
Well, I’m not sure if the ScotGov or even ScotParl is the right body to approach the UK – perhaps a Constitutional Convention is. Maybe a back-bencher. The SNP itself did submit an intervention to the UKSC LA Reference, but the Judges managed to cheat their way around it, errr, I mean, legitimately bypass it.
LikeLike
“approach the UK“
should be UN, not the UK!
LikeLike
That makes more sense.
LikeLike
Successive national electoral mandates in favour of further independence referendums, all blocked by the UK ‘Administrative Power’, added to Scotland’s enforced EU exit, suggests a nationalist administration should have long since permanently parked itself at the door of the UN until state membership (and hence independence) is achieved.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A genuine liberation movement would have demanded more of a nominally nationalist government. It’s all too easy to blame the politicians. But if the people are the ultimate authority then the people cannot evade ultimate responsibility.
I suspect I know what your response will be, Alf. What we have is a very flawed democracy which limits our choices. It is not only land and minds which are colonised, but the entire political, social and cultural infrastructure of the nation. Our democracy is of the ‘managed’ variety. Not as overtly as in some countries, perhaps. But the colonisation of our democracy is all the more insidious for having had more than three centuries to seep into the fabric of the nation.
Am I starting to sound like you!?
It must be said that there is a point at which the argument above starts to sound like making excuses for the sovereign people. Rationalising our failure to better ‘motivate’ our politicians and operate our political apparatus. But maybe that’s because my impersonation of you is not exactly Swiftian in its acuity.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Its not the peoples fault. The people have never been informed by their ‘leaders’ what independence actually means and what it requires; it means decolonization and requires removal of racist colonial ideology and values, and ‘self-recovery’ of the oppressed people/culture.
The party elite in making its accommodation with colonialism has made sure only colonialists were handed seats. So-called radicals have been excluded from standing, and many hounded out the party. This political deceit was what caused the rupture in the movement.
The decolonization template is there for us, as we ponder phase III, the liberation phase. Better understanding is the key; intellectuals have a major role to play as you demonstrated in ‘The New Thinking’ article and many other contributions, as do other blogs.
A good result in the Euros is arguably of more help to our cause than a colonialist SNP; without such national consciousness there would be no independence movement and nothing makes us more conscious of our national identity than our participating with the international community of nations.
However the people still need to understand their ‘condition’, which is becoming more obvious as the colonial corset tightens around them.
LikeLiked by 2 people
From becoming leader of the SNP to becoming FM, sturgeon made no effort secure Independence she actively made more of an effort to destroy the movement and disband it and then started calling herself British and yet loyal supporters didn’t see anything wrong with that.
Before Sturgeon reign, the SNP had only one asset at its disposable and that was Independence and with Independence what it could bring to Scotland and our people no other party could anchor that to their cause, it’s the sole reason the SNP has been in government for the last 17yrs.
Instead Sturgeon took over and has used it as a weapon not to achieve Independence but to destroy it entirely, even today her puppets are welding the cause of Independence in this election on promises of making Scotland Independent within the next 5 years, I ask again why wait, if the idea of Independence solves all Scotland problem and her is the answer we’re being conned again, the SNP and its misuse of the Indy cause is doing irreparable damage to the cause by dangle the carrot and then taken it away again only to be rolled out In 2026, what’s going to happen is people are going to get so fed up of the promise of Independence that when they hear it they’ll just ignore it as another stunt of leading us up the hill on election night only to bring us back down and to be slaughtered by the SNP promise of Independence.
Scotland can become Independent and the only way its going to happen if we elect someone who prepared to put country before greed and Kate Forbes or Stephen Flynn aren’t these people neither. If Scotland had the right leader who actively wants Independence, would have to set out a policy of defying English rule and this is the correct way to go it can be done peacefully and when people see the truth about Britain and how Scotland is a prisoner then support for Independence will grow well past the 60% and the support for that leader of party putting Scotland first will also grow, people aren’t interested in promises there interested in active action something the SNP has lagged for the last 10 years. Sturgeon was never a leader I wouldn’t even say she was a deputy and neither is Swinney or deputy Forbes.
LikeLiked by 3 people
the Scottish Greens co leader spoke about Independence far more than Swinney did. The SNP are no longer the party of Independence they’re happy with Devolution and being part of the British State down in Westminster.
LikeLike
Two thing I’m looking forward to this election 1 Independence from the SNP 2 who Sturgeon going to blame Swinney or Humza and the truth is neither she to blame.
From becoming leader of the SNP to becoming FM, sturgeon made no effort secure Independence she actively made more of an effort to destroy the movement and disband it and then started calling herself British and yet loyal supporters didn’t see anything wrong with that.
Before Sturgeon reign, the SNP had only one asset at its disposable and that was Independence and with Independence what it could bring to Scotland and our people no other party could anchor that to their cause, it’s the sole reason the SNP has been in government for the last 17yrs.
Instead Sturgeon took over and has used it as a weapon not to achieve Independence but to destroy it entirely, even today her puppets are welding the cause of Independence in this election on promises of making Scotland Independent within the next 5 years, I ask again why wait, if the idea of Independence solves all Scotland problem and her is the answer we’re being conned again, the SNP and its misuse of the Indy cause is doing irreparable damage to the cause by dangle the carrot and then taken it away again only to be rolled out In 2026, what’s going to happen is people are going to get so fed up of the promise of Independence that when they hear it they’ll just ignore it as another stunt of leading us up the hill on election night only to bring us back down and to be slaughtered by the SNP promise of Independence.
Scotland can become Independent and the only way its going to happen if we elect someone who prepared to put country before greed and Kate Forbes or Stephen Flynn aren’t these people neither. If Scotland had the right leader who actively wants Independence, would have to set out a policy of defying English rule and this is the correct way to go it can be done peacefully and when people see the truth about Britain and how Scotland is a prisoner then support for Independence will grow well past the 60% and the support for that leader of party putting Scotland first will also grow, people aren’t interested in promises there interested in active action something the SNP has lagged for the last 10 years. Sturgeon was never a leader I wouldn’t even say she was a deputy and neither is Swinney or deputy Forbes.
LikeLike
I gave up the ghost on the SNP more than a year ago. You have done really well getting this far and I totally sympathise with how you must be feeling.
LikeLiked by 5 people
“seats, salaries, status and short money”
The above Peter that’s it, that’s all it boils down to, it always has, and probably always will going by human nature, as you know fine well that there’s nothing to be gained for Scotland, and certainly not in the indy department, by sending score of Scottish MPs to Westminster, its all just about the money and position, we the masses don’t really count.
I’d like to think I’m just overly cynical, but the history of Scotland sending MPs to Westminster shows that very little has been achieved for Scotland by sending politicians to Westminster, all that happens is we give this alien parliament a sense of credibility over Scots, and add another layer of government laws and rules to our lives.
If we’re honest with ourselves the SNP is no longer a party for Scottish independence, and I can even see them in the not so distant future taking up residence in the HoL. A decade has passed since the indyref, we’ve had countless indy mandates and SNP governments we’ve sent 57 indy MPs to Westminster, and it hasn’t made one little bit of difference to the indy cause.
I understood your pitch Peter on continuing to back the SNP in 2026, to keep out the Fifth Column parties, however there does come a time when we have to say enough is enough, have we reached that time yet? I guess that choice is down to the individual.
I foresee the SNP and BLiS as the two-biggest parties at Holyrood in 2026, they’ll work together and indy will definitely be off the table.
Salvo’s hard work might yet turn up a way out of this illegal union hopefully they find a way to nullify what never actually occurred, a legal union.
Boycott the GE.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The things about ” Ends ” is they precede ” Beginnings ” .
If even a stalwart ( former ) member of the SNP like yourself is forced to concede it’s curtains for that Party , we can be fairly certain this is indeed the case – it’s done . This G.E will merely be administering the coup de grace , they died * spiritually * some time ago .
I agree ALBA – on current form – do not look like a credible replacement , for reasons we’ve discussed previously : this could change , must change , if they ever want to be taken seriously as a genuine , whatever-it-takes Scottish Independence Party .
Personally , I’m not sure ANY Political Party has , or will develop , the requisite steel and clarity to take us to our goal – though ISP are displaying more of the ” right stuff ” than any of the others , and there is some promise from that quarter . The fact they have embraced the work & value of SALVO is very encouraging . Not sure where they stand on the adoption of a Scottish UDI position , but from what I’ve read/heard they may be amenable to such ; if they aren’t already .
If ” Crisis = Opportunity ” – and I believe it does – the demise of the SNP as a vehicle to Independence may open-up space to be filled by other entities ; not , necessarily , Political Parties , but other possible ” entities ” , representing the TRUE will of the people and with unassailable legitimacy to follow-through on manifesting this will .
I anticipate your response possibly being ….” Time ” , ie the lack of it , and , if so , I concur , but we can only hope there is enough of that precious * commodity * to prevent the total extinction of our Aspiration : and work to ensure that there is , to the best of our capacities .
LikeLiked by 2 people
I wonder if perhaps, we might need a completely new Independence Party?
But we would need it to be lead by a real firebrand type person who can be both credible and worth voting for.
The lack of any such person at the moment is one in political world just now is a huge problem for Scotland.
LikeLiked by 2 people
As I say above , Gordon , if a Political Party still has a key role in progressing our cause , ISP may be the one , they are the only Party not wedded to the futile pursuit of WM seats , don’t seem to be about ” personalities ” ( thank f*** ! ) and seem to have a broader , deeper understanding of and approach to Independence . Yes , a ” real firebrand ” could/would be a catalyst to infuse our support with energy and sense of urgency : the potential downside of this being we’re back to ” personalities ” again .
We’ve paid an exorbitant price for the elevation of – more accurately ….the suspension of all critical discernment in relation to the – as it turned out – feeble , duplicitous , narcissistic ” personality ” of Sturgeon . We def don’t want to make anything like the same mistake again .
LikeLiked by 1 person
ISP is putting up two candidates. What is that if not “pursuit of WM seats”? What they plan to do with the seats afterwards is irrelevant. They have to pursue and capture the seats first.
LikeLike
Fair point ; though surely there’s quite a difference in attempting to win a seat with the intention of abstaining from participating in the WM circus , than making the same attempt in order to sit on yr arse for five years whilst collecting yr generous salaries/perks ?
LikeLike
The SNP main page always has the start of 8 articles and a link to each. snp.org – Starting with the oldest article, the last line or two are these:
“put Scotland’s interests first” + “a future made in Scotland, for Scotland” = “Independence”.
Message Matters. Association by rote is not rocket science. And still 3 weeks to go.
LikeLike
Then why take it off the ballot?
LikeLiked by 2 people
If Alba and ISP had it on their ballot, then it would be confusing if the SNP did. I did think it was a meaningless gesture anyway.
And then there’s the “Independent Green Voice” saga.
LikeLike
All the excuses.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Take it up with your branch. I’m not a member. And on a scale of 1 to 100 in terms of importance or impact, I’d give it 1.
LikeLike
My vote in the UK GE will read #EndTheUnion
LikeLiked by 2 people
Okey-doke. It does seem this is indeed the plan so far. From the Herald this afternoon:
He [Swinney] said: “What I’ve been doing throughout this election campaign is relating independence to the principal concerns that people have in Scotland.”
Yousaf terminated the BHA with the Greens, which was absolutely essential. Then Swinney needed to move the SNP back to the moderate centre-left, as, never mind the distraction of “woke”, the Greens were disastrously dragging the SNP further and further over to the extreme far left. And that is not where Scotland is, hence the residual GE support which went as low as 8 seats according to Electoral Calculus. Yousaf by the way had ditched most of the excessive and incompetent Green stuff even before ending the BHA, and Swinney (and Forbes) continued that.
Then he has needed to show that the ScotGov wants to become competent again – they’ve been a ragtail of bobbin soggy muffins. The economy and business needed boosting – and that message is getting across.
Then he needed to tie up the measures needed to be taken, with Independence. Support was / is at about 49% overall. Not enough. And yes, 50% + 1 is enough in the end, no need for 60% or whatever stupidity,
That’s where we are now. That’s for the “normal” voters, not the disenfranchised, dispirited and dismotivated YES activists. And it’s essentially what I posted elsewhere was needed the moment the GE was announced and made it all real and now. The SNP was up shit creek, and facing years in the wilderness – along with any hope of our Independence.
But now the campaign needs Independence to be pushed more and more, and more openly, and hey, we have still got 3 weeks.
My prediction for the GE is the SNP to get 57 seats. Or 3. Or anywhere in-between. They have everything to play for. And everything to win – or lose.
I haven’t changed my avatar. Yet.
LikeLike
There is nothing to win. Not for Scotland’s cause. There is no prize for being the ‘winner’ of the Scottish bit of a British election. Scotland’s cause gains nothing. The party does, obviously. There’s stacks of money in it for the party. But nothing for the cause.
You’re chuffed tae bits ‘cos you can find a few mentions of independence on the SNP website. You seem to believe this proves some kind of commitment to restoring Scotland’s independence. You also appears to suppose it makes light of removing the word ‘independence’ from the ballot. Which implies you fail to see the significance of the gesture. Like the SNP loyalists, you simply discount the fact that putting the word ‘independence’ on the ballot was a decision of conference – the ruling body of the party . . . supposedly!
You fail to see the significance of the leader unilaterally and for no logical reason overturning a conference decision. You don’t get what signal this sends. You don’t get how it is perceived by the independence movement.
Your ‘reasoning’ makes no sense. Apparently, it was necessary to detach the SNP from independence so as to attach independence to a host of policy issues which have nothing to do with the constitutional issue. So, independence was taken off the ballot paoper. But that’s OK because independence gets plenty of mentions elsewhere. But if it has all these mentions elsewhere, what was the opoint in taking it off the ballot paper? Does putting it on the ballot have some magical power to associate the party with independence that all those mentions elsewhere don’t?
And what is the point of detaching the SNP from independence so as to attach it to policy issues if this leaves the policy issues attached to something that isn’t attached to the SNP?
And how the fuck do you detach the SNP from independence when it has been entirely bound up with independence in the public mind for 100 years just by taking the word off a piece of paper the voters will have sight of for mere seconds?
And why would the SNP performance in government be an issue? This is a Westminster election. It is NOT an election for the Scottish Parliament?
And why would you tie independence to a raft of policy issues that are by definition divisive? Isn’t it obvious that a large part – a huge part – of the independence campaigns problems to date have been cause by the failure to treat the constitutional question as a standalone issue? Take EU mombership, for example. You link independence with EU membership, you piss off the anti-EU mob. You don’t link it with EU membership, you piss off the pro-EU mob. Multiply that be a hundred different issue on which opinion is more or less sharply divided and you have a lot of pissed off people.
There’s so many bad decisions here it’s almost as if Swinney is trying to make Sturgeon look good. FFS! The SNP’s record in government is ‘problematic’. It’s the easiest line of attack for the SNP’s opponents. Whether what they say about the SNP’s record in government is true or not makes no difference. Perception is everything and they have 99% of the media. So, Swinney decides to lead with the competence of the SNP? It makes no sense!
There is absolutely no strategic thinking here. No coordination. The bits don’t join up. It’s as if he’s being given contradictory advice by different people and trying to follow all of it.
And there’s more. The way you refer to the word ‘independence’ very much reflects the way the SNP is using it – as a electioneering device. Just a slogan. They want to use it when they think it’ll help them get seats, salaries, status and short money, and shun it when they think it might cost them votes. What does this say about their commitment to the cause? It say there is no commitment! A fact borne out by what the SNP ‘plans’ to do on the constitutional issue after the election. It’s the same ‘plan’ as has kept the independence move in the doldrums for a decade while the timbers rot. Nothing has changed. They still defer to Westminster. So, even if we look only at the half of their campaign where they are demonstrating commitment to independence and ignore the half where they are demonstrating disdain for independence, what they are committed to is a ‘plan’ which cannot possibly ever lead to actual independence.
It’s a fucking mess! All the post hoc rationalisations for bad decisions is painfully familiar. They are still bad decisions. And they are destroying the prospects for Scotland’s cause.
However, I have resigned myself to the fact that Scotland’s cause must inevitably come out of the election in a worse place than going in. And we’re in a dire place going in. I’ve also resigned myself to the fact that nothing is getting through to the SNP leadership. They are sitting in their comfortably appointed armour-plated bubble listening only to each other and talking only about how to hang on to the seats, salaries, status and short money. On the odd occasions they’re obliged to venture forth from their fastness, they see only the sycophantic mob confirming their belief that they are doing a bang-up job.
We are fucked!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Spot-on , P . Is not manifestly , glaringly obvious this sudden burst of ” oh we better start using the ” I ” word ” post-hoc cynicism is just one more attempt by the current SNP P/leadership to salvage what they can from what’s looking like an inevitable mauling in the G.E ?
At this stage in the * game * they’ll say anything , * pledge * anything , promise anything .
Sure , all Parties do this during election campaigns , but this doesn’t mitigate or excuse the SNP doing it . They are not – or should not be – an ordinary Political Party , they have an historic mission and everything the do should at all times be in the service of that mission . Not just in the few weeks preceding an election .
Check Flynn waffling insincere garbage about ” within the next five years blah blah ” , this after he had the gall to utter the weasel ” Gold Standard ” formula that Sturgeon used to keep the movement in suspended animation ( well , animation is a bit generous , stasis is more accurate ) for the entire duration of her tenure .
They think we’re all stupid , that we haven’t clocked the lies , contradictions , missed opportunities and flat-out idiocies of the last almost decade .
We have ; at least a lot of us have . We’ll find out soon how many .
Anyone who falls for this gaggle of chancers needs to give themselves a forceful slap .
LikeLike
” is it NOT manifestly ……”
LikeLike
You’re very presumptuous which isn’t a good quality. Try reading what people write, rather than what you presume they’ll write or even did write. And that’s not just about me, it’s about Swinney and the SNP. My personal opinion was summarised by this: “I haven’t changed my avatar. Yet.”. Anyways, I posted the following elsewhere. And try to remember that analysis (or interpretation) doesn’t neccessarily mean that it’s the analyst’s personal opinion. It’s just one option out of many. + + +
I wonder if Quebec will come into play?
“In summary, the international law right to self-determination only generates, at best, a right to external self-determination in situations of former colonies; where a people is oppressed, as for example under foreign military occupation; or where a definable group is denied meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, social and cultural development. In all three situations, the people in question are entitled to a right to external self-determination because they have been denied the ability to exert internally their right to self-determination. Such exceptional circumstances are manifestly inapplicable to Quebec under existing conditions.”
In terms of “democratic effect to the rights of the people of Scotland to be independent”.
https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2022-0098-judgment.pdf
First stop – UK Government, who then deny Scotland “the ability to exert internally their right to self-determination“. And when that fails, where next …
LikeLike
Just to make the point clear:
“or where a definable group is denied meaningful access to government to pursue their political, economic, social and cultural development. In all three situations“
is the appropriate part – that would be the 50% of the population who support Independence, but are denied a referendum to properly test the People of Scotland. And this therefore is the claim:
“In all three situations, the people in question are entitled to a right to external self-determination because they have been denied the ability to exert internally their right to self-determination.” (my bold)
and then this from Quebec as endorsed by the UKSC:
“Such exceptional circumstances are manifestly inapplicable to Quebec under existing conditions.”
However, I would claim that the one I illustrated, IS manifestly APPLICABLE to Scotland under existing conditions.
And I, for what it’s worth, think an external court may well agree.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are not the only one to claim this; the lawful right to self-determination of ‘a people’ is clearly a determinant of (their) independence.
However, the elected SNP Scottish Government has never progressed or acted upon this right, including directly with the UN and its institutions and where the right to self-determination is enshrined in its formative charter.
‘National aspirations must be respected; people may now be dominated and governed only by their own consent. ‘Self determination’ is not a mere phrase; it is an imperative principal of action’.
(President Woodrow Wilson, 1918)
LikeLiked by 1 person
How many of us are 100% sure having MPs in Westminster will be the determinant that will regain Scotland’s independence?
Is Rabbie’s declaration no less true today that when he first said it?
“I’ll make this declaration
We were bought and sold for English gold:
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!”
The Declaration of a Sovereign Scot initiative is seeking any candidate(s) who will take an alternative Oath – a Scottish Oath – before the 4th of July.
Since 1707 we have witnessed the continued imprisonment of Scotland as an Oath is sworn to the Crown in Westminster.
Scotland will regain its independence when the Sovereignty of the Scottish people is recognised by those who seek our votes, and who say we should support them for one purpose – Scotland’s independence.
It requires a moment in Scotland’s history when a Scottish Oath is spoken. This Oath:
‘ I do solemnly swear and affirm that my allegiance is, and will remain permanently and exclusively, to the Sovereign people of Scotland.’
Can we overturn the result of decisions taken by those long since dead – instead of endessly repeating them?
LikeLike
Mike, I like the idea of the people of Scotland being sovereign.
I hesitate to say sovereign Scots as I imagine many genuine supporters of Yes are not Scots, or are partly Scots.
Not that I believe in ‘civic nationalism’ as it’s a ruse inspired by virtue signaling. The politics of identity is largely about identity.
Whilst I like the idea, I don’t think it’s all that relevant nowadays. Actually, was it ever particularly relevant, even way back in ancient history in the Declaration of Arbroath or whatever? Probably not. Fine idea though. Power to the people! I grew up watching a sitcom about that; funny because it was true. I imagine it’ll look a bit dated now.
Maybe not as dated as thinking sovereignty of the people is the key to future success. Steve Clarke may as well issue his players with tackety bits and the team talk from the 1875 auld enemy game.
Thankfully we’re better than that… at football.
At politics we’re dreadful. We live in a rich country and can’t even provide enough food to feed everyone properly. Once everyone can eat, at their own dinner table, the prospects for independence will look so much brighter.
John Swinney actually knows all of this. Tragically he’s no more believable when he prioritises child poverty than when he claims to support independence.
LikeLike
I just received the letter telling me my postal voting pack will be sent out “around the 19th June”. So the SNP have just 7 days to step up their campaign before people start sending them back.
I’ll say the same here as I did elsewhere: if you currently intend spoiling your ballot there’s no rush to post it off if you have a postal vote. In the end if you’re still in your local area you can drop it off at an polling station in the constituency (you can not vote in person). Or just post it a few days before.
I say this just in case the SNP surprise us – by saying WHAT exactly they’ll do if the UK Government fail to “negotiate” after the SNP win a majority of seats, which might persuade some Indy antagonistics to vote SNP instead.
Their current “strategy” if they have one, may well win back regular voters, but won’t impress those who don’t trust the SNP with Indy any more. They need to step up to the plate as the Yanks might say. Like UN or ICJ.
LikeLike
Just don’t vote in the GE at all, it makes no difference to Scotland for our MP’s can’t change anything in this alien parliament, all you’ll be doing if you vote in these English elections is to give a few dozen Scottish politicians a good living at your expense, that’s it, there’s absolutely f*ck all in it for the Scottish masses, we sent 57 indy minded SNP MPs to Westminster not that long ago and it changed nothing, because Scots don’t matter and the MPs made too good a living to upset the apple cart.
The media in Scotland is bigging up the GE as are our political parties, the former wants Scots to think these foreign elections matter to Scotland when they don’t. The latter wants your votes to get as many of their candidates at Westminster as possible, the more they get in the more Short Money they get, and the candidates make a bloody good living whilst we back home get shafted as usual.
Don’t give the English parliament credibility over Scotland by voting in the GE, the bottom line is there’s nothing in for Scots.
Boycott the GE.
LikeLike
Or repurpose your ballot as a vote to #EndTheUnion. At least get something out of an otherwise pointless event. Even if it’s only a bit of personal satisfaction.
One of the benefits of #RepurposeYourVote is that it offers an alternative to those who would otherwise not bother voting at all. If only the campaign could gain enough thrust to reach these non-voters. There is a huge pool of voting power held by the disenchanted, disaffected and disengaged. Find a way to tap even a small part of that reservoir and you have the power to effect real change.
LikeLike
“Conversations I’ve had with people who have quit or been expelled from Alba Party lead me to conclude that there is no real chance of them rocking the devolution boat. As with the SNP, the Alba Party leadership is mainly focused on seats, salaries, status and short money. Independence is just an electioneering slogan.”
It’s sad to hear that. Having friends and family in Alba and having attended a few events I’ve been hoping for better.
What I would say, in fact I think I’ve said it already on here, is that opposition political parties in receipt of short money are inappropriate vehicles to carry forward #ScottishUDI or similar.
Their active MPs and MSPs have taken an oath and the short money is necessary, e.g. for Neale Hanvey to finance the defence of his seat here in Kirkcaldy (and Cowdenbeath).
A different vehicle is required to promote #ScottishUDI, perhaps a political party or a civic movement funded by means beyond short money. A political party and separate grassroots movement is the answer. A political party cannot do it alone imo.
The key election objective for Alba should arrive in 2026 when Alex Salmond attempts to return to Holyrood. I think Holyrood needs him whatever his vehicle, Alba or anything else. Serious question, why would any nationalist NOT want Alex Salmond to return as an MSP?
Please note I said any nationalist. I know why Nicola Sturgeon and her anti-justice clique don’t want him back but none of those desperados are nationalist.
I can’t defend Alba on resignations or expulsions. I don’t know enough about any of it.
I did have a conversation on twitter/X with Barrhead Boy but he badmouthed me, posted about me behind my back, failed to get a single accomplice to pile on, and then ran away into hiding. I’m not saying anything here I haven’t said to his face. I can understand why Alba would want to distance itself from the likes of him, using his blog/twitter to call people “house Jocks” and “English nationalists”.
It can’t be easy trying to start a new political party without picking up the dregs. How long has the SNP taken to become the devolutionist disaster we see today? How long did people stand by the Party after Nicola Sturgeon took charge? How long is it reasonable to give Alba a chance?
LikeLike
There is nothing illegal about #ScottishUDI. But it is just a model. I wouldn’t expect parties to adopt it exactly as I have formulated it. So long as the basc elements are there, parties would obviously want describe the process in their own ‘voice’. The biggest danger with that is the difficulties it might present for creating a single common #ManifestoForIndependence. And, of course, the big problem of trust. But that applies to everything politicians and parties say or do.
Whatever for it takes, #ScottishUDI would have to be picked up by a political party. Only a political party can seek a mandate from the people. More importantly at the early stage (which is now past), only a political party could hope to put pressuer on thèparty of government. If, for example, Alba had from its inception adopted the more ‘robust’ approach to the constitutional issue that I commend, it is unlikely that the SNP would now have the electoral space it does to push independence down the agenda. Alba Party talks the talk of a ‘radical’ nationalist party. But the reality does not withstand much scrutiny.
Alba has been a massive disappointment to a great many people – myself included. And many more are asking probing questions about the party’s ‘strategy for independence’ now that there’s an election. Interstingly, Alba seems to have bred its own wee army of party loyalists, every bit as dumb as the SNP variety. Which is actually what I was thinking of writing about today.
I’m going out for an old guys’ beer ‘n’ blether sesh this afternoon. So, if I’m going to write anything, I’d better get on with it. It is increasingly difficult to motivate myself these days.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nicola Sturgeon went to court to prove that constitutional matters are reserved to Westminster. I see that as a legal precedent for Party devolutionists to cower around should a nationalist ever lead the SNP.
Qualifying for short money requires an oath to the King and, legal or no, ‘parliamentary business’ or no, I’m thinking that #ScottishUDI is incompatible with the oath. Therefore it’s a matter of principle.
For me, the troughers who take the oath for financial gain whilst crossing their fingers only reinforce the idea that we are infantilised. Scottish politicians behaving like bairns in the playground is an absolute embarrassment.
LikeLike