7TH JAN 2024 AT 10:59
I despise Tommy Sheppard.
For all the contemptuous scaremongering, lies and threats contained in articles he writes and the words he utters.
His ‘vote for the SNP or Independence gets it’ column in today’s National being a particularly despicable exhibit.
The real reason I suspect that Tommy Sheppard is touting ‘Independence’ so hard now is he is more than likely in trouble in his Edinburgh East constituency. This is the seat in the Scottish capital that voted 47.3% for actual Independence – versus 38.9% for Edinburgh overall – and which was much higher than the other 5 constituencies in the city (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Scottish_independence_referendum).
People really have had enough of the bull crap offered up by phoneys, windbags and forelock tugging, cap-doffing, cringing self-identified “good parliamentarians” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2wSGjjHXfQ) like Tommy Sheppard.
7TH JAN 2024 AT 11:49
Another sadly accurate synposis, Peter.
In Sheppard’s article he states that: “A generation of Labour activists – of which I am one – made a conscious decision to embrace independence as a political strategy not because we were nationalists, but because we believed it offered a better prospect for achieving the social and economic change we desired.”
So, first off Sheppard is not and never has been a ‘nationalist’. He does not therefore know that in order to free the people from oppression the colonized must first become a nationalist (Fanon), as a form of ‘defensive nationalism’ (Memmi) in the struggle against ‘aggressive (British) nationalism’!
Second, like many on the Left, he mistakenly believes independence to be a fight between political ideologies of Left and Right, between Socialism versus Capitalism. This ignores the fact that the most urgent and necessary priority in any colonial society is first ridding an oppressed people of a colonial and hence a racist system; whatever political ideology a liberated people choose AFTER independence is a matter for them and them alone at that time (Memmi).
And so we are sadly left with the sickening realisation that ‘politicians are not intellectuals’ and that Mr Sheppard and his ilk clearly have no idea what independence or nationalism/national consciousness even means, which largely explains why they have yet to find the only remedy:
Click to access THEORETICAL+CASE+FOR+SCOTTISH+INDEPENDENCE.pdf
We can all remember some MSPs (Sheridan, Rosie Kane) taking the oath 'under protest' e.g. raised fist or whatever. But it doesn't matter, does it? You could do a handstand and ventriloquise it out of your arse but you're still taking an oath to a 'foreign' monarch. In effect, you deny Scots' sovereignty by doing so.
There's no getting away from it - the oath is a highly visible form of subservience and cannot be excused.
"This gap between proclaimed commitments and practical actions ......" .
This sentence , alone , sums-up the entire post-Salmond SNP Government/s abject failure.
As the title of this piece sums-up ScotGov's shameful , woefully inadequate response to Scotland's " Highest drug-related deaths in Europe " record.
January 8, 2024 at 12:26 AM
" By reversing Nicola Sturgeon's de facto referendum policy" - every time Sturgeon has stated an independence referendum/policy she has subsequently taken action to scupper it. She knew that when she resigned in 2023 this policy would end up in the bin. You only had to listen to Yousaf and Forbes in the hustings to realise that de facto referendum would not be happening. Bizarrely Pension Pete Wishart who vilified everyone who suggested a de facto referendum is now positioning himself as the champion of this approach, knowing it won't happen, to try and create the impression he is championing independence. A chancer extraordinaire.
Of course Sturgeon did not have to wait for a UK GE to have a de facto referendum she could have called one at Holyrood at any time long before she resigned. A point none of the SNP numpties have an answer to so like numpties do they just ignore it. No wonder they are so blind it's all the sand in their eyes from continually sticking their heads in the sand.
January 9, 2024 at 10:25
Brexit was an entirely political project and nothing whatsoever to do with economics.
Anyone who thought that leaving the largest trading bloc in the world was going to bring benefits was deluded,to say the least.
England still thinks of itself as a global imperial power having no need of alliances,other than the USA which it regards as it’s grown up offspring.
England should never have been part of the European community because it is fundamentally at variance with their philosophy and unless there is a shift in culture,will not be welcome back.
The only involvement from England’s ruling party over the years was to either arrange opt outs from European policy or to exercise their veto.
Scotland is viewed by the London establishment as having been assimilated into this Anglo imperial culture and either doesn’t or won’t understand that we disagree, nor do they care. I suspect the latter.
Apologies for the rant…usual morning, not quite awake yet problem.
9 January 2024 at 10:29 am
I was disappointed when Alba chose to turn its back on abstentionism. It was an opportunity to be radical and clearly different from the SNP toadies and Westminster worshippers. It would also be a vote winner for Alba and give a boost to support for independence. I hope Alba changes its mind – and quickly.
9 January 2024 at 11:49 am
I voted against you that day Roddie , although I was back and forward during the debate, I was finally persuaded by the argument that Kenny was an experienced conviction parliamentarian and that I have never seen another politician who could keep up with me on the barricades and hold down a full time job in another country like Neale Hanvey and believed that they could between them rumble things up down there .
I believe my decision at the time was correct.
I have also been studying for the past two years in the similarities with Ireland a century ago and the juxtaposition between the two situations are uncanny . The next step would be for Alba to campaign OFFICIALLY on an abstentionist ticket. Thanks to the party’s stance on standing on the bones of loyal indy supporter Margaret Ferrier in Rutherglen and Hamilton I was freed up to help out a bit with Colette Walkers ISP campaign and she lit the fire for abstentionism. Now people are talking about it. The chances of either Neale or Kenny being re-elected for Westminster are negligible if anything at all unless there is as much clear water between Alba and the SNP as possible.
The SNP cannot afford to walk away from the only source of funding they have left but I am beginning to be of the opinion that cannot afford NOT TO walk away and use the Westminster campaign as a bridgehead for 2026 as far as data and experience to blood candidates is concerned. There is a lot more realistic chance of being able to emulate our Irish cousins in our own parliament especially when the Branchform chickens come home to roost and Labours stitchup of Scotland’s electoral system hamstrings them in their attempt to gain a majority.
So if you would like to re-submit your resolution from two years ago, I would not only support it but openly campaign for it .
9 January 2024 at 12:01 pm
It was my motion on Abstentionism and I remember the occasion very well because what followed was a fine debate. I was disappointed but accepted the result when the motion fell but it was a great example of democracy in action.
I’m sure there’ll be similar motions submitted in the future followed by more debate & excellent points raised such as you have in your blog today.
9 January 2024 at 3:51 pm
Time is almost certainly running out for us. This was obvious from 2014, and had Alec Salmond remained as leader, the SNP would have taken us out of the UK on the Brexit vote, I am certain of that. However, time has moved on, and we are not in 2014 anymore and must make shift with what we have – which, in truth, is very much less than we had pre 2016.
I think, too, that we need to leave Westminster, although there are a number of MPs I would be glad to see at Holyrood in 2026. The SNP may not lose the GE as badly as predicted by some, but it will still lose mightily. I cannot and will not vote for the SNP as it is, and, if there is no other independence party candidate standing in my area, I will spoil my ballot paper rather than just not vote.
Those 5000 joined, BB, because they, and we, thought that something concrete would come of the walk-out. Ay, right! The MPs got a wee bit of exercise and that was it. The tactics and the strategy need to change dramatically now. Not tomorrow. Today.
If we go to the ballot box, having withdrawn our MPs, then we must go on a pledge – not a weak maybes ay, maybes naw promise to “do something” – that, assuming we win, we immediately move to a unilateral declaration of independence and invite rUK to negotiate on the Articles contained within the Treaty, on our Claim of Right and on our sovereignty. After independence, we can hold a; women and the referendum on the monarchy, and draw up a constitution already drafted prior to the SE, with everyone having universal human rights, and none more, than others. We should, in my opinion, make referendums mandatory for all big public issues, and local issues, as they do in Switzerland.
If we want to galvanise the vote in time for 2026, and if we want to target the main demographics – the working-class and lower middle-class, women and working-class young people. These are the three main demographics that have been sidelined by the SNP/Green coalition. Many thousands of both born Scots and new Scots will fall into these categories. Older people, from whatever class, are apt to vote anyway, but they, too, need to be reassured that their pensions will not tumble into oblivion or they will certainly not vote for independence. Everything will require to be costed, and a new currency ready to float, plus a central bank, with Scottish business leaders (mainly SMEs, but the larger corporates, too, who will no longer get all their own way) being reassured that they will not be forgotten, even though big changes to the country, and for its citizenship, are to come. We need to strike a balance between all interests. It will not be easy for at least five years, but, by ten years, we should be well-established and thriving.
2024 at 8:02 pm
A big A.Y.E to all of that , Roddy .
Time to bin West-Yes-Minister , for good .It’s the venus flytrap of ( what passes for ) * Democracy * UK-style ; oak-panelled pantomime.
England gets what IT wants at all times n the rest of the ” territories ” can whistle : their supposed representatives swallowed by the * trappings * n seductions available to the WM/London political cast members .
ALBA needs to be bolder in it’s thinking and more confrontational in it’s acting .
It also needs to trust the people more ; no need to be cautious on their behalf . People will respond in kind to displays of undaunted strength in pursuit of a cause : as long as the cause is the right one . Like ours .
Adopting Abstentionism would be a powerful statement of intent . The intent to stop playing by our opponents rules .
10 January 2024 at 10:00 am
I want to use two extracts from the Declaration of a Sovereign Scot document to contribute to this discussion.
Extract #1: … and in so doing declare that I recognise the sole democratic legitimacy of the Scottish Parliament, and assert its primacy and permanence to act singularly on behalf of the Sovereign Scots whose votes alone establish and maintain its existence.
In the simplest of terms that is a rejection of Westminster – you either agree with that sentiment – or not. It then also leads to this second extract related to the Royal Oath. Because of the above affirmation it’s words relate singularly to the Scottish Parliament – but it is equally relevant to Westminster, and perhaps as I suggest below even more relevant.
Extract #2: … and demand that any Oath of Allegiance to be sought from, and given by, a potential Member of the Scottish Parliament recognises the Sovereignty of the Scottish People in the following terms: “By this oath, I acknowledge that if elected as a Member of the Scottish Parliament, it will be as a result of votes cast by Sovereign Scots, and I do solemnly swear and affirm that my allegiance is, and will remain, to the Sovereign people of Scotland.
As of now MPs to be elected from Scotland at GE 2024 – unless the Yes movement intervenes – will swear or affirm the Royal Oath – as have every one of our current MSPs. It asks a question of any candidate – ‘To whom do you swear your allegiance?’
I am not and never have been a member of a political party – but were I a member of any – that is the question I would ask of any potential candidate – and I would – or would not – give them my vote dependent on their answer.
Lastly, may I use the current ISP position if I understand it correctly as an example of one significant step beyond just abstaining.
Don’t just abstain if elected – head to Westminster, and in the body of the House of Commons – refuse to take the Royal Oath – affirm your Oath of Allegiance to Scotland and its people – and be ejected. Do so as defiantly as possible please – and in front of all Scottish MPs who choose to remain after taking the Royal Oath.Saor Alba!
No spam or ads, just the latest posts and updates from Scotland's newest pro-independence blog.
.png)
