Sometimes there’s an advantage in being the underdog. But there’s a difference between underdog and cowed cur. If you’re seeking sympathy, it may help your case to appear to be at a disadvantage or even victimised and bullied. But there’s a point at which sympathy shades into pity and pity into contempt. Turning the other cheek may afford you the moral high ground, ensuring that everybody gets a good view of you having your face slapped. Inviting a display of contempt can be a clever political tactic if your point is to have everyone know that your opponent is inclined to contemptuousness. But once everyone is aware of how despicable your opponent is your continued determination to be spat upon begins to look perverse.

What I’m trying to say is, we get the point, Nicola! You really don’t want to know what I’m trying very hard not to say!

This has to stop. Preferably before people start to conclude that the contempt is deserved. Behaving as if you expect respectful dialogue with the British government just gives the impression of stupidity once the British government has demonstrated beyond all possible doubt that neither respect nor meaningful dialogue will ever be forthcoming. The pathetically pleading hanger-on is not a good look for someone purporting to be a political leader. Stop it!

If you find these articles interesting please consider a small donation to help support this site and my other activities on behalf of Scotland’s independence movement.

Donate with PayPalDonate with Pingit

14 thoughts on “Briefly…

    1. It is worse than even that.

      I thought the core of Scotland’s case was that remains sovereign…hence it holds power and the Union is just an arrangement between 2 sovereign states not a parent with a break-away.

      I suspects this grates so much with many YES is that this is not “grovelling to power” – it is giving it away.

      Liked by 2 people

  1. It is an appeasement that sticks in the craw because you just know it will not work. Whatever Chamberlain’s real motives, it was evident from the writing of ‘Mein Kampf’ in the 1920s, while Hitler was imprisoned, and well before his rise to power, that he intended that Germany should not lack the resources necessary to maintain its ascendancy once he, and the Nazi Party, had established it. WW II became inevitable because appeasement was never going to work and because he was not stopped in his tracks timeously. When a ruthless person and regime decide that what you have is what they need, no amount of appeasement will help, no amount of stalling and prevaricating. On a smaller scale, no amount of appeasement is going to create that avalanche of YES votes out of previous NO votes because those who voted NO were, by and large, the beneficiaries of the status quo. If they have lost out in the interim, they might vote YES next time, but, fundamentally, their reasons for voting NO have not changed. They, too, need what you have, and they cannot afford for you to keep it or to use it other than they ordain. Basically, it will take a momentous loss, or threatened one, for previous NO voters to change tack in sufficient numbers to create that avalanche. It will certainly not be because they have arrived at the philosophical appreciation of Scotland’s right to self-determination. Anyone so inclined will have done so by now.

    Liked by 5 people

  2. Can’t disagree. There is a limit to petitioning for “better devo” and suchlike.

    Ultimately it’s all about getting people behind you, some of whom are inherently very reluctant. If the people of Scotland at large had more of a backbone, we would likely already be independent, but after 300+ years of Eng-Brit institutionalisation, it’s hard for many to break out of old ingrained habits. So for a long time it was wise not to appear too much of a boat-rocker, since that would simply have alienated rather than garnered support. Show reasonableness and good governance so as to establish a sound basis of trust.

    But that time has passed. The SNP general leadership – and it’s not simply down to one person, that’s facile – has not switched in a timely manner from the ultra-cautious to the proactive, yet people have been crying out for more leadership for some time now.

    I believe the turning point came when the SNP contingent walked out of the HoC, which they did out of mutual solidarity for their house leader and an overflowing sense of frustration. Afterwards, however, they initially feared that they had “gone too far” in front of public opinion, but in fact it was clearly the reverse. They were taken by surprise that it was so popular, and the SNP garnered a whole new tranche of membership on the back of it. That should have been a sign for them that the popular mood had changed, but alas nothing came of it. Even more critically, the historic opportunity offered by the unwilling imposition of Brexit upon us has largely been squandered.

    It’s not all down to the SNP leadership, though. We still get a stream of letters in the press from ordinary members decrying more positive action for fear that it’s a “too-risky last chance”. This inability to strike at the moment of maximum opportunity seems to be all through us like letters through a stick of rock. But the only antidote to it is leadership, offering a clear way forward, and demonstrating a willingness to make it happen by taking the initiative, going on the offensive. I believe enough people are now well ready for it. (And I don’t mean pleading for another devo tweak here or there.)

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Take care all and kindest regards, the people you quoted I have seen their faces heard their voices much closer than all would think both in Scotland in Westminster and in other speaking places yet I would confirm that I do not know the real people or their real ambitions.


  4. I suppose I agree, but from a slightly different perspective.

    I can see that it is useful to be able to argue that all of the existing mechanisms were tried for achieving consent, but then were thwarted by a subsequent refusal for S30 grant. Hence justifying the subsequent use of alternate (non violent) measures – be that UDI, court cases, “unauthorized” referendum. or whatever.

    However I do tend to agree with you prior point that NS has somewhat painted herself in to a corner by playing up the S30 approach as being the only means.

    As long as we keep electing the SNP to office, this issue will continue to arise unless and until Independence is achieved. So either the people have to stop so electing, or the SG have to do something to actually fulfill the reason for the SNP existing.

    As it is, I can easily see the possibility of a lost Indyref2 leading to Indyref3 in another 10 years.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Why would we try to achieve consent? Why would we need or want such a thing? Why demean ourselves by asking for something we don’t require and are aware will be refused? Why would we have to prove anything other than majority support for restoring Scotland’s independence? The whole approach is nonsensical. Wrong mindset!


      1. Correct. All else is appeasement.

        Incredibly, we have an appeaser leading the country and the independence movement. Not a good look. She and her cadre have to be got gone if we are to have any hope of severing our union with the English state.

        We will have no hope of progress until she is out on her ear.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Simply to exhaust the already available means, before moving on to other methods.

        That way one is able to carry those who would otherwise point to “you should be doing that”. In this case “that” has already been tried, and refused.

        Now one can move on to other means. Other than the fact the NS has painted herself in to a corner, and may have to do a U-turn.


  5. Maybe it’s just become a habit Peter.

    Blackford is on the same page. He moans about being treated like shit. Yet he stays every day to take more. It gets boring!

    Liked by 1 person

  6. “The pathetically pleading hanger-on is not a good look for someone purporting to be a political leader. Stop it!”

    Good advice. If not taken, and if someone else des not take the lead, Nicola and the SNP mandarins will prevent Scotland’s independence.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.