This morning online, Westminster journalists are making it *pretty* clear that anything less than an SNP majority will not be seen as a mandate for indyref2The National Election Live Blog We always knew this. Or should I say, this was always knowable. If somebody didn't know it, this could only be because they had only … Continue reading ‘Twas brillig, and the slithy Gove…
If the Yes movement is to march march under one banner it must be a banner that everybody is prepared to march under. It must be a banner which concisely expresses our common cause. It must be a banner which purposefully excludes all subsidiary causes. Causes which, forgivably in most cases, seek to hitch a ride on the cause of restoring Scotland's independence and in doing so hamper and hinder that cause.
It may be interesting to speculate how different our media would be if they adopted that as their motto. When you claim to be speaking truth unto power, is it not vital that the truth you speak be as impeccable as human fallibility will allow?
The SNP has no intention of moving to resolve the constitutional issue with the urgency which Salmond at least recognises. But the notion that Alba will be in any position to force the pace is fantastical. There almost certainly won't be a supermajority and there definitely won't be a supermajority that works the way Alba claims it will. The reality is that regardless of how many seats Alba Party wins it will have no leverage over an SNP/SG Scottish Government. Absolutely none.
I try not to grudge Alba Party supporters the excitement they feel. But I do resent their tendency to castigate as trolls, Tories and traitors anyone who doesn't share that feeling. The adrenaline jolt of political battle is harmless so long as it doesn't come at significant cost to rationality. For all too many Alba Party supporters that cost has evidently been very significant indeed.
The cold, hard political reality is that only the SNP is placed to provide the effective political power that Scotland's cause absolutely requires.
We should not simply dismiss George Galloway's talk of "partition" or Adam Tomkins' proposal to bind Scotland by law to England-as-Britain. We should, rather, regard their purposefully outrageous utterances as portents of the British state's intentions.
Consent which cannot be refused or withdrawn as readily as it is given and without onerous penalty is not true consent. It is coercion in the guise of consent.
There are vastly more bad gamblers than good gamblers. This is necessarily so because a gamble, by definition, offers many more ways to lose than to win. So there are massively more ways to be a bad gambler than there are to be a good gambler. Whether you are a good gambler or not is almost entirely a matter of chance.
Lately, even thinking about Scottish politics has become painful. Writing about it has become a chore. Observing what is happening in Scottish politics is heartbreaking and infuriating. People with whom I felt something akin to a sense of community have become like strangers. People I once admired and respected I now despair of. Connections have been severed as folk I once stood shoulder-to-shoulder with have gone mindlessly wandering or militantly marching in various directions - all of them away.