If you want it broken, break it!

I don’t know this David Clark. He may be every bit the foreign affairs expert John Drummond says he is. But I still need to pull him up on a couple of points. The reason federalism is a “non-starter” is even more “simple and straightforward” than Mr Clark suggests. A federal settlement acceptable to the people of Scotland would have to be negotiated between parties of equal status. In other words, such a settlement could only be negotiated AFTER Scotland’s independence was restored. Try imagining that happening.

But the main dispute I have with David Clark is when he maintains that “independence is inevitable” and “the present Unionist position is unsustainable”. He is wrong on both counts. Worse! He has fallen into a very dangerous fallacy which encourages complacency.

I used to say that independence was inevitable. I reasoned that it was inevitable because any constitutional arrangement which succeeds in terms of the ambitions and imperatives of the British state necessarily fails in terms of the aspirations and priorities of Scotland’s people. I was not wrong about the intractable conflict of interests. I was horribly wrong about the inevitability of that conflict being resolved by the restoration of Scotland’s independence.

I has since come to realise that, notwithstanding David Clark’s assertion, the ” Unionist position” is entirely sustainable. They can keep on saying “now is not the time” forever. The Union affords them that power over Scotland. The Union affords British state total dominion over Scotland should the British ruling elite choose to exercise it.

There is simply no way the British state is ever going to cooperate with any process which puts the Union in jeopardy. There is no political power which can force them to do so. The imperative to preserve their ‘precious’ Union is existential. Even if there was such a political power, forced cooperation would be false and come at a price and with inherent dangers for Scotland. We have a name for this impossibly fraught process. We call it a Section 30 referendum.

So long as the Scottish Government remains committed to the Section 30 process, the British state can sustain indefinitely its effective veto over the exercise of Scotland’s right of self-determination. The British state’s grip on Scotland is not going to break. It must be broken.

The twin notions that we are on the verge of independence and that the UK is crumbling are both part of the same pernicious folly. Power is not given. Nor is it relinquished gracefully. Power must be taken. It can only be power if it is taken. It cannot be taken without confrontation. Hence, our independence can never be restored while avoiding confrontation.

Having realised all of this, it was but a short step – but a strangely protracted one – to the conclusion that there is only one way Scotland’s independence can be restored. I use the term #ScottishUDI.

Federalism is definitely a “non-starter” – for ALL the reasons stated. Just forget it! It is not even being mooted as a practicable proposition. It is being flogged by Gordon Brown solely for the purpose of muddying the constitutional waters.

Independence is NOT inevitable. It will happen only if we make it happen. Scotland’s independence can only be restored by the Scottish Parliament. Only the Scottish Government can initiate the process. What is inevitable is confrontation with the British political elite. The Scottish Government must be prepare to deal resolutely with that confrontation. The support of the majority of Scotland’s voters will be essential.

The Unionist position can be sustained forever unless the Scottish Government is prepared to reject the British state’s authority to obstruct the exercise of our right of self-determination. The Scottish Parliament, on a proposal by the Scottish Government, must assert its competence in all constitutional matters on the basis of its exclusive democratic legitimacy and on the grounds that this is the ONLY way the people of Scotland may exercise the right of self-determination guaranteed to us by the Charter of the United Nations.

Having asserted its competence in constitutional matters, the Scottish Parliament must entertain a proposal to dissolve the Union subject to the agreement of a simple majority of the Scottish electorate – such agreement to be sought by means of a referendum held entirely under the auspices of the Scottish Parliament.

There is no other credible process being presented which could result in Scotland’s independence being restored. I would posit that this is because #ScottishUDI is the only way. Others may disagree. But if they do, then they must be prepared to explain the process that they have in mind.

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

12 thoughts on “If you want it broken, break it!

    1. Westminster won’t be so accommodating when it comes to Scotland leaving the union, Whitehall will use every dirty trick in the book and then some to keep hold of the Golden Goose.

      Westminster won’t cede a third of the UK’s land mass all the assets that go with it and a convenient naval base for their nukes and nuclear subs. It’s unlikely that the UN’s C24 on decolonisation will get involved in our struggle to ditch this union, they don’t see Scotland as a colony and the UK is no longer a member of the C24, and don’t expect our current FM to aid the indy cause she’s far too busy with her own party’s agenda and hawking her wares all over Europe via COPs, and visiting her heroine, the warhawk Hillary Clinton, and speaking in the USA via the Neoliberal think tank the Brookings Institute.

      Like I keep saying we’re going nowhere whilst Sturgeon is FM.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Nicola Sturgeon attended the Brookings Initiative on Climate Research and Action. What’s the problem with that? As First Minister there are places she must go to, things she must do and people she must speak with regardless of her personal preferences. I would have supposed that was generally understood. Evidently not.


        1. Peter.

          I don’t buy into that Sturgeon is concerned about global warming, the COP’s are a farce, 636 fossil fuel lobbyists have been registered to talk at COP27, the while event was set up by a PR firm that represents the oil and gas industry.

          Many corporation and think tanks have jumped on the greenwashing global warming band wagon, even Al Gore has taken huge wads of fossil fuel companies cash the Brookings is funded via the Smith Richardson Foundation which is a well known CIA front that distributes funds.

          In my opinion and it’s just my opinion, Sturgeon visited the Brookings to calm the horses and reassure them that Scotland is open for business to the giant US corporations of which she and her party covet.

          As for the COP’s I’ve read that every fifth COP is seen as the one to attend and where any real deals are done, Glasgow being one of the fifth COP’s.

          Liked by 1 person

        2. You should read her speech. The only question left is whether London or Houston will own Scotland’s renewable energy assets. It certainly wasn’t a speech from someone looking for new markets for energy and know-how from a newly independent Scotland.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. To be honest, I tend to avoid reading her speeches these days. I have great difficulty with the fact that she is so different from the person I (we?) thought she was back in 2014.


            1. Here you go….

              Putin bad. Climate change bad. Foreign private capital to develop Scotland’s natural resources good.

              That’s basically it.

              Liked by 1 person

  1. Bang on Peter there’s no way out of this union via Westminster, there never was, nor is there any way out of this union via Sturgeon.

    We’ll possibly need to go down the same route as Egypt did when our time comes.


    The union will remain intact until WE TAKE our independence, in 2014 David Cameron approach 34 countries to ask them to frown on Scottish independence, he even shoved a note into the hands of the then POTUS Obama hoping he would play down Scottish independence and he did, so we know what to expect when we do declare UDI.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. times have changed since 2014.
      I wonder what would actually happen if the Scottish Govt were to proclaim Scottish Independence – most unlikely I know but still withal . . . .

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The British reaction to #ScottishUDI would very largely depend on their reading of how determined the Scottish Government was. If they sense that the Scottish Government will blink first, they’ll fight. It they see there is no way the Scottish Government will back down, then they they will try to screw us in negotiations.

        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 )

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.