A choice explained

There is an important part of the Brexit saga (so far) which Mike Russell has omitted from his column in The National. It is easy to understand why. The SNP/Scottish government’s abject failure to defend and protect Scotland against the insanity of Brexit is something those culpable would prefer to airbrush from history. That the British state showed total disdain for Scotland’s democratic choices is entirely unsurprising. It’s what they do. It’s what they have been doing for as long as there has been the means to make democratic choices. That our own government was so inadequate in its response is shocking.

Missing from Mr Russell’s account is any mention far less explanation of the SNP leadership’s decision to campaign against the implementation of Brexit in England & Wales – where people had voted for it – rather than fight the imposition of Brexit on Scotland – where people had voted decisively to remain in the EU. I think at the very least we are due an apology. But I don’t see that in Mike Russell’s column either.

The effort to keep England & Wales in the EU despite them voting to leave was doomed from the outset. It was nought but futile posturing. It’s difficult to believe that an able and experienced politician such as Mike Russell could fail to understand this. So it was hard to understand why this course was taken in preference to launching an all out effort to ensure that the democratically expressed will of Scotland’s people was honoured. Which could only happen if Scotland’s independence was restored. It’s not so hard to understand now.

What we have learned in the five years since the EU referendum is that while the SNP is still the party of independence in terms of wanting independence and in terms of being the only party position to end the Union, the leadership was – and remains – unwilling to confront the British state on the issue. So averse is the party’s leadership to the kind of aggressive politics that the restoration of Scotland’s independence demands that even the majestically unavailing attempt to halt the entire Brexit project seemed a better option.

That’s how I explain the matter. If Mike Russell has a better explanation then you’d think he’d have offered it up before now. Either that or an apology.

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 cause.


8 thoughts on “A choice explained

  1. Indeed Peter.
    Something else missing.
    The importance of being earnest and radical.
    Something not missing, the arrogance.
    Watch this space.
    There’s nothing like being up yourself
    When it comes to narcissistic tendencies.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. All that Mike Russell is doing is adding to the already well documented catastrophe for Scotland that is Brexit. A few additional adjectives perhaps but the same old examples and complaining. The non-threat of “there will one day be a reckoning” is particularly pathetic. The Britz would be more intimidated if he’d said “I’m going to get my big brother on to you!”.

    However before that non-time bound event Mike Russell reckons that “Scotland will have shaken the corrupt dust of the current UK from our feet”. As usual there is no mention of how that will happen. Obviously ‘the when’ is somewhere over the rainbow.

    A good plan is supposed to be specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound (SMART). Mike Russell and his colleagues have opted for a scheme that is delayed, uncertain, muddled and behind (DUMB).

    That’s if they have one at all.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Succinctly put Peter, we’ll said.
    Maybe Mike can also explain why the much fanfared SNP sponsored Independence ‘horse box’ (no expense spared) is now stripped of all signage and is now lying abandoned in a field outside Bowmore, Islay.
    Abandoned, just like Indy supporters ourselves.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. What is missing in the SNP is democracy.

    That is why members have left in droves.
    That is why minority policies have taken precedence over independence.
    That is why the leadership no longer has to listen to the ordinary members.

    We won’t get independence until democracy in the SNP gets fixed or Alba grows big enough to force their hands.

    Liked by 5 people

  5. He may well know and understand why the SNP’s chosen course was wrong, but he may not have been allowed to express that view. It would go against the Dear Leaderene’s wishes.


  6. I just read his article and at least it was to do with Independence for a change. I stopped reading him because in his usual articles he waffled on about racism, castles, party politics, inquiries, stuff that had nothing to do with Indy. A disappointment as I expected far greater things from him, more focus. Silly me.

    Liked by 1 person

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 )

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.