The principle of Scotland's right of self-determination is of little worth or utility if there is no process by which that principle can be put into practice and the right exercised. After the principle comes the plan. Which is also dependent on process. Without a process, the plan doesn't even qualify as a plan. It … Continue reading The horizon or beyond?
The thing to bear in mind is that all those international laws and conventions brought in to end the old imperialism apply to Scotland just as much as they applied to any of the other nations which chose to challenge the remnants of old imperialist power.
Why ask if 'Plan B' might be a panacea anyway? Has anybody claimed that it might have the power to cure all ills? Come to that, has anybody claimed that it might be the "solution to all our indy woes"? Or that it could "break the constitutional stand off and get us swiftly and easily to independence"? Who has described 'Plan B' in such terms? When? Where?
Section 30 is all about denying and curtailing democracy. #ScottishUDI is all about enabling and facilitating democracy.
Independence is normal. It is not normal that a nation such as Scotland should be purposefully and maliciously denied its rightful constitutional status. It is not normal that the people of Scotland should be denied the full and effective exercise of the sovereignty that is theirs by absolute right. It is not normal that Scotland should be forcefully prevented from freely negotiating the terms on which it associates with other nations.
Where we might have hoped for a rousing message of encouragement and incitement to the Yes movement urging us on with a call to some kind of action, there's nothing.
Nicola Sturgeon is an astute and highly experienced politician. As a political operator, she is undoubtedly outshone by her predecessor. But that leaves her plenty of scope for putting into practice whatever tricks she may have picked up.