Proud malcontents and other disruptors

The 'play nice' preachers are heavy on the alliterated pontifications in The National today. Karen Adam MSP has an oozingly self-righteous piece under the headline "We must be composed and considerate for the good of the indy movement". Gerry Hassan's column, meanwhile, is titled "Confidence and candour are what’s needed to win the battle for … Continue reading Proud malcontents and other disruptors

The wrong mindset

Stu Campbell has just published an article on Wings Over Scotland which despite the obvious anger and bitterness makes a very salient point about the vacuum in the SNP leadership where strategic thinking should be. I felt obliged to respond to the effect that Wings Over Scotland wasn't alone in warning of the British state's … Continue reading The wrong mindset

When the need for illusion is deep

A regrettably rare intervention by Stu Campbell on Wings Over Scotland reminds us of two things. Firstly - and most obviously as this was the purpose of the article - it reminds us of the sickening spate of scaremongering pish that issued from the anti-independence campaign ten years ago and which continues to pour from … Continue reading When the need for illusion is deep

Shooting the spotlights

Why is the SNP leadership so intent on silencing or sidelining anyone who asks this kind of highly pertinent question? Why are they propagandising against bloggers who do no more than insist that the SNP does what it is elected to do while pointing out the ways in which it is failing to fulfil its role as the political arm of the independence movement?

Burn the witch! Burn the books!

Joanna Cherry cherry has earned the virulent hatred of this clique not by betraying the the principles on which the SNP was founded but for upholding them. Not for flouting the standards which the party is supposed to operate but for insisting on them. Not for a lack of integrity but for having integrity in a measure which embarrassed too many who today are responsible for managing the party's affairs. Not because she is unpopular with 'ordinary' members but because she is so detested by those jealous and fearful of that popularity.

Am I the only one who sees the problem with this?

Why would we, in one breath assert the sovereignty of the people of Scotland and in the next allow that the British state has the rightful authority to question the choices made by the sovereign people of Scotland? What kind of 'sovereignty-lite' does the Reverend Campbell envisage? Is this conditional sovereignty conceptually similar to the idea of 'managed democracy'? I think we should be told before we commit to anything.