Intellectual rigour

There's not much "intellectual rigour" evident in Jim Sillars's pettily dismissive attitude to the AUOB marches. Marches and rallies have been a feature of reform campaigns for as long as there have been such things. If they served no useful purpose or were detrimental to the cause I reckon somebody would have noticed before now. … Continue reading Intellectual rigour

Craving substance

The issue is simple. If there is to be a referendum in the "second half of 2020" or "before the end of 2020" then there must be a process by which that can happen. This process cannot be secret. It cannot be known only to Nicola Sturgeon and a few trusted colleagues. Options are not unlimited. If Nicola Sturgeon can work out what this process is, so can Boris Johnson's advisers.

It’s Scotland’s decision!

The term UDI is used by the British state to imply that the act of restoring Scotland's independence is somehow improper if it is done without their approval. It is easy to understand why the British political elite would wish to promulgate such a belief. It is impossible to understand why the people of Scotland would accept such curtailment of our right of self-determination.

Please stay: A response to Jim Sillars’s essay in the Daily Record

Jim Sillars: A concerned grandfatherJim Sillars is, of course, fully justified in being deeply concerned about the consequences for Scotland of a No vote that will empower people whose purpose is to keep power from the people.I was among the first to write about what a No vote would mean for Scotland more than two … Continue reading Please stay: A response to Jim Sillars’s essay in the Daily Record