The UK government is reeling. It is like a boxer already knocked unconscious before hitting the floor. The wheels of the civil service continue to turn, but there is no longer any connecton to those at the top. Authority has simply disintegrated in Boris Johnson’s hands. Everybody knows he is no longer in charge, and nobody yet knows who will be.
The time to act is when your opponent is at their weakest. This is the moment for Scotland. With a majority for Independence both in the Holyrood Parliament and – massively – among Scottish MPs at Westminster, this is the time for Scotland’s elected representatives to declare that Scotland is now an Independent state. They should set a date for a confirmatory plebiscite, I suggest in September this year. That plebiscite to be held within a Scotland already independent, held on Scotland’s terms and in Scotland’s way, with no interference from outside of Scotland.
The declaration of Independence could be made now by the Holyrood parliament or – perhaps better – by a National Assembly to be convened in the old Parliament Hall of Edinburgh, consisting of all Scotland’s MP’s and MSP’s, in other words all representatives elected at the national level. The Act of Union would thus be repealed in the building where it was passed.
Scotland should declare Independence because it is continually governed by parties for which it does not vote, has indeed been forced out of the EU against its will, and has witnessed the polity of the United Kingdom become a cesspit of lies and corrupt malpractice which Scotland should never have to suffer.
How would the UK be able to react? Who could lead the campaign against Scotland’s new Independence? The utterly discredited Boris Johnson? Rishi Sunak as his tax increases and coming sky high energy bills destroy his artificial popularity? The hopeless Liz Truss? Michelle Mone if not in prison?
The massed supporters of Anas Sarwar and Douglas Ross would hardly fill a bus. A few toothless wonders might be found to wear union jacks and smash up George Square in Glasgow, but their activity would not extend much beyond closing time.
The SNP let the golden opportunity of Brexit slip by through a cowardly acceptance of Theresa May’s claim to a power to veto any referendum. The SNP never used their Westminster parliamentary leverage to forward Independence during months of May’s effective minority government.
The SNP believed that, rather than win an Independent Scotland still in the EU, it was their duty to try to prevent England and Wales from leaving the EU, even though England and Wales had voted to leave.
Now apparently the SNP believe it is their duty to strengthen the United Kingdom by working towards the replacement of Boris Johnson by a more honest and effective leader of the union. Who will enjoy a honeymoon period, may get a post-Covid popularity boost, and will probably be less toxic to the people of Scotland than Boris Johnson. Rather than act now on Independence, the SNP seek to strengthen the union.
In short, the SNP seem far more intent on maintaining their position on the gravy train of governance inside the UK than on actually attaining Independence.
It is simply astonishing that, with the United Kingdom government falling apart before their eyes, it has not occurred to any of the SNP leadership to act now for Independence. Instead they wish to act to shore up the United Kingdom.
Now is the moment for the Scottish MPs to walk out of a Westminster parliament which is already on the verge of collapse. It should be simply unconscionable for any genuine Independence supporter to do otherwise.
———————————————
Forgive me for pointing out that my ability to provide this coverage is entirely dependent on your kind voluntary subscriptions which keep this blog going. This post is free for anybody to reproduce or republish, including in translation. You are still very welcome to read without subscribing.
Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.
Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.
Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:
Paypal address for one-off donations: [email protected]
Alternatively by bank transfer or standing order:
Account name
MURRAY CJ
Account number 3 2 1 5 0 9 6 2
Sort code 6 0 – 4 0 – 0 5
IBAN GB98NWBK60400532150962
BIC NWBKGB2L
Bank address Natwest, PO Box 414, 38 Strand, London, WC2H 5JB
Bitcoin: bc1q3sdm60rshynxtvfnkhhqjn83vk3e3nyw78cjx9
Ethereum/ERC-20: 0x764a6054783e86C321Cb8208442477d24834861a
Subscriptions are still preferred to donations as I can’t run the blog without some certainty of future income, but I understand why some people prefer not to commit to that.
And this will not happen.
Sturgeon and her corrupt acolytes are owned by the US State Department.
Craig says the leadership of the UK is “utterly discredited,” but so is the leadership of Sturgeon’s SNP.
Among the Scots themselves, is this statement true? Craig and others, obviously including you, now discredit Sturgeon and the SNP, but is this echoed in the citizenry? Again, that’s why it’s desperate that the Scottish Labour party accept that Scottish Independence is a rational response for the Scottish people to see to a fairer socialist future; any party such as the SMP or the Tories gaining such permanent majorities will corrupt themselves. Scotland needs an effective opposition, Democracy needs an effective opposition, not just politically opposed, anyone can do that, but intellectually, ethically and resolutely opposed. That’s the major failure of “New Labour” or any “social democrat” party that merely feels able to tinker around the edges of capitalism and neoliberalism and manages persuades both itself and a bamboozled electorate that that’s sufficient in the face of the converging crises advancing so quickly.
(I am English).
Boris’s cancelling of Covid yesterday was a massive event, he is probably the strongest politician in Europe or N America right now. (things change quickly etc). Post Covid it appears that standing 1 foot on the liberal side of the fence now turns out to be the smart strategy and he is cashing in by not stepping right out into the libertarian ground.
Boris was right, an independence referendum is a once in a generation event. Campaigning for one now, after 8 years, reduces your chance of getting one after 25.
Ludicrous. I am English too, and not by any means a wholehearted supporter of Scottish independence, if only for sentimental reasons (I’m English, I love Scotland), though I think Scotland should be independent if the Scottish people want it, but:
As to the ‘once in a generation’ event. Sounds plausible but doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. Why once in a generation? If the time is right, it is right. I don’t know whether it’s right in Scotland now, but Lenin and co. didn’t wait till 1930 after the failed 1905 uprising.
I think VI Lenin and Co kind of did wait for a generation to pass, and were caught out by a popular uprising. I think that vanguardism, which I believe is being advocated here, has at best a chequered history. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguardism
Although rearguardism is perhaps even more suspect (and I’m sure Boris Johnson copied his royal predecessor in claiming he’d die in the last ditch if he didn’t get his way on some cause du jour cri de coeur).
Aye, awe i can say is it was grand tae see ye the dae, walkin aboot wi folk glead tae eee ye. Take care Craig and thanks for everything you do, much appreciated.
Why can’t Scotland be independent because the people of Britain want it?
Hello Michael, you Anglo apologist (just joking). Now, where to start. I consider myself an Anglo-Scot (I was born in Lincoln to a Glaswegian dad and a NZ mother of fully Scottish ancestry and I trained in medicine in Glasgow, and consider Scotland my spiritual home), though for the last 34 years I was persuaded by my NZ wife to return to her homeland. Living in NZ is nice enough, but like lingering in a warm bath too long, it can pall! Nor is NZ, despite so far having an exemplary response to Covid, avoided the conspiring problems of neoliberalism, which NZ has followed perhaps even more than the UK. We have some serious social and economic issues waiting on the sidelines for too long. So I keep in touch with events in the UK, not least as all four of our daughters now reside in south east England. So there’s a sadness in our situation too.
So, you talk about honesty. It’s the lack of honesty that already pertains that is the major issue, as Craig keeps on telling us. The SNP stands for the Scottish National Party; its whole raison d’être is Scotland’s independence and the dissolution of the UK as it is now constituted, returning Scotland to full sovereignty, not experienced for over 300 years. The SMP was founded nearly 90 years ago in 1934, and there’s literally no point in being a member of that party, voting for that party, or becoming a Parliamentary representative of that party unless you firmly wish to see an independent Scotland and will continue to strive for that event. Even if you disagree with Scottish independence, surely you can accept the rationality of what I am saying?. So when the SNP, a huge majority in Scotland’s politics, hardly ever even mentions independence or seems unfailingly lukewarm about it, where’s the honesty there?
An SNP working for independence by now will have worked out all the issues, including the ones you present. Scotland would have seen by now many expert commissions to have already reported back, to examine Scotland’s future constitution, its economic arrangements, its currency, its foreign policies, defence (including one hope nuclear disarmament) etc. etc. All these matters then could have been debated by the Scottish citizenry in citizens’ assemblies, aided by a media that would be forced by circumstance to take note and report honestly as to what was happening. Nothing like this has happened in the SNP’s political ascendancy. That’s totally dishonest. So it is true, Scotland remains politically incompetent, and the SNP by its inaction is undermining the very reason for its existence. Perhaps the English are right, Scottish people are too stupid or disinterested to make a go of independence, even though its size, its resources, its communications, its language, its distinct culture, judiciary and history make Scotland an ideal landscape on which a new country can thrive?
In regard to suggesting Boris is “incredibly strong”. He was strong as a populist PM. That was all. His strength derived as all populists do, from pulling the wool over the citizens eyes. Well, the wool is truly being removed very quickly, and populism does not thrive too well when you’re no longer popular. True strength comes from character and commitment, Boris possesses neither. The Tory party voted him their leader, they knew what they were doing, holding their noses or swallowing a dead rat, as they say here in NZ. Boris has surrounded himself with a mean and not particularly bright or worthwhile team of lackeys none of whom if gaining the premiership when Boris falls will bring any confidence to the sinking ship of Brexit Britannia.
Finally, as Craig points out, Scotland does not need “permission” to declare independence. That is a decision purely for the citizens of Scotland, protected by the UN Charter so to say the referendum was a once in a generation event is not true.
Having said all this, I still wonder if the majority of folk in Scotland actually want or will work for independence, despite lots of reasons why it would truly be a rational and beneficial political, economic and moral decision. So, as always, it’s up to the folk that live in that beautiful country to damn well make up their minds.
John, have you noticed yet the kind of politicians favoured by media outlets who rail against “populism”?
I have.
Hello U Watt, not quite sure what you mean in your comment. Can you enlighten me please? Thanks. JKM
What kind of politicians are favoured by the media that constantly rails against “populism”? Sir Keir Starmer, David Cameron, Joe Biden, Mitt Romney. I think you know perfectly well what I mean.
You are English, you have ZERO say in the right to self determination of another state, epecially as you supported Kosovo.
I am English, and therefore British. If there is a proposal to detach part of the UK, how come I don’t deserve a say in what happens?
@Funn3r The last and only time the English had a say like that, they voted “Outez!”. ever since, the boss class have been like those respectable fascists who murdered the Weimar Republic in 1930 and then found that the public wouldn’t cooperate.
I voted for the first time since I was old enough (1983) because it was a democratic vote and I’ve been laughing since I woke up the next day.
Obviously the democratic thing to do is have a British-wide vote on proposed changes to the nature of the state but since the UK exists to thwart democracy, I wouldn’t hold your breath. Imagine the scandal if the English voted to be rid of Scotland, the north of Ireland, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands (the financial equivalents of Fernando Po, Bioke and Principe in the time of slavery), Gibraltar, Akrotiri, Bermuda et al.
For the same reason that the citizens of the other 26 countries in the EU didn’t have a say when England voted to leave.
The strongest card that Boris holds, is the fact that British PM’s or party leaders no longer get appointed by a cosy cabal of parliamentary members, but require the votes of the wider party of which they are members, and probably more importantly in this modern world, the acclamation of a majority of the great British public.
Thanks to two years of covid hysteria, and the virtual stasis it imposed on politics, the number of potential leadership runners in the public eye has been somewhat decreased. Given that it will take a little while for the now post covid world to produce a viable political froth, no leading member of the Conservative Parliamentary Party will be anxious to actually eject Boris at this time ? Ample time for him to produce rabbits from hats, that is if he actually wants to remain PM and party leader.
Whilst I have little doubt that Boris did covet the top job, once he got it, and discovered that his usual bluff and run MO couldn’t work, I would wager that the jobs attraction waned rather speedily. He’ll probably go before the next election, but it will be in a manner that is more likely to ensure that history books yet to be written will show him in a more positive light than would be the case if he were to be forced out now.
Its amusing to think that covid coming when it did, had the effect of preventing quite a few large and problematical pigeons from actually roosting, thereby saving Boris from having to deal with issues that would have dented his prestige, and so extending his tenure. 🙂
Casual Observer
“no longer get appointed by a cosy cabal …”
No, chosen by the Miss World committee for the blondness of his hair and ripeness of his lips.
Get away wi ya , ya Scottish lightweight !
Unionist garbage.
We do not need to explain why independence is justified. It is normal for a country to be governed by its own people, and not by it’s big next door neighbour.
We don’t need any more reason than that.
And we don’t need permission for a referendum.
Hard to know where to start with you, so I won’t.
Any ideas on why the UK Labour Party would immediately (publicly and warmly) accept a defecting Conservative MP into its ranks? Aside from smacking of desperation, as it hardly shifts the balance of power in Parliament, surely this is a gift to Independence and other critics of the similarity and indeed near-interchangeability of Conservatives and (New) Labour unionist parties at Westminster?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60054968
It is part of a old script. Make the populace believe that the Other party is attractive enough for even a tory. Narrative.
But why would anyone want to present Labour as attractive to a Tory? It undermines the whole idea of an (ideologically opposed) opposition, and beyond that, the notion of political pluralism itself. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluralism_(political_philosophy)
If it is a cynical calculation that embracing a defecting Conservative will cause more people to stop voting Conservative than people who stop voting Labour, then this is corrosive for politics, at least of the party kind, and currently (only these two) parties are the ones able to (for example) change voting systems and make quasi-constitutional changes. Apathetic or principled non-voters who see ‘all politicians as the same’ will be reinforced.
The truth I think is that the latest added party subscriber ( Starmer has been busy decanting Corbyn supporters out of the party) maybe welcome – despite the rule re: supporting other parties as a disqualification but it will make no difference either way.
The aim is to continue further and deeper austerity in order to compensate the capitalists who have lost turnover and profits during the Covid pandemic.
We need to get this simple equation into our heads ( all of us) and that is the only reason for going from 10 days isolation to 5 to 0 in mid March is to supposedly revive the economy into some semblance of what went before the epidemic.
This cannot be done – things have changed.
Sir Kier – Johnson _ Sturgeon et al need to recognise that ‘ Fing’s Ain’t What they Used to Be ‘
The truth is the ERG – Covid Group are purely English and not Unionist in character which actually means that despite the Union Jack facade they are English Nationalists not Unionist and it is naked.
As far as I am concerned as a Socialist a Nation has its own right to self determination and if they want to leave the UK that is their choice.
Union Jack Starmer doesnt agree with that I don’t agree with him.
The Tory Party is the party of England not the UK.
The Union Jack saluters are fakes and that includes the BBC.
How many Scottish Welsh and Sinn Feigners will stand up for The National Anthem?
None and neither will I.
So that the voters will vote for Labour. It was a tactic used to boost Nu LabInc.
The whole two party con can only work if there is the pendulum swing.
It’s pantomime.
I agree with you. But I think DunGroanin is right: to win an election you need the swing voters to swing, and his switching is normalizing this kind of swinging in the public eye.
Of course some people will want to be convinced that Labour is a party with distinctive principles or ideologies worth voting for, but maybe this matters less.
Matters less than winning with the same principles and ideology as Tories? What a wonderful, worthwhile victory that would be.
And if there is a general election will the ex-tory be the Labour candidate?
What the U.K. effectively now has is a UKIP government led (currently) by Boris Johnson, vs. a traditional, ‘one-nation’ Conservative party, led by Sir Keir Starmer.
Or the previous one led by Bambi?
The GKH is just a Knight in disguising shining armour coming to set up the latest new nu-Camelot and like hungry kids we will be lured by these fake promises. Again.
I really don’t see how there is any gap between the two on the substantive policies and parliamentary voting between most of the controlled parliamentarians. Not on Scottish Independence; The current state of BrexShit; the callous reaction to the Pandemic in 2020, nor on any geopolitics, that most are directed to ignore by focussing on the English agenda alone, daily.
All the bs with bozos parties from 2 years ago really just took the can of worms exploding all over the Royal Family off the viewers minds. HMQ must be protected. Her status. The forelock tugging internalised sensibilities of the Empire fantasists. Divided from other Peoples of the World. When she goes it should be time to finally dump that post of Head of State in the bin. Then we will see the actual ancient rusty claws of the henchfolk Aristos and their chums pulling the strings of Crown Prerogative powers that has always existed. Will the People allow that without the emotional attachment to the King or Queen?
That is no way meant to be a direct disagreement on your superb and short comment Mr S.
The most worrying part of this is that a Tory should be reassured that the Labour party isn’t going to rock this particular MP’s ethical or political boat. This can only be the case if the Labour party have pretty well abandoned any pretence of being a socialist or radical party. Yet as the UK quietly or not so quietly sinks in its off-shore retreat from reality, the need for a radical and environmentally concerned party that can reverse 40 years of Thatcherism, contain globalisation, and work unflinchingly for a fair society has never been greater. The signs, including this Tory defection, are not good. That’s why I’ve previously noted here the urgency of the Scottish Labour party striking out as a pro-independence party, becoming separate to the English Labour Party, but allied, to challenge the SNP’s increasingly smug and intolerant leadership. A Scottish Labour party I believe could be radical and socialist, and do well in the Scottish Parliament, and to heck with the Labour numbers in Westminster.
“the need for a radical and environmentally concerned party that can reverse 40 years of Thatcherism, contain globalisation, and work unflinchingly for a fair society has never been greater.”
Which is why the security services and their allies are working hard to prevent any such political configuration from forming.
I agree, but perhaps they believe unions to be good things in themselves?
Liarbour hasn’t been either for the last hundred years.
Last hundred years? As the party first contested an election in 1922, you’re saying the Labour party has never been the Labour party? That really doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.
I agree wholeheartedly but I know this will never happen. If this government ever DID declare independence we would have to win the war of public opinion. That’s NOT on whether we should be independent, that’s whether declaring it so MAKES it so. That, I fear, is a war we wouldn’t win. The press are against us, the TV News are against us and the majority of all of the politicians in Scotland are against us (I include the SNP in this)
I’ve said this before but I believe it to be true – until support for independence is embarrassingly high ie 75%, then we won’t see independence happening..
If you asked the Irish at the beginning of the last century if they wished independence it would have surely been a lot more than a faint majority. If Scotland wishes independence it needs to be at least 60% otherwise the country could fall apart in recrimination if circumstances become a bit tougher, may be another financial or economic crash. The majority needs to be big enough for the minority to accept a definite fait accompli. IOW, it needs to be a lot higher than in the Brexit referendum. By the way, what’s embarrassing about a 75% majority?
Before 1914, Sinn Fein was a fringe group in Ireland, and the Irish Constitutional Party, which stood for Home Rule (devolution), was winning virtually all Catholic constituencies. By 1918, that situation had changed totally, and something like 80 percent of Irish Catholics supported Sinn Fein and independence. This was a result of a series of misguided British policies: postponement of Home Rule, moves toward partition, the brutal suppression of the Easter Rising, official moves toward conscription in Ireland, imprisonment of Sinn Fein leaders.
What’s embarrassing about English rule?
You have too little confidence .
Which is why they should have prepared the ground in the way a previous poster suggested. That they haven’t is because they don’t want independence.
Who could lead the campaign against Scotland’s new Independence?”
A rhetorical question obv. But if not.
Marmalade?
Oh it’s occurred to them, they’re already spitballing the best rebuttals of any such suggestions
Great Post Craig.. And this is exactly the topic of conversation I was having with my Daughter earlier today.. Now is the Time.. My Daughter imagines Nicola has a Secret plan of sorts..and the Referendum will be within Five years..I told her there Won’t be a Scotland in Five years.. Independence NOW.
Another stirringly, great article. YOU ARE CORRECT in every sylable.
Glad you got leave to appeal. Glad you have representation of the broadest, highest calibre & I wish you EVERY success with Scotland’s Judges come February. Hope they may choose open proceedings as it is a BIG DEAL, from a Scot’s Law perspective. Naturally YOU matter more and a fair outcome is my wish.
You are right Craig; but, ‘it ain’t ever gonna happen’ with the current bunch of crooks in the North and south.
A lot of you well meaning people just don’t get it. You’re trying to play by the rules in a game where your opponents set the rules, you cannot win. Freedom is to be taken not given.
Which is what Sinn Fein did in 1918-22.
Indeed. Ireland would still be waiting for its freedom today if brave men and women hadn’t identified a prime chance in 1916 and gone for it.
The rebels of 1916 knew that the vast majority of their fellow countrymen and women wanted independence and had done so for many years. True, Holyrood has a majority of pro-independence MSPs, but Sturgeon made clear in May 2021 that she would not regard a vote for the SNP as a vote for independence. As a result, many voted SNP on the grounds that they are by far the party most able to improve health outcomes, reduce drug usage, narrow the attainment gap, build ferries, prevent the 24% budget deficit from doubling, promote more diverse usage of toilets and changing rooms, convert Aberdeen to an economic powerhouse and look after care homes during a pandemic.
“You’re trying to play by the rules in a game where your opponents set the rules, you cannot win.”
As Corbyn and his mass of supporters also discovered.
Corbyn sabotaged himself five minutes after he got the gig.
Is that so?
How did PM May lose her majority in the desperate action of abandoning the Fixed Term parliament set up by Cameron just a few years before?
An act designed to dethrone Corbyn as Labour leader because the Chickencoups had failed to restore the Blairites who had hubristically lost their control by trying to decide who the prettiest of them all was to lead the Party. Clue – it was supposed to be the first Woman to lead the party and become a Labour PM – who would help the NHS into the grave dug for it – along with the rest of the Public Services.
Corbyn’s unexpected win. The burgeoning membership and his survival against the daily coup attempts and the surviving the sudden general election meant to catch the new local membership on the back foot – completely fucked the master planners – ex- head of MI6 said it directly. They couldn’t let labour under the Corbynites in at Downing Street. It would ‘upset ALL their plans’.
They only succeeded in removing the Corbynites from the front benches by yet another snap election. In winter. With massive amounts of postal vote fraud.
So that these ‘plans’ hatched decades ago could carry on. Forever to be channeling all Money to the Hedge Fund owners in Chicago, slurping up the wealths of all nations with their long straws. Through their cast iron WTO stitch up.
Unfortunately for them and fortunately for Humanity as a whole some of these straws are reversing their flow as the victims have successfully turned the game to their own favour. And now the WTO rules are being subverted so that can be stopped!
Corbyn is the real PM of the UK who was ousted by a coup at the ballot boxes to avoid the messiness of sending tanks and special forces into Whitehall to remove him after winning. We aren’t a turd world country like that after all! Are we?
Yeah but you see Corbyn just isn’t as smart or as committed as you. I think anyone who has seen your comments knows you would have taken the whole lot of them in expert fashion, rallying the country to your side with gibber about “zionazis’, the fascist state and whatnot. You duh man.
“In short, the SNP seem far more intent on maintaining their position on the gravy train of governance inside the UK than on actually attaining Independence”.
Agree 100%. The SNP and especially Nicola Sturgeon want to be seen as *campaigning* for independence and blaming Westminster for all their problems, rather than taking positive steps to make it happen.
And that is why you are whistling in the wind.
Federalism – good idea, but independence only really makes sense to :-
” Don’t run away into nationalism.” — You mean like British Nationalists with their fake country that is really an English controlled entity.
“This island has the most natural sea border. Keep it” — what sort of island has an unnatural sea border???? The UK is not an island so the point you make is just nonsense. It’s as much nonsense as when people talk about England being an island.
“Independence only really makes sense to … ” — the vast majority of countries in the world. A large number of whom escaped from the colonial empire of Westminster.
The UK still glorifies its brutal empire as do some of the people who post on this site. Perhaps some of you will get an OBE for your efforts one day.
Cubby
Nationalism is the tool that replaced religion as way of elites getting the masses to do their bidding. Since nationalism there have been other tools, but nationalism still seems to get people triggered.
The island is the natural country space because of the nature of such a border. To spoil it is to the benefit of those living outside the island not those on it.
Scotland was part and parcel of the elite that created the philosophy of empire, ran it and profited eg many of the characters from that notable work Sikunder Burnes Master of the Great Game.
Empires and colonies are not a positive thing and I am not advocating for their return.
FwL
Scotland is a colony of England and you seem to be advocating that situation continues.
People born in Scotland to this day still sell out their country to England. That is not news. Some people in colonies have always sold out to the oppressors. Scotland did not profit from the Empire – certain individuals did.
So following your logic North America and South America should be one country ruled by USA.
The SNP leadership, Sturgeon, her husband (the Munroe’s) are not interested in independence, they’re only interested in keeping their noses in the British Trough and getting rid of opposition like Alex Salmond.
Sturgeon is a failed Solicitor who saw an opportunity to attach herself onto Alex Salmond’s coat tails. He resigned and she took over. She manipulated the Scottish legal system to make Craig Murray a political victim of the Scottish Crime System.
She is watching her role come to an end and seeing the termination of the Scottish Gravy train and is seeking a high profile role on the international stage with her husband in tow.
Look at the links below referring to Ex Scottish Liberal MP Danny Alexander who has done well for having his nose in the trough.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scots-ex-minister-admits-lobbying-13818202
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danny_Alexander
The Scottish population are defrauded by the political class just like the rest of the union (England, Wales & Norther Ireland).
I agree. Kick wm when its down. We need the SNP NEC and Sturgeon out, now. Unionists can move to England or love and support our republic.
Ivan bishop warms to the thought that opponents of a brave new independent scotland “can move to England”
So, a Nakba is proposed for all who don’t fall in line with the movers and formers of a ‘free and liberal’ Scotland. Maybe fantasies of scenes that resulted from the Pakistans separation from India after independence are preferred.
Bigots are, as bigots do…_
It’s not bigotry, it’s encouraging them to join their fellow BritNats in the glorious empire and give them more opportunities to celebrate their Englishness.
It’s really quite mild when you consider how the French treated their collaborators after they regained their independence.
If some people really feel so strongly about English governance then they certainly have that option.
Your option seems to be to make mischief.
A sort of Israel of the North ?
‘When you strike at a king, you must kill him.’ – Ralph Waldo Emerson
As you say, the MSM seem to have fatally wounded Johnson politically, but he’s still there. Tory MPs have shown themselves to be divided, incompetent coup organisers; bad at choosing leaders and ridiculously self-indulgent.. all at the same time.
Right – but as Craig has endlessly pointed out, the SNP under Sturgeon is NOT the party of Scottish independence and they have no such intention.
If they were, they’d have been pushing the independence debates since the last referendum on issues like currency, central bank, armed forces, passports, trade and The EU. Not that those issues are necessarily insurmountable, but they haven’t even been discussing them.
As it is, they can’t just declare independence without even a manifesto on those issues. Kind of like jumping out of the plane first and then looking for your parachute.
And in pushing this debate they would have increased the support for independence.
Scottish independence voting intention:
Yes: 46% (+1)
No: 46% (-2)
Excl. DKs:
Yes: 50% (+2)
No: 50% (-2)
via
@SavantaComRes 14–18 Jan
Chgs. w/ 28 Oct
Pushing independence could just as easily turn people off and rally the unionists, unionists who control the MSM. It’s easy to dismiss the media’s influence. But consider this Twitter post by a Corbyn supporter ‘Agree to Disagree’ on the Tories’ recent poll plunge :
“For years we were told we were sore losers or conspiracy theorists for saying the media fucked us and yet in little over 4 months they’ve managed to destroy one of the most popular politicians[Johnson] in the country and obliterate the Tories 10 point lead in the polls.”
I listened to a science program on radio 4 today discussing the antics of the common cuckoo. It provided the most perfect metaphor for what has happened within the SNP in recent years.
Accordingly, the common cuckoo sneakily lays its egg in the nest of another species. When the cuckoo chick hatches, its first goal in life is to eject (and destroy) all other competing chicks in the nest.
Instead of addressing this most diabolical and heinous crime, the foster parents continue to feed the cuckoo chick and it naturally thrives, often to the point where it outgrows the foster parents themselves.
There are really only two explanations for Sturgeon’s behaviour in recent years and, since the “they must have something on her” theory amounts to the same thing, we may as well assume she is employed by the British Government.
The common denominator in virtually everything she has done isn’t simply the failure in the here and now. The common denominator is that her machinations do lasting long-term harm to the independence movement and to the future viability of Scotland itself (if it was ever to somehow achieve independence).
In restructuring the SNP internally, in attacking and marginalising the grassroots, in attacking leading figures like Salmond, in generally sowing division, in committing to the section 30 process as the only route to independence, in fighting against the ‘sovereignty of the people’ claim in court, in choosing to contract foreign companies (instead of our own) to build our ships, and, most recently, in selling off the country’s energy resources at a fraction of their value, Sturgeon gives the show away.
If the most ardent Unionist politician was to embark on half of that stuff, nobody here or in the ranks of the SNP would doubt for a second that the agenda was to make independence extremely unlikely and do as much harm as possible to the viability of Scotland as an independent nation.
As I said, the whole thing is cuckoo.
Excellent metaphor for the disaster that has befell the SNP and by extension the cause of Independence under the Sturrell Cuckoos and the conclusion that this has been and continues to be a deliberate strategy of sabotage is inescapable . No one , acting in good faith , could get so much so calamitously wrong so consistently .
There is simply no other credible explanation for the ongoing Scottish Nakba than betrayal . Either from day one of the Sturgeon/Murrell takeover ( the * asset * achieves prime position after being groomed by covert State interests ) or as a result of blackmailable behaviour from the pawns in the political chessboard . Either way the result is the same . Checkmate .
Another great article Craig . Thank you for everything you’ve done and continue to do in the genuine service of our country and the ever-diminishing ( by the political and MSM social poisoners ) pursuit of truth and honesty .
“The massed supporters of Anas Sarwar and Douglas Ross would hardly fill a bus”
Almost all the seats would be occupied by journalists, of the stripe admired by Lady Dorrian.
“A few toothless wonders might be found to wear union jacks and smash up George Square in Glasgow, but their activity would not extend much beyond closing time”
Very disparaging of a noble culture.
A sudden declaration of independence would be a revolutionary act. Revolutions only succeed when the armed forces and police have either changed side or collapsed. Have the English-controlled armed forces and police changed side or collapsed? From the perspective of South Africa it seems not. Therefore, a sudden declaration of independence would be met with the arrest of the provisional government and the detention of their supporters, conducted by the police and backed by the military, and if there were any resistance to this a state of emergency could be declared in Scotland. And there would be nothing that the Scots could do against this. Very much like what Spain pulled in response to Catalonia’s attempt to declare independence.
I’m sorry, Mr Murray, but your justified enthusiasm for independence and your much less justified belief in the weakness of the London government have led you astray.
Aye, maybe, but the difference is that it would be the start of actual independence.
There’s no way the UK would prevail longterm.
It would generate an incredible amount of resistance that would be well funded by the Scottish diaspora in the same way the Irish did.
Look at all the countries that took their independence from the UK
There’s not one that would say the pain was not worth it.
Plainly @CraigMurrayOrg does not understand democracy. The Holyrood Parliament DOES NOT have a mandate to declare independence without a referendum. It was not in any manifesto and so no MSPs or MPs were elected on that basis. To do so would be a betrayal of the electorate.
Is the SNP’s main policy to be for independence for Scotland? Or is it their policy to only seek a referendum? Their website seems to be coy about this.
I think you are the one who does not understand democracy.
Right now we do not have democracy.
The UK has a Queen (unelected)
The UK has a House of Lords (unelected)
The UK has a House of Parliament where English MPs vastly outnumber Scots, and routinely mock and over-ride our MPs. That is not democracy.
And it is Unionist thinking of the most pathetic straw clutching to assume that a party that is seen as existing to get us independence does not have a mandate when it is sweeping the boards in election after election.
Your only hope of the staying in England’s glorious empire is injecting some more careerist cuckoos into the SNP.
I think to accuse Craig Murray of not understanding democracy is ridiculous. He has more knowledge on the nature of democracy than all of us contributors together. He’s worked for democracy and lost his job and reputation for stopping that same “democracy” behaving undemocratically and cruelly. He’s seen how democracy can work, and fail, in many parts of the world. He’s been a consistent moral, highly intelligent and knowledgeable commentator on the most important part of any democracy – its ethics and its fairness.
So much of what we now accept as normal in a functioning democracy was once “illegal” – womens’ votes, abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and we’re still discussing in many democracies assisted dying or euthanasia. The thing about politics is “things happen”. I’ve made the point elsewhere, some major economic or political disruption could change the landscape in Scotland and the UK very quickly indeed. Someone replied to me about the situation in Ireland and how quickly and massively things changed there. The First World War might have had something to so with it too. Similarly, involvement in a war in Europe related to Russia/Ukraine/NATO, might make the citizens of Scotland decide there has to be a better way.
But I will add this, others make the same point, Craig does know about democracy, but he still seriously over-estimates the support for independence in the citizenry of Scotland. But when the nominally Scottish Independence party itself can’t even be bothered to foster a wish for independence in the population or keep working for it, despite garnering so much popularity for itself, then it’s not that surprising the public remains luke-warm. The popularity of the SNP and Scotland’s ambivalence to independence is a strange dichotomy. So the call for a unilateral declaration is not in itself something that Scotland could never consider, there’s insufficient political will to make it feasible or politically sensible presently, however ridiculous Westminster becomes, in fact, it could seriously damage social cohesion in the country. So why aren’t the SNP making the same points passionately to the electorate as Craig and many contributing here do?
England and Australia are the Crabbe and Goyle to the US’s Malfoy. Why would Scotland want to be part of that? Build bridges instead.
Brexit was an executive order to the Cameron Government to preserve off-shore banking and its tax avoiding benefits. The “consultative” referendum was an opinion poll which sadly made the orders from above easier to implement.
Do you conceive the EU as some great socialist enterprise, Jim?
Perhaps Westminster jailing our heroine Leader Nicola as a dangerous rebel could be the trigger to mobilise the great scottish people for independence.
A win-win situation.
-apologies to anyone else who has been jailed by a corr*pt judiciary
I think they prefer seeing anybody who opposes her jailed. Wonder why?
Your previous piece on Sturgeon and her ambitions was much better with undeniable logic.
The SNP (or it’s leader?) were not cowardly for not leveraging Brexit – as you said in your previous piece they are committed to gravy training and globalist capitalism. The commitment to keep Britain as a whole in the EU is also compatible with that attitude.
Your desire to insult the SNP’s moral fibre or lack of causes a logical inconsistency in your work. Which is a shame
SNP and moral fibre?
Surely you jest. That’s long gone.
Excellent point
I am afraid this won’t happen: as you yourself have said a number of times, Sturgeon is not a true supporter of independence. How would it work in practice, i.e. what level of majority do you think would be required, a super-majority? If so, could it be achieved? As an Englishman I would be sad to see Scotland leave, not least because the remaining countries of the union risk becoming a perpetual Tory majority. But I agree that the Scots should not be obliged to prop up progressive politics in the UK, and if 66 per cent or more Scots want independence, they should be allowed to have it.
Sturgeon is a person who probably wants independence, just not the difficult and risky stuff required to achieve it
66% ???
How generous of you English.
You’re like all unionists, not keen on democracy
James
Why not 96%. That sounds more like Britnat style democracy.
Seems to me the whole principle of democratic governance has cracked here and elsewhere, and is being wedged apart by corrupt actors. Every level of government in UK is a combination of corruption and fecklessness based on multiple layers of dishonesty.
It cannot continue but how will it change or be changed? Must admit to being at a loss. Activism seems hopeless.
I wonder if Putin will act while the conditions are so fragile. Just as this may be a time to act for independence because of central government collapse, so also for international activity. Russia regards Ukraine as a key part of the ‘homeland’ and is eager to re-establish its dominance there. The fiascos in Afghanistan and in Kazakhstan are indicators of underlying disruption so something will ‘give’ and out of whatever turmoil ensues there will be a new settlement.
The US is in a process of pivoting to the east/China. On top of the weakening Biden, it looks as if the Trump is poised to return with his particular brand of parapsychological whimsy.
Europe seems fragmented and dissolute. Fuel/energy is always a major factor in our lives.
The return of significant inflation and personal hardship must have an impact, All this in the context of the difficulties with the pandemic, climate change and the ensuing migratory impulse with the ludicrous situation described in the previous post. If the money is there i wouldn’t be surprised to see some such process of offshoring eventually occurring to solve such problems. Everyone has their price and if principle prevails there are always ways to remove, threaten or ‘persuade’.
What Craig and his ilk refuse to talk about, the elephant in the room which makes a mockery of the “act now” cries, are the numbers. Craig knows full well that when he says that “we” need to declare independence, he’s nor asking Sturgeon to act as First Minister of all of Scotland, he’s asking her to act on behalf of what is (probably/possibly) a minority of the Scottish people.
When Norway declared independence, it was after a referendum in which 99.95% of the voters voted yes. When Estonia conducted their referendum, 78.4% voted yes. In Latvia, the result was 74.9% yes. In Lithuania, 11 months after independence was declared, the referendum vote was 93.2% yes.
By comparison, Sturgeon would be acting in a highly contentious way, if she took it upon herself to declare independence, and there is no certainty that she’d be acting on ANY kind of majority, never mind the kind of figures quoted above.
Every action taken, and every word spoken by Sturgeon is taken by Craig and his cohorts, spun and twisted, and presented in the way most designed to undermine her. The latest “wheeze” from Craig, in a recent blog, presented Sturgeon’s “guilt” using the “evidence” that she might, at some point in the future, take a lucrative job with the UN. I bow to Craig’s superior knowledge of the inter-relationships of governmentsvand world institutions, but I’m not going to accept his credentials as a clairvoyant.
A section 30 order will be requested. If refused, legislation will be passed to hold a referendum without one. If challenged successfully in the court, then the final option will be a plebiscite election. Because of the closeness of the percentages on each side of the independence argument, a referendum or plebiscite confirmation is required before Sturgeon can do any of the things that hotheads like Craig are demanding. I don’t agree that 60% is required, but I do believe that a majority (no matter how small) IS required before ANYONE can declare independence.
I can’t believe that I’m having to defend democracy……
Alex you make some excellent points, and it’s all too easy to get carried away by one’s enthusiasm for a particular political course. But I’d still strongly defend Craig’s understanding of democracy. The fact is Westminster has been failing for years. The UK has been failing, Craig rails against this, rightly. We should all be railing against this, including the English. Similarly, Craig rightly points out the failure of the SNP to actually work for independence in any meaningful way. So those percentages you quote in other nations are not present in Scotland presently, you’re right, and that is a serious problem for Craig’s unilateral declaration of independence. But the SNP has had years and years to make independence appeal as a natural course for Scotland and its people, and they’ve failed to do this.
Westminster HAS been failing for years. And? I agree with you, and a large number of Scots agree with you. However, an arguable number of Scots either don’t agree with us, or (more probably) don’t care enough to change the status quo.
Where Craig and I part company, is his interpretation of the actions and tactics of the SNP under Sturgeon. I look at everything she does or says, and can see immediately that it is aimed at precisely those Scots who don’t agree with us or who don’t care enough. She doesn’t need to “do a Salmond” and stir up the troops. They are already in the camp, and their votes are assured. She is trying to persuade those who are “comfortable”, and she’s doing it from their point of view, holding up her common sense against the lunacy that emanates from Westminster, and (more aggressively) against the inanity of DRoss and Sarwar in Holyrood.
This year, we will see a request for a section 30 order, which will probably be refused. If and when that happens, we will see legislation, which will probably be challenged by Westminster. I happen to believe that we are going to end up with the last resort of a plebiscite election, and I sincerely believe that if we DO get 50% +1 voting SNP, it will be the result of Sturgeon’s diplomacy efforts – aimed at Scots.
Craig and his ilk are totally ignoring the no voters. Sturgeon isn’t. I hope I’m right…..
Alex
There is no democracy in Scotland. Never has been. Just a kid on. Nothing for you to defend. It’s a colonial situation and colonies do not have democracy.
In a Scottish context, you’re right Cubby. However, having realised that, the worst thing we can do is to try and force a majority to succumb to the wishes of the minority. There WILL be a democratic decision on independence – by whatever means, referendum or plebiscite – and when Sturgeon (or whoever) declares independence, she better be damned sure that she’s doing it on behalf of the majority of Scots.
Craig would have her do it right now, when there is zero certainty that she’s acting on behalf of the majority of Scots. There may not be much democracy going around, but if we don’t start off our life as an independent country using democracy, then we are in trouble.
Craig (rightly) decries the lack of democracy in the U.K., and then blithely recommends using undemocratic means to obtain our independence, and seems to be oblivious to the irony of that.
Alex
The majority of Scots voted for independence in 2014.
The majority who voted voted against independence in 2014.
So if Westminster passed a law giving massive financial benefits to English people to relocate to Scotland and vote against Scottish independence then what? It’s called controlling the colony.
Installing citizens from the colonising country in positions of power and in increasing numbers is a well-established way of maintaining hold of a colony. This has been happening in Scotland and will continue.
To quote you “on behalf of the majority of Scots” – well, the point is that a lot of voters do not see themselves as Scots no matter how much we would wish that they do.
Different argument, Cubby. Having said that, I couldn’t disagree more with your premise. Separating Scots into “home-grown Scots” and “foreign Scots”, is an absolutely terrible idea, and flies in the face of the whole ethos of the 2014 referendum campaign.
Everyone who lives in Scotland is a Scot, and has the right to vote on the constitutional status of Scotland. After independence, every Scot will have to live with the consequences of the referendum vote.
Persuasion, not exclusion is the way forward. I will speak out against the idea of excluding Scots from the voting booth, based on some arbitrary criterion. Who would decide the qualifying criteria? No …… if you live in Scotland, you are Scottish, and have as much right as any of your neighbours to vote on the fate of Scotland.
Once you start down the road you are hinting at, where does it stop? EDL type skinheads marching through Glasgow shouting “P**is and English go home!”??
There’s still many decent folk in the rank and file of the SNP.
Despite concerted efforts of the Stalinist core around Sturgeon the intake of new MSPs last year was not rigged to consist solely of Politics graduates careerist. Failure to rig constituency selection processes will doubtless be rectified by the imposition of further rule changes.
This said, the party machine under Sturgeon / Murrel is in thrall to the US State Department.
Humza Yousaf and Jenny Gilruth are graduates of the State Departments International Visitors Leadership Program.
There is nothing inherently sinister in either Yousaf or Gilruth having participated in the IVLP, others (Kezia Dugdale, Patrick Harvey, Ross Thompson) were recipients of the State Department’s largesse.
What’s interesting are the details where Yousaf and Gilruth are concerned.
From Yousaf’s Wiki: “In 2008, whilst working as an aide, Yousaf took part in the IVLP programme, an exchange that is run by the US State Department.” That’s right, in his second year as a humble aide, Yousaf was recognised by the US State Department as a “future leader”.
School teacher, Gilruth was in Washington as part of an IVLP delegation on 9th July 2016. That’s 35 working days after being sworn in as a rookie MSP.
If those two don’t strike you as State Department plants, I have a Nigerian Prince I’d like to introduce.
Angela Crawley was also present in Washington on 9th July 2016. What Crawley (SNP Defence Procurement Spokesperson at the time) was doing in Washington is not at all clear. There’s no mention in her HoC register of interests. Perhaps a private visit, circa Priti Patel going on “holiday” to the Golan Heights. Then again, Patel is independently wealthy (est. £2.2 m), Crawley most certainly ain’t. Politics graduate Crawley is (as of 01/02/21) Shadow Attorney General for the SNP at Westminster. Get this; Crawley obtained a LLB Degree in Law from the University of Glasgow AFTER she became a MP. A Shadow Attorney General that’s never practiced law!
On a recent James Kelly podcast, when asked about the attempted forcing of “Nicola’s favourites” as parliamentary candidates, the first name to spring to Denise Findlay’s mind was Stephen Gethins.
Stephen Gethins became the first SNP, MP to be allowed a position on the HoC, Foreign Affairs Select Committee in July 2015.
Prior to gaining a salary from UK politics, first as an advisor to Alex Salmond and then as an MP, Gethins was employed by “NGO LINKS”. NGO LINKS is based out of the University of Arizona and is funded by the US Government’s National Science Foundation. NGO Links is exclusively interested in matters on Russia’s Southern border with particular emphasis on the Republic of Georgia.
On losing his seat in the December 2019 snap election, Gethins rapidly gained employ with indecent rapidity at the School of International Relations, University of St. Andrews. The SoIR, was BBC Scotland’s go-to source for “Russia bad” commentary before they discovered the swivel eyed, Prof. Anthony Glees at the Centre for Security and Intelligence Studies at the University of Buckingham. The proximity of the SoIR to the “auld haunted barn” that housed the Integrity Initiative may or may not be coincidental.
The State Department has its own reasons to influence Scottish politics (Faslane, the Scottish Icelandic gap, … ). There’s also the established protocol of the State Department and MI5 operating on a quid pro quo basis. Remember little Simon Bracey-Lane of the Institute for Statecraft volunteering to “work for Bernie Sanders” during his Primary run against Hillary Clinton. “You run dirty tricks against our lot and we’ll run dirty tricks against yours.”.
With all the mandates walking out of Westminster is long overdue. Walking out now when the Palace of Westminster and government is on the ropes will be a gold standard certification of the traitors that Sturgeon and her clique are.
You can see now how the dark arts security apparatus and their SNP acolytes wanted rid of Alex Salmond and all of his ilk.
I think that Craig is absolutely correct to say that now is the time to move.
I have a question.
If the Scottish MSPs/MPs did this and declared independence, would any state recognise that declaration?
Or to re-phrase: ‘Would Scotland be the only state to not recognise it?’
Oh Craig, do you really expect those placemen and women to risk having their snouts pulled out of the trough?