The lady’s not for bludgeoning

Nicola Sturgeon opines that Unionist Scots “mustn’t feel as if you are being bludgeoned towards an outcome you have not been persuaded of”. How very democratic of her. I cannot help but contrast this generosity of spirit with the attitude of the 31 MSPs who have so little regard for Scotland and its people that they would foist upon us as First Minister no less a person than Douglas Ross, knowing full well that there is no less a person than he. An individual unencumbered by dignity and unfettered by principle the better to ensure that the interests of the British state in all circumstances and for all time take precedence over the interests of the nation whose Parliament he sullies with his presence.

Such creatures are not to be persuaded. Their loyalties are fully committed elsewhere. Scotland gets from them none of the consideration Ms Sturgeon would have us lavish on them and those who elect them. Ross and his accomplices in the British parties squatting in Scotland’s Parliament have sworn fealty to the structures of power, privilege and patronage which constitute the British state. There is no possibility of persuading them that Scotland’s welfare might be sufficient reason to disrupt the established British order. Neither, we must assume, is there any possibility of persuading those who elect mindlessly fervent British Nationalists such as Ross to represent them at Holyrood. It is perfectly legitimate to judge people by what they do. And what those who elect British Nationalist MSPs do is as much an affront to democracy as is perpetrated by those who voted for him to be Scotland’s First Minister.

I do not hope that Nicola Sturgeon might explain to us how Scotland’s independence is to be restored if as her comments suggest, this is only to be done when we have achieved that idyllic condition wherein nobody is so convinced of the necessity of preserving the grotesquely anomalous Union that they must be figuratively “bludgeoned” into accepting that Scotland is worthy of having constitutional normality restored. Ms Sturgeon is no more inclined to explain this than she is the contradiction of simultaneously insisting that the powers of independence are absolutely essential to the good management of the Covid recovery process AND that she cannot countenance setting about the process of restoring those powers until she is assured that the recovery process has been or is being, successfully managed.

As a political realist I recognise that there are those who consider themselves Scottish who will never under any circumstances accept the restoration of Scotland’s independence. Principles of democracy are no impediment to their determination to preserve their ‘precious’ Union at whatever cost to the people of Scotland. There are, in short, people who will stand stubbornly in the path of Scotland’s progress regardless of the will of Scotland’s people. When that popular will is that Scotland’s independence must be restored these people will think themselves “bludgeoned” no matter how much gentle persuasion is applied to their fanaticism.

If the idea of “bludgeoning” anti-democratic British Nationalists is so abhorrent to Nicola Sturgeon as to be a hindrance to Scotland’s cause then she is no more suited to the task of leading that cause than Douglas Ross is to the role of Scotland’s First Minister.

Let us not forget that behind Douglas Ross and his ilk stands the might of a British state and its ruling elites which regard preservation of the Union as an existential imperative. Anyone who imagines their resistance to the will of Scotland’s people will be overcome other than by the mightiest bludgeon Scotland’s democracy can contrive, is a deluded fool. In the recent election we missed an opportunity to contrive that bludgeon. Had we but armed our Government and our First Minister with the means by which to confront the British political elite then they would no longer have an excuse for failing to do so. Rest assured that Nicola Sturgeon will make the fullest possible use of the excuse for inaction that the outcome of the election has bestowed on her.



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 PayPal

11 thoughts on “The lady’s not for bludgeoning

  1. Who is to determine that this bludgeoning has taken place? This idiocy is on the same level as ” feeling offended ” or indeed “disgruntled”. This soi-disant leader of the Scottish independence movement is a disgrace to the memory of those who have struggled against the British State. This comment is but another attack on the social conscience of the Scottish nation. Another attempt to make those who fight against that British State feel less worthy of the attempt to bring down the Union. It is not so long ago when we were told that to want the proceeds of the natural bounty found under Scottish waters spent on improving the lives of the people of Scotland was a “Selfish act ” and that it would be a despicable action against the rest of the UK.
    As long as Nicola Sturgeon or her cult are in any way in charge of the cause of defending Scotland’s ancient honour and rights the fruits of our labours will wither on the vine.
    Delenda Sturgeon est.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. “Rest assured that Nicola Sturgeon will make the fullest possible use of the excuse for inaction that the outcome of the election has bestowed on her.”

    I believe that Nicola Sturgeon would have found a reason to avoid confrontation whatever the outcome of the election. She has “The economic effects of COVID” now where previously she had “COVID pandemic”. Prior to that there was the “BREXIT negotiations outcome” and before that “the fog of BREXIT”.

    Nicola Sturgeon employs delay and prevarication to avoid dealing with the matter in the same way that the Unionists will always find a reason to deny democracy i.e. there has to be majority of pro-Indy parliamentary representatives, if that hurdle is overcome then there must be a majority of the popular vote for Indy, if that obstacle is successfully negotiated then there must be a majority of the popular vote AND pro-Indy parliamentary representatives, if that threshold is met then substitute ‘SNP’ for ‘pro-Indy’ in the foregoing and repeat etc.

    And so it goes. Only this time there is no need for the anti-democratic Unionists to confuse and conflate or to move the goalposts. The diversion is being supplied very effectively by Nicola Sturgeon.

    Nicola Sturgeon is not fit to lead the ‘party of Independence’.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. As I look back, Peter, the more I see that Nicola Sturgeon was always going to behave like this. That very first meeting in a draughty hall, as she and Mr Salmond made their bid as a duo to lead Scotland to independence, haunts me. Maybe my ‘b***s**t detector was in full sniffer mode that day, but something didn’t gel. It is not that she lacks courage to do the unthinkable, at whatever cost to others, but that she is not willing to do it for Scotland: quite simply, she doesn’t want to be the one who has to face down the might of the British State. She knew when she became Mr Salmond’s Deputy that she was never going to do that. Mainly, I think, she doesn’t see her personal interests lying in that direction, but also, that she actually believes that the UK is the best option for Scotland. She is, and always was, a devolutionist/Unionist. To be honest, most of the present SNP leadership fit into that category.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Her attitude to Unionists in fear of bludgeoning is also much more cosy than her attitude towards those of us who believe in independence but have lost or never had any faith that the SNP will actually further the cause of independence. Evidently it is more important for the SNP to appease unionists than take power from the independence movement. Sturgeon is getting good at failing to grasp historical opportunities.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Sorry, I just don’t get it. All through the election campaign you argued that Alba would and could not achieve anything in the new parliament if they took any seats
    Then you write an article decrying the unionist mob and the uselessness of Sturgeon in taking Scotland forward to Independence.
    Even one seat for Alba would have probably meant one less unionist and that in itself would have been an achievement and yet you persisted in saying Alba were a waste of space.
    Sorry, I just don’t get it

    Like

      1. What you missed..The human aspect….
        Take yourself out of the make up of the parliament for a moment and whether any Alba Msp’s would have made a difference or not.
        Then think about what are the needs of many in the yes movement.
        They need something to believe in and something to hold on to. And what we have now is to endure more years being becalmed in Sturgeon’s duplicity and lies.
        Alba would have fulfilled that need for many and would have instilled a sense of hope that something could have changed somehow along line. What, I don’t know but now we will never know, will we.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Hit the nail on the head there Peter. Your rational and objective analysis is just that but without any emotional perspective in what people feel.
        If only, if only, if only people were rational and objective but of course they are not.
        I suppose you know about defence mechanisms and what there functions are?
        Rationalisation and intellectualisation being prime examples.

        Liked by 3 people

      3. FFS! I’m not analysing how people feel. If that’s what I wanted to do then that’s what I’d do. I’m examining specific claims that were made for and/or on behalf of Alba. I’m pointing out that these claims regarding specified actions and/or effects are either total shite or something that looks and smells so much like shite that you wouldn’t know the difference. I look to Alba to respond to this objective analysis and I get this crap about human psychology.

        It matters not the smallest part of a single fuck how people feel about a supermajority, the fact remains that it cannot do what Alba has scribbled on the tin with a half-chewed bookies’ pen.

        Don’t give me that drivel about “rationalisation and intellectualisation” and imagine you’re impressing me. I may not have finished my psychology degree but I learned enough to give me an excellent grounding in the subject. Good enough to recognise evasion when I encounter it.

        Either address the point or fuck off. I’m not devoting time and attention to this sort of crap any more.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. No less being bludgeoned by the british state to be britishand told my opinion is wrong and anyway its of no consequence. Stupid bloody comment from her. They will take every oportunity to bludgeon the union into us.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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.