I have waited for anger to subside before writing about Humza Yousaf as First Minister. The obvious unfairness of the election created a lot of anger.
The SNP party machine did everything to get Humza elected, with the now huge payroll vote swinging into action from the start with coordinated endorsements and messages. Central party staff, the SNP’s Westminster spin doctor and even Sturgeon’s “fixer” Liz Lloyd were seconded to the Humza campaign.
The hundreds of paid staff of MPs and MSPs campaigned relentlessly for Humza, self-describing as “activists”. The numerous SNP HQ troll accounts swung into action.
Banners and campaign materials identical to those produced by Party HQ were instantly available to Humza, almost before the other candidates knew there was a leadership contest. Party hustings were packed with Humza supporters before the rest of the party knew there were hustings, with online tickets almost instantly “sold out”, but the same claque faces appearing at multiple hustings, to the extent that Kate Forbes and Ash Regan actually called it out.
The mainstream media swung into unanimous and ferocious attack on Kate Forbes instantly the election was called, attempting a knockout blow based on her religious beliefs.
Party HQ lied to the media and the world repeatedly about membership numbers, hiding the depth of Sturgeon’s failure, to the obvious benefit of the “continuity candidate”.
Entirely false claims were made by the same HQ about the role of voting platform provider MiVoice’s – who just provide the software; they do not audit the list of voters or logins SNP HQ gave them. There is no audit or check.
Ultimately only 51,000 out of 72,000 supposed party members bothered to vote in an election effectively for First Minister of Scotland. That is 10% less than the member turnout in the Truss/Sunak Tory leadership election. The Tories have a large portion of membership which is purely social in rural England.
After all this bias, for Humza to get less than 50% on first preferences, and then get over the line by just 52% to 48%, was really quite remarkable. It speaks to the massive amount of dissatisfaction among ordinary party members.
It says everything about the mentality of Sturgeon and Murrell that GCHQ were brought in to ensure the cyber-security of the voting. Willie MacRae, my old friend Gordon Wilson and all the others who built the SNP will be birling in their graves.
In fact, if you excluded the votes of those who make a living from the SNP – elected representatives, their staff, HQ staff and the massive and too infrequently discussed tail of those in third sector organisations funded by Scottish Govt grants – I have no doubt Humza would have lost on the votes of those who support the party without reward and at their own cost.
Which is an interesting thought.
Those are reasons to feel angry about the mechanics, the process of election. There was also reason to be angry about the substance. From the start, the election was, as befits Sturgeon’s SNP, much more about identity politics than about Independence.
The use of culture wars to define “progressive” politics – rather than economic debate about reducing the massive wealth gap in society – was systematic and deliberate. It made listening to the debates frustrating and unrewarding. The mainstream media was delighted to play along with this narrative.
Now the strange thing about all this is, that had he not cast himself as Sturgeon’s “continuity candidate”, I would have been supportive of Humza Yousaf.
Yousaf’s instincts are more left wing than Sturgeon’s. Unlike the Clinton-mimicking Sturgeon, Humza is not a natural neoliberal, and when he muses about wealth taxes or genuine land reform I believe that is the real Yousaf coming out.
Humza also has a good, solid record of solidarity and activism with Palestine – something the SNP moved away from, and which is anathema to Sturgeon’s young praetorian guard. Unlike Sturgeon, Humza is not a natural NATO hawk nor supporter of United States’ neo-Imperialism.
Humza unequivocally declared himself a republican and in favour of a non-monarchical Independent Scotland, again marking out a far more radical approach than Sturgeon.
It is of course obvious but still worth saying that it genuinely is delightful that Scots would select a Scots Muslim of Pakistani heritage as leader. That says something very good about our society. The horrible Islamophobia this has attracted – almost entirely from unionists – has been very unpleasant to observe on social media.
In a career as a diplomat, you get access to senior politicians and observe governance at close quarters, all round the world.
One conclusion this has led me to, is that puppet successors very rarely work out as planned by whoever is holding the strings. Once they have gained enough control of the levers of power, the supposed puppets quickly find the advice of their predecessor onerous, and the interests of their predecessor less than compelling.
There are exceptions – Medvedev never made any real effort to pull clear of Putin, though Putin had guarded against that by calling himself Prime Minister and not actually letting go of the levers.
But that Humza, the self-declared continuity candidate, will simply be a cypher for the Murrells seems to be not certain, even though he plainly felt appearing to accept that role was the way to get elected. He was right – just.
It is however certainly true that his Cabinet is very heavy with those close to Sturgeon, who will keep her informed on every move. In particular Shona Robison, extremely powerful as both Humza’s Deputy and Finance Minister, is inseparable from Sturgeon, as is Shirley Anne Somerville, Minister for Social Justice.
We often talk loosely of ministers not being talented or bright. Humza, in reality, is both talented and bright; his failing has always been fecklessness and epicureanism.
But in the case of both Robison and Somerville, it genuinely is impossible to make a case for either of them being talented, or to put it bluntly, intelligent enough for the positions they occupy.
Their elevation depended entirely on their loyalty to Sturgeon and their belief in the kind of identity politics agenda that ignores the economic structures that suppress the poor, but focuses on opportunities for members of specified disadvantaged groups to thrive within the existing system.
In practice these opportunities often benefit only some of the already wealthier people in society.
Put another way, neither the persistent gender pay gap, especially in low paid work, nor the increasing number of children in child poverty in Scotland, has in any improved whilst having, as deliberate positive discrimination, more female ministers.
The lives of the female ministers have however improved immeasurably.
Humza has removed or excluded from his cabinet Kate Forbes, Ivan McKee and Michelle Thomson, any of whom would have easily been the most talented in it.
I have seen it very little commented upon – perhaps because it is simply taken as read – but the fundamental criterion, indeed the only criterion, for inclusion as a minister by Humza appears to be enthusiastic support for Gender Recognition Reform in its pure and ideological form.
That compelled purity includes the rejection of the elementary common sense of excluding convicted sexual offenders (a tiny percentage of trans people) from self-ID, which political bullheadedness politically holed the entire project and unleashed a horrible and entirely avoidable wave of hatred against trans people.
Humza is essentially squandering his political capital like a lottery winner, doubling down on precisely the Sturgeon behaviours that caused at least 53,000 members to leave the party – and counting.
In 2022 on average the SNP lost 80 members per day. In 2023 up until the point true membership figures were released three weeks ago, it was losing on average 120 members per day.
It is probably fair to measure the number of active party members who are concerned primarily with culture wars, as being those who voted for Humza and refused to give a second preference to either Forbes or Regan. That number is 9,763 people.
These figures are actually important because they speak to the intolerance of opposition of the Humza camp. Almost 40% of Humza’s displayed their closed-mindedness by refusing to give any second preference, compared to just 16% of Kate Forbes’ voters.
Yet it is Kate Forbes’ supporters who are the ones being enthusiastically castigated everywhere as intolerant bigots, despite the fact the large majority of them not only gave their second preferences, they gave them to Humza.
Humza’s problem is not only that he has chosen his Cabinet from only his own supporters, and has thus ignored the views of over half the party members, whose first preference he was not. Humza has the much larger problem that in doing so, this only represents the 9,000 who voted for him and nobody else.
His Cabinet consists solely of those who wish entirely to limit the SNP to those who meet their measure of ideological purity – which for some inexplicable reason means commitment not to Scottish Independence, but to an absolute, unmoderated right for everybody to change their gender by declaration.
This is a serious break with the traditions of a party that was always the big tent for Independence supporters. Much more crucially, the election provided the opportunity for the SNP careerists who overwhelmingly backed Humza to come out as, de facto, devolutionists rather than Independence supporters.
There is a continuum from gradualist to devolutionist to unionist, and under Sturgeon the SNP had been sliding steadily down that scale. A long way down that scale.
This election gave the devolutionists license to “come out” and shed the pretence that they had any intention of doing anything about Independence in the next few electoral cycles. Independence became an “aspiration”, a “goal we should always keep before us”. While actually becoming Independent was decried a “process” discussion of which was pointless.
This derogatory relegation of becoming Independent to “process” was a rhetorical trick constantly practised by Humza himself. Yet again we are being told that we have to wait until support for Independence somehow, by magic, reaches a sustained level of 60% in opinion polls before we can even look at what that “process” is.
If that is now the stance of the SNP – and I am 90% sure it is – then I would take the view that it is incumbent upon real Independence supporters to oppose the SNP as a de facto unionist power structure.
That means Alba should stand against the SNP not just as a list party, but in First Past the Post elections too. Otherwise genuine Independence supporters could be left with nobody to vote
for.
But – and this is a small but, as my hope is limited – I note that Alex Salmond, who knows Humza very well, has not yet written him off.
Humza has already requested an S30 for a new Independence referendum from Rishi Sunak. He did so orally but I presume a letter is following. He received the expected dismissive answer.
As you know, I think it is wrong to ask permission from London at all for Scottish self-determination. Asking permission is an admission ab initio you don’t actually believe in the right of Scottish self-determination.
But did Humza make the request in the spirit of homage to Westminster, or is it a formality he had to get out of the way to comply with his purported commitment to Sturgeon’s footsteps? The question is, now London has said no, will he have a plan B for Independence?
If so he needs to produce it in the next few weeks, or face mass desertion by SNP voters.
I am one of life’s sunnier optimists. I note that Humza frequently mentioned Independence, unapologetically, at his first First Minister’s Questions in Holyrood: about as many times as Sturgeon had voluntarily brought up Independence in the past three years.
Humza needs to find his inner radical, and that inner radical needs to act decisively.
I don’t expect it. But I am not entirely devoid of hope.
————————————————
A brief question. For years this blog published very frequently short, snappy opinions, often only a few lines, on the issues of the day. More recently, probably in line with a trend in blogging, I have largely stopped that and this blog produces much more considered, longer form pieces.
I tend to confine short snappy thoughts to Twitter instead.
On the upside, the much shorter thoughts were not always produced with much quality of argument. On the downside, abandoning them (which just evolved, not by policy) has definitely damaged the existence of regular community in the comments section.
What do you think?
————————————————
————————————————
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.
A welcome and much needed analysis.
The “Humza only” numbers shed new light on his repeated assertion during the campaign to be focused on first preferences.
Was that a coded signal, to the payroll vote and other hangers-on, to vote Humza only?
“The question is, now London has said no, will he have a plan B for Independence?”
It wasn’t “London” or ‘Westminster’ who said no.
It was we, the people of Scotland, who said NO to the destruction of the Great Britain which we created.
Yes, democracy can be a bitch, but you must live with it, Craig.
That was 9 years ago. Many things have changed since fundamentally, including a disastrous hard Brexit that the Scottish people overwhelmingly voted against.
Not quite a “lifetime”. Not even “a generation”.
We all, not just a wee cluster of counties within the UK, knew that a referendum on Brexit was following on and most of us recognised which way that one was going to go. The two referenda were never some kind of twinned pair.
We voted for independence from the EU. Within the UK we are interdependent with the United Kingdom which was created by Scots for the benefit of Scots.
“was created by Scots for the benefit of Scots”
You mean surely mean:
“was created by Scots landowners, lairds and gentry for the benefit of Scots landowners, lairds and gentry”
The Scots people were NOT consulted. There were riots.
Spot on John
Exactly.
Bayard (comment doesn’t have a Reply button)
The united kingdom was created by the Treaty of Union 1707. Notice the word Treaty and it’s contents include Articles. It is an agreement between two Independent Nation States to create a New Entity, the UK.
The 1801 Act (Ireland) was Domestic Legislation containing Clauses. It was therefore NOT an International Treaty and did Not create a new entity. It merely recognized that the Kingdom of Ireland was already part of the united kingdom as it had been under English rule since the 1100s indeed Henry VI of England was also King of Ireland.
@Ebenezer- You state that ‘The United Kingdom which was created by Scots for the benefit of Scots’. If you can’t read or understand history then you are condemning yourself (and others) to an eternity of this type of delusional stockholm syndrome masochism. Thankfully more and more people are realising that this marriage needs a quickie divorce for the sake of all involved and nothing more than that. Independence for England!
ES doesn’t care about history, or, if he does care about history, he doesn’t care about accuracy. The union of England and Scotland did not produce the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom was created by the English and the Irish, mainly.
“The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland was a sovereign state in Northwestern Europe that comprised the entirety of the British Isles between 1801 and 1922.[4] It was established by the Acts of Union 1800, which merged the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland into a unified state.”
Not quite a lifetime or a generation but a long time, nine years. How many prime ministers did you say have come and gone in Westminster in the last nine years? Oh, you didn’t. Scrooge with the truth Ebenezer. And p.s. democracy is not a bitch, ebenezer, much as you dislike democracy it’s a human right. Come aboard and you will feel better. You might even lose your streak of miserable sanctimonious attitude.
We, the people of Scotland, voted in the referendum. Less than 38% of the electorate voted to self-harm by amputating Scotland from the UK.
Those who oppose and scorn democracy are trying to subvert that verdict of the people.
The United Kingdom was created three and four hundred years ago by Scotsmen for the benefit of the Scottish people. We have done very well for ourselves as a result of that Scottish creation. That’s why we voted against the proposed quickie divorce.
I care not a jot for independence, but I do want to live in a less right-wing country. With the far-right Tories and a right-wing Labour party as my only two viable choices for government in the UK, I therefore want independence for Scotland so that we can be at least a bit less right wing.
One vote is not decisive. We change governments every five years – nobody comes along and says ‘But you already had a vote’. That is a nonsense argument, and all who make it know that.
Even a democracy as weak as ours (no UK government has a had a majority of votes since before WWII – if at all) has to allow more than one vote on important matters – particularly when you consider how propagandised our electorate is by the billionaire-owned and government-funded right-wing mainstream media.
Humza has got elected, get over it. Bitching about election results is a serious problem of yours Mr. Murray.
In line with the way politics is these days, he only appointed loyalists; the consensus of the past on such matters is long gone. There can be only one.
As to only appointing those who were supportive of gender laws, that is common sense. They have demonstrated a clear talent for brown nosing those in charge, no matter what claptrap they are told to support. He wants yes people, now he has a whole cabinet full of the buggers.
As to this gibberish of yours…
“That compelled purity includes the rejection of the elementary common sense of excluding convicted sexual offenders (a tiny percentage of trans people) from self-ID, which political bullheadedness politically holed the entire project and unleashed a horrible and entirely avoidable wave of hatred against trans people.”
….I would point out that the gender laws are a dog’s breakfast of a Baker Bill; no amendments, or exclusion of sexual offenders, will change that.
….as to the “wave of hatred against trans people” you claim exists, it is no different to the hatred expressed against anybody of a non heterosexual or alternate sexuality. To claim those against gender laws are against trans people, is like saying those who are against uncontrollable immigration are anti-immigrant.
Scotland really has no substantial majority for independence, get over it…_
DiggerUK. Scotland does not need a substantial majority for independence. Anything above 50% will secure it – 50.00001 no problem; leaves the unionists with 49.00009 which of course will be printed in the newspapers as 51 – 49.
“Anything above 50% will secure it – 50.00001 no problem; leaves the unionists with 49.00009 which of course will be printed in the newspapers as 51 – 49.”
=======
On 50.00001 the unionists are NOT left with 49.00009 but with 49.99999. Only The Grauniad might publish your 51-49. Others, more accurately, would print 50-50.
@terence callachan,
If you think it wise to declare an independent country, state, or nation, on 50% +1, then you are foolish. It would be legal, but crass stupidity in my view.
People need to feel a sense of justice in their life, it simply won’t work if you turn round and tell the 50% -1, to just like it or lump it. You run the risk of civil unrest on a scale that wouldn’t rise to the level of a pyrrhic victory…_
“ If you think it wise to declare an independent country, state, or nation, on 50% +1, then you are foolish. ”
========
I never argued that proposition.
I see you have discovered safety in (whole) numbers but have you learned to count yet?
It’s over, get over it, shut up and eat your porridge, don’t give the Unionists ammunition, the membership voted for Yousaf, it was a vote who cares if it was fair?
Slap slap, ooohh errr, sorry about that, I thought I was an apparatchik chick.
Vote Green and if not, vote SNP, it comes to the same thing.
The Greens have signed up for Nato, warmongering and therefore loyalty to the dollar Empire. I now have nobody to vote for.
Bramble, like everyone else that votes, vote for the one that is closest to what you want.
If you are saying none are close to what you want
You were never a voter with a grip on reality.
No political party will ever give you all the things you believe in.
I suspect you came here to moan.
“If you are saying none are close to what you want
You were never a voter with a grip on reality.”
Why’s that then?
What’s the status of Stewart McDonald’s hacked phone contents? Is anybody going to publish relevant extracts?
His choice of Shona Robison as finance secretary ended hope of a ‘radical’ Yousaf. Shona’s a lady who says that issues like tax, size of the state, monetary policy and bank regulation are ‘not relevant’ to tackling poverty.
What I find truly amazing is the fact that a self-declared enemy of the SNP has such comprehensive insights into the inner workings of the SNP and the mindsets of so many leading SNP figures.
On just about any other issue, Mr Murray, you are clear-headed and factual. When it comes to Scottish independence, and the SNP, your rejection as an SNP candidate has curdled your intellect to the point where fair and independent observers could (and should) declare “You’re full of shite”.
Now, away back to your wee cabal of Alba plotters and try again….
“Alba should stand against the SNP” … Jesus Wept!!!
As Einstein is reputed to have said… “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results”
2021 Alba voting percentage – 1.66%
2022 Alba voting percentage – 0.7%
But hey!! If you expect a different result next time, fill yer boots!
Misattributed to Einstein afaik. Here’s another famous quote:
Sometimes the majority just means all the fools are on the same side.
– John Kennedy
I was a member of the SNP for 36 years. I left two years ago and joined Alba.
The SNP as the party of independence no longer exists. The SNP no longer exists.
I still support Scottish independence.
In terms of agency theory, which describes how a business can be taken over by those (their agents) that its owners (the shareholders), put in place to manage the ‘business’, such that the aims of the owners are subverted by their agents (managers, staff), the SNP’s present predicament can be very well explained.
This is before we even consider subversion by agents of the British state – which has undoubtedly occurred too.
In the case of the SNP the aim of the owners (members and voters) – Scottish independence – has been superseded by those of its agents/representatives (CEO, head office, SPADS MPs MSPs).
The prime and only purpose of the SNP – Independence – is now nothing more than an “aspiration”.
The interests of the ‘agents’ – salaries, careers, pensions etc have now superseded the primary – indeed the only aim of the owners of the SNP – independence. They also have an additional line in promoting so-called ‘progressive’ policies – which as Craig has pointed out fail to be progressive for the poor and dispossessed
The party now exists only as a vehicle for the interests and preferences of its agents.
This was always the danger of the parliamentary route to independence – which in my view is a chimera.
To a great extent the SNP is the victim of its own (electoral) success – and that success in turn, was to a huge extent the accomplishment of its greatest ever leader – Alex Salmond. It now resembles nothing as much as the old, corrupt Scottish branch of the Labour Party.
Salmond in turn, in the deepest of ironies, was an even greater victim of the agents of the SNP – who sought to destroy him – and might well have succeeded in doing so.
I think this article by Craig Murray is a very useful, well-observed and accurate description of recent events.
I suspect many of those making ad hominem attacks on its author are among those who have benefited from the demise of the SNP – the agents who have taken over.
“This is before we even consider subversion by agents of the British state – which has undoubtedly occurred too.”
=======
That may have been so but, I suspect, to a lesser degree than its capability. As Napoleon said, “why interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake?”
John O’Dowd
This “agency theory” sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. Perhaps the agents of the British State you speak of might have heard about this “agency theory” and decided it was just the ticket. A band of such agents could be nurtured by elements of the British State without most of the members of such a band being aware of it.
A description of Agency Theory;
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/esg/agency-theory/
I notice that the LibDems, nuLabour and now the SNP all seem to have gone down the same path/plughole.
If Forbes was so heavily mauled over her religious beliefs and the GRA etc, how in the name of the wee man did Humza get off scot free? As a practicing Muslim, his views on the GRA should be even more anti than hers.
Hollyrood has become party of the gravy train – full of career politicians who do not wish to part with the goose that lays the golden eggs.
Meanwile, popcorn at the ready to watch the rise of Brics and Opec+ and the fall of the Hegemon.
Alex Birinie.
I think it was very recent Survation poll, or was it John Curtice, who agreed that Alba will gain at least four MSPs come 2026. I personally think it will be more. I also expect defections form the SNP to Alba once Alba gets a foothold in the chamber.
First up though is the next GE where the SNP troughers bar one or two need removing, such as twenty-years troughing Pete Wishart, who has done zero to further the cause. Get the right people in and the cry for indy will shoot well past 50%.
Alex Birnie, you don’t know what you are talking about.
I was a voter when Gordon Wilson, who Mr Murray mentions here, won the seat in Angus for snp – the only seat for snp.
From small beginnings, eh?
If you’re old enough to remember, or read the correct info.
What *I* find not remotely amazing is that what in your post could generously described as an attempt at a point, having waded through so much bile to eventually arrive at it, is so utterly imbecilic as to leave fair and independent observers wondering how you ever learned to tie your shoelaces.
Presumably once any party wins two successive elections they should be done away with altogether, and that party installed as rulers in perpetuity, because clearly it would be “madness” to ever expect a different result in future.
Alex: I’m old enough to remember when they said the same thing about the SNP.
Make up your mind. Is Yousaf breaking up the UK or isn’t he? If he is breaking up the UK, then you disagree with Craig Murray. If you agree with Craig Murray, then he isn’t breaking up the UK
All predictions are from the current position. None of us have the powers of prophecy. Yousaf will likely be overcome by events dear boy. Wee Peter going to jail? The alphabet witches losing their anonymity? Another unknown unknown.
The wholly inappropriate official HQ backing from the get-go for Yousaf, hardly casts the SNP staffers or the Sturrells in a positive light.
Did the hugely controversial Peter Murrell wait until he knew a Yousaf’s victory was in the bag before finally quitting? The fact they inexplicably wouldn’t allow people to change their online votes, right up to the close of voting, adds credence to the theory that the result was already finalised. Basic changes to the methodology could have allowed people to change their vote and opt to keep a record, allowing for an independent audit. Trust, but verify, isn’t paranoia, it’s about fairness and being sensible.
The way the contest was run with such blatantly obvious HQ and Sturgeon favouritism, leaves a bitter anti-democratic taste. And raises fundamental questions as to whether the SNP are fit and proper people to run an independent nation.
Vivian oblivion, I agree with you
The Scottish legal system is comprehensively corrupt. That’s not SNP’s fault. It’s just the way it is.
For the alphabet witches to be exposed would need fundamental changes to the structure of the Crown Office. The Lord Advocate is a political appointee and a Cabinet Minister. A flunkey of the Prime Minister before devolution and now a flunkey of the First Minister. That needs to be changed.
The thoroughly rotten trial of the two innocent Libyan guys predated devolution by several years and illustrates how profoundly stinky the Scottish legal system has become. It was only the jury system which prevented a similar miscarriage of justice in the Salmond case. It was the absence of a jury trial which convicted Craig Murray.
We need to depoliticise the courts and the police.
Any party when it becomes successful enough will turn on itself. But the trans rights seems almost purpose designed to divide support, if it was then it’s done its job. If people really do vote for Alba in significant numbers then the Indy vote will be split and Labour/Tory politicians will again become dominant. Some years back Labour were reminded that every vote is a tactical vote, as soon as a viable alternative arose (SNP that had already built sufficient support) voters abandoned a party that had abandoned them many years earlier. And now they are third place in Scottish politics.
No politician in Scotland is ever going to hold a referendum not okay’d by Westminster, likewise they will never declare independence. I’m not saying this is right but it’s simply the way it is. When support for independence is embarrassingly high then this might force UK’s hand. But this would require an actual campaign to raise support – something SNP seem unwilling to do.
Not really a risk under the proportional system used for Holyrood – splits are only really fatal under FPTP. As the UK establishment know all too well.
A wiser voting, pro-inde Scottish electorate could’ve used the system to lock out the unionist parties creating a much stronger, almost near unstoppable, united front for independence. The great missed opportunity was in the SNP’s silly, selfish factionalism; greedily urging supporters give them both the constituency and list vote (#BothVotesSNP) despite the diminishing returns. The SNP know being so anti-Alba just opens the door to the unionists too. If the SNP were serious about independence they’d concentrate fire on the three unionist parties, and cooperate more with Alba. The SNP supposedly exist to achieve independence, not for the sake of the SNP.
With Sturgeon gone and the acrimonious Salmond vendetta stuff gone with her, Yousaf would be wise to reevaluate the SNP’s position on Alba relations. If he’s serious about independence, wiser voting can make achieving independence easier. They share much more in common than say the Greens.
I agree that, looking back, a more effective wedge issue could have hardly been devised to derail the independence movement. Was that the intent all along? It seems difficult to say.
With regard to Goose’s point above, the chasm on gender reform positions between Alba and the SNP (both under Sturgeon and now Humza) seems like a profound political impediment to cooperation.
El Dee
” the trans rights seems almost purpose designed to divide support, if it was then it’s done its job.”
Yeah.
On the contrary, bringing in Cyberdyne Industries to oversee cyber security would tell us much more about the ‘metality’ of Sturgeon and Murrell, though it would not tell us what models of Terminator they were alleged to be.
Sorry, this is utter hogwash. I’m one of the 9763. I voted for Humza because I thought he was the best candidate of the 3 – I did not put a preference for 2nd or 3rd as I believed, and still believe that they should both have been expelled from the party for bringing the party into disrepute. When the fascist puppet in Downing St gleefully uses the words of a candidate (at PMQs) against the party and the Scottish Government, sorry, time to go. My vote had nothing, absolutely nothing to do with gender reform, not in any way, shape or form. Surprised at you Craig, I expect better.
That’s interesting Derek. But does it not therefore trouble you that 52% of voting members gave their votes to people you believe should be expelled from the party? Do you not see a problem there?
You say that your vote had nothing to do with gender reform. So I think it is fair to ask you which of the candidates’ positions on gender reform is closest to your own view? That would potentially prove your contention.
I don’t give a flying fig (only not fig) one way or the other Craig. Live and let live. That both of these candidates brought the party into disrepute is, to my mind, indisputable. Sunak was positively beaming as he repeated Kate Forbes’ lie that the trains never ran on time and the health service was in crisis (as, unfortunately, a regular user, it’s not.) As for the suggestion that I am not interested in Scottish independence, just fig off (only not fig.) I could attempt to point out the number of countries that seem to trundle on with gender reform without hordes of (obviously) trans males fighting each other to get into women’s “safe” spaces, but that way lies madness apparently. We’ve been played like a fiddle, aye, fling them some religion and some genitalia, that’ll keep ’em busy squabbling with each other. Pathetic.
“Sorry, this is utter hogwash. I’m one of the 9763. I voted for Humza because I thought he was the best candidate of the 3 ”
Derek Thomson
If true then you are not interested in Scottish independence, for Yousaf HAD NO PLAN for Scottish independence.
It is a long time since the name of a political party had any relevance to its beliefs or policies.
“they should both have been expelled from the party for bringing the party into disrepute.”
Seriously? No wonder people are leaving in droves with nonsense like this. They didn’t bring the Party into disrepute. They committed the cardinal sin of having a different view. That’s what the SNP has become and shame on people like you for going along with it.
120 desertions per day and they wonder why!!!
Yes, seriously. You hand our enemies direct ammunition to use against us (and it was lies, remember that) and there is no place for you in the party. I make no apologies for this.
You clearly miss who the real enemies are, as we’ve seen lately with the absolute lies that were exposed about membership numbers and sending their PR man out to lie to his own former press colleagues and accuse them of talking rubbish. He was humiliated by that and rightly stood down. THEY did that to him. It was Regan and Forbes who demanded answers on the numbers. They were right and they told no lies there.
The other lie was that it would be a fair election yet Yousaf was able to tell the press he knew he was “significantly” in the lead. People like YOU are the problem if you want a Party that demands that everyone thinks and says the same things. There’s a name for that! I don’t expect any apologies from you. You’re welcome to your views but the damage done out here is severe and likely to get worse and, fortunately, you can’t force anyone to follow your own example.
I know exactly who my enemies are Sadscot. I need no reminding. That is exactly why party discipline is absolutely essential. The membership numbers issue was an embarrassment, but ultimately an irrelevance. It’s good that you don’t expect an apology from me, as I have none to make. I would never dream of forcing anyone to follow my example, although Scotland would be better off if they did. 🙂
Gender reform was, perhaps, not on your radar? If not, are you perfectly sanguine about the female population losing their spaces and rights to men who claim they are women? Is independence worth betraying the entire female population for?
There is very little that I’m perfectly sanguine about these days Lorncal. As for “betraying the entire female population”, I’m afraid I must revert to my original word when describing Craig’s article – hogwash. All about opinions though.
“What do you think?” – Do Both? You are best when you write as you feel.
Humza has sold his soul. Obvious if only from his cabinet choices compared to his “one camp now” BS after the vote.
The whole strategic objective is capture of all relevant (i.e. potentially threatening) groups. E.g. Labour are fully captured (and anointed successors) in the UK and this management change, plus consequent loss of popularity, will help Labour in the next Westminster election.
I predict Humza will not be permitted to make many unauthorized noises; they probably have some things on him. He will be slapped into maintaining message. Step 1 is widespread trolling about a series of negative narratives in the (fully captured) MS media; if that doesn’t work, a more blunt conversation illustrated with photographic or whatever evidence.
We Brits have been simmered gently to the boil; put a fork in us.
You have to say the French public have more cojones than us these days.
I think the blog piece is quite optimistic, and sensibly clarifies that a dislike of how Yousaf was effectively ‘anointed’ shouldn’t lead to acts of profound electoral self-sabotage by independence supporters.
Sarwar and Starmer – the realistic alternatives – aren’t exactly politically attractive, so the unionist threat can and should be be contained. And Tory support is hardly growing.
The point being, Humza doesn’t need to fail or be a disaster, not at all. It’s up to him and largely dependent on how he performs. He’s free to be his own man and he shouldn’t allow Sturgeon to direct from the backseat. The 2014 – 2023 political inertia she got away, won’t work for him. She should be ignored and he should try to radically renew enthusiasm for the party and the cause.
It tells us all we need to know that only 11.1% of the SNP membership voted for the only candidate (Ash Regan) with a viable plan for independence. The other two candidates didn’t have a plan for indy except to ask for a S30. Mind you with GCHQ’s input we’ll never really know how many votes Ash Regan got. Even the Britnat media in Scotland did their best to ignore her; it reminded me of a lighter version of the disgusting smear campaign against Jeremy Corbyn
I have nothing good to say about Sturgeon/Murrells puppet Yousaf, he’s been a failure in every post he’s had from transport to justice to health, apparently his only redeeming feature is that he’s willing to be a puppet and keeper of Sturgeon and Murrell’s dirty secrets, and he’s willing to bow to the Greens and spent whatever amount of taxpayers cash is necessary to challenge the S35, when the majority of the Scottish public don’t want it.
His cabinet is full acolytes and troughers and dolts, its definitely the continuity cabinet, getting back to the deceitful and clandestine leadership contest, Murrell inviting in the enemy of Scottish independence GCHQ to oversee (interfere and help fix more like) the “campaign” should’ve saw that disgraceful decision stop the contest in its tracks, inviting in GCHQ is in my opinion unforgivable.
The SNP needs to be destroyed. It’s stopping the natural progression to independence. There’s really no other way, and the few half-decent MSPs that are left at Holyrood need to decide whether to stay in and sit on their hands or move over to the Alba party that some polls forecast will obtain seats come the 2026 Holyrood elections.
Sturgeon may have left Bute House and Murrell has stood down, but they still hold sway over the party.
please do publish your thoughts craig. even in short form
it is your ‘take’ on the world that is one of your biggest strenghts.
and for jumping off points to further discuss, they are also great to read.
the more discussion the better
Craig,
What you describe as the “short, snappy thoughts” you often posted on your blog, I found just as informative as the longer, more thoroughly worked (but less frequent) pieces you’re tending towards now.
I don’t use Twitter, so from a purely personal perspective, generally what I’ve experienced is a drastic reduction in content output from you.
Just thought I’d drop my tuppence worth in. Keep up the good work (in whatever format)! Atb
That’s A Fair point Glen…If one does not use Twitter
I use Twitter ..And it’s often the First place I go to when online..Exactly to see what Craig’s Tweets of the day are.
I’d agree that, not being on twitter, it’s a shame to miss out. I like Craig’s writing, am always happy to read his thoughts (whether I agree or not!), and don’t object to whether they arrive in long or short form. So, from a selfish standpoint, I’d be happier if he posted them here than on twitter.
RogerD….
The Twitter Feeds are But a Couple of sentences .. No Place Here I think.
“The horrible Islamophobia this has attracted – almost entirely from unionists.”
I’m sorry, I can’t agree with that statement. Yousaf’s attacks on Forbes on the sole grounds of her religious beliefs spoke volumes about the anti-Christian “phobia” in this contest. On day one his lackey, Gray, announced publicly that Forbes could not be “trusted” because of her religious beliefs. She was demonised to the extent that three Scottish churches publicly expressed serious concerns about what was going on. That was appalling.
Yousaf constantly repeated that message throughout the hustings, that Forbes wasn’t to be trusted. It upset many, many people and offended them deeply. Further, all that talk about “no religion in politics”? What was his first move when he made it to Bute House, a government building? To “share” photos with the media of his family praying together in one of the main rooms. I’m trying to imagine the reaction to Forbes doing something similar had she won. There would have been an absolute meltdown from the usual suspects who had gone after Forbes, including Yousaf AND the media, yet the media were happy to publish the photos and there wasn’t a cheep from any of them.
The whole debacle has been so shocking that I can’t believe you have anything good to say about him, Craig. The man is a liar, a bare-faced liar. He adopted the filthiest tactics. He constantly talked down to the two female candidates and patronised them. He talked over them. Finally, he sent out an absolute lie about Forbes’ reasons for not wishing to take up a post. She wanted “out of the spotlight” and “more family time”. Robison was happy to carry the lie on to a BBC Radio Scotland interview and repeat it. Gray was happy to spin the same lie. Forbes made it clear at the weekend that none of it was true and made the reasonable point that if it was a quieter life she wanted she would never have run for the leadership post. Some of us had worked that one out, but obviously Yousaf isn’t as bright as you suggest he is, Craig, because that thought hadn’t occurred to him!
Oh so absolutely 100% true. Forbes was mauled for having the wrong religion while Humza was celebrated for having the right one because it fits the so right on world view of the paid political elites. He certainly has a talent and it’s for knowing how to work those folk. She was a breath of fresh air and more in tune with working class Scots. She is not a liar. She has a deep moral commitment to tackling poverty but understands the need to grow the economy to pay for it. It’s tragic, the economic illiteracy amongst this “progressive” Green coalition is staggering. Meanwhile the economy will continue to tank whilst they outpour millions of words of bullshit advocating self ID.
“She has a deep moral commitment to tackling poverty”
Yet, like Yousaf and the wider SNP-UK State payroll she fails to comprehend what postcolonial theory tells us in this regard – which is that a colonial administration only serves to perpetuate the poverty of the native people, the extent of which is directly linked to and broadly equivalent to the territorial plunder the administration helps to facilitate; as Ministers of the Crown they can have no other purpose.
For a better understanding of what independence means and why it is necessary:
https://salvo-cor.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/THEORETICAL+CASE+FOR+SCOTTISH+INDEPENDENCE.pdf
Amen 10 thousand percent
Well made point about identity politics can obscure general economic justice. What understanding of human diversity is that to be based on though?
I suppose muslim is an identity. Abrahamics. What do they think humans are though.
Saw a comment elsewhere by someone saying they’re intersex and their minority issues are getting lost in the trans wars.
Meanwhile women are waiting to feel safe. Incels waiting for sexual selection psychology to be addressed.
An excellent article with much food for thought, Craig.
Maybe we’re grasping at straws, but I too am hoping that Humza will be more radical on independence than expected.
Do you want to win? Then pick your best players. – Ash Regan, Kate Forbes, Michelle Thomson, Ivan McKee have not been selected.
What does that mean? That the manager is unable to identify talent? Or is insecure about being able to manage talented people? Or is he no more than a puppet? A puppet? Why else was Yousef provided with so much assistance from the SNP hierarchy?
Kate Forbes and Ivan McKee were offered positions in the team – reminds me when as 12 year old our team manager said I was to play left back instead of my usual inside forward position – ” Playing football means playing left back, I’m not playing football” was my reply. I never did play left back.
If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck – the hierarchy assistance to Yousef, the Yousef supportive appointed attendees at the hustings, the assault on Kate Forbes religious beliefs, but not Yousef’s? Have any of you lived/worked in a Muslim-faith country? I have, in several, I’ll refrain from expressing my experiences.
Naw, the election looks like a fix is my view, Yousef has no validity as a First Minister.
Ahhh velofello ..then you are not a team player, are you?
The manager picks the team, not the left back or the inside forward.
Sometimes you have to play the position that strengthens the team best, which may mean accommodating others in the place you covet.
Yup, I paddle my own canoe Terence, I’m no camp-follower. As I realised what was happening to the SNP around 2016 I quit, after a lifetime of only ever voting SNP.
Craig, You write that, “Humza, in reality, is both talented and bright”, and then go on to provide a great deal of evidence that he appears to be anything but.
My concern is that the election of this person has set back the cause of Scottish independence markedly. Anyone who behaves as childishly, as churlishly and predictably as Yousaf will be very easy for the entitled mafia in Westminster to handle and, of course, provide endless opportunity for the media to play with.
I am not encouraged, sadly.
re the brief question: Twitter is such a pigsty and I find it hard to go there just to see what you are tweeting about. Nothing wrong with double-posting some of the more profound tweets here, even just copy/paste
As someone who isn’t from Britain, let me see if I’ve got this straight. A First Minister who:
a) Was not elected by the majority of the (non-compensated) SNP;
b) Belongs to a minority religion;
c) Belongs to a minority ethnicity; and
d) Campaigned on protecting the rights of a tiny minority (trans)…
…is somehow democracy?
I got bad news, people in Scotland. You’re yoked to the empire forever. Enjoy your whiskey and Burns Nights because that’s all you will ever have.
Scots drink whisky not whiskey. If you can’t get the simple things right, your opinion isn’t worth a beremeal bannock.
Sorry Bob, but from a distance it looks like that.
Not that Scotland is an exception as most of the West has been WEFfed: full with groomed and compromised muppets who had great PR potential who $ky rocket into prominence at the right moment.
I’m not sure I follow this logic. A minority candidate shouldn’t be able to get elected in a functioning democracy? Is that really what you’re arguing?
Most of the SNP selected votership were cajolled by the media and their party machine to make Humza their first preference. That this resulted in a 52-48 vote split will mean that many more will leave who, like velofello, have given half their life and more to the idea/hope that one day Independence will be prepared for.
I’m not Scottish but such a noble cause and just development, when faced with being robbed of resources for decades, when being pummelled by a bully who thinks that this is just another colony, conveniently at one’s doorstep, to be exploited and kept down by a bowler-headed union that is no such thing.
Look over the water and see how Stormont was highjacked by jackbooted unionists who could not fathom that they have lost, could not be governed by a republican party head. What makes people think that only one way is the right way to gain Independence?
I do not know, but the writing on the wall next door spells it out.
The media is now an integral part of the security services that do not work for democracy or strive to service the country. They are at all times enabling a self-anointing elite/establishment and what keeps them in charge, judicially and with the force of their police.
Time has come to develop a twin approach to Independence.
Very Well Said Nevermind… I admire your Courage and Faith in Us..
Hope to see yous at Doune
A wee Haiku I wrote the Just yesterday –
Submerged Monsters Hide
Weapons of Mass Genocide
Out there on My Clyde
thanks for the appropriate and timely Haiku, Brian. One can only hope that one day you will see modern catamaran ferries on their way to the Scottish isles, rather than submerged monsters that sneak in to renew their deadly arsenal.
return Haiku: yes we will enjoy a pint at Doune soon.
Looking Forward to it …
From a Samurai Page I follow –
“Nature’s Embrace”
A warrior wanders alone,
In the old forest grown,
A life spent fighting through,
Peaceful end, but oh so few.
Nature’s embrace his final home,
Mind released, no more to roam,
Lonely but serene he lies,
Underneath the open skies.
The forest whispers soft and low,
Stories of battles long ago,
A warrior’s spirit now at rest,
Amidst the trees, forever blessed.
I’d prefer to see the short frequent “twitter” thoughts on here also Craig. I don’t know what your readership is for the longer blog posts, but my guess is that (because of an increased visit frequency for the short stuff) that long-form readership would increase. Good post on Yousaf – the early days, he needs to be given a bit of time and a wee bit more rope, but already hearing is as bent as a £4 note as befits a true continuity candidate.
Robin McAlpine claims to know the identities of the “rebel 15 MSPs” touted by the Herald on Sunday.
Not entirely composed of the usual suspects. Includes individuals who committed to Yousaf at the start of the truncated election process (this seems an arithmetic certainty as so few MSPs commented to Kate or Ash). Does this speak of ideological disenchantment, strategic disagreement or broken career promises?
Tantalisingly Robin suggests the 15 are a core group and others are “adjacent”.
The 15 hold a diverse range of political positions / grievances.
Robin theorises that the common thread that binds them is rejection of the centralisation of democratic power around the office of the leader.
Yousaf has embarked on a road that is difficult to deviate from. Actions speak louder than words. Even if Yousaf recognises his early strategic blunder, any promise to reinstate the “broad tent” will echo hollow with those already spurned.
Yousaf and the toxic Greens are permanently bound in an asymmetric relationship where the tail wags the dog.
All is set to unravel as the payroll read the portents and see imminent unemployment looming.
Since Justice Secretary Pontius Yousaf processed the committal of A Salmond and C Murray to the shenanigans of the office of Unionist Lord Advocate,
Let’s be prepared for plus ça change, plus c’est la same show.
As long as you know, as I do about myself, that the lies fed to Asians by the security services about opponents of the British Establishment are 100% politically motivated lies, its well understandable that they don’t volunteer to take your side..
Ah come on sir! You surely write with tongue in cheek.
“ Unlike Sturgeon, Humza is not a natural NATO hawk nor supporter of United States’ neo-Imperialism.
Humza unequivocally declared himself a republican and in favour of a non-monarchical Independent Scotland, again marking out a far more radical approach than Sturgeon.”
He wouldn’t have been chosen without PV in the first place. It is the same play as with Sunak/Javid/Braverman faces in Westminster – designed to play on the diaspora at home and influence geopolitics on the subcontinent. It won’t work. Both Pakistan and India are walking the multipolar walk away from centuries of mental domination.
As for his posturing on Palestine – let’s see a single concrete immediate action.
Like Meloni in Italy all the pretend radicalness quickly evaporated into full on natzo flunkies.
There are plenty of Journalists and supposed politicians who claim to be socialist – but are as we all know merely playing their role in the fascist state, doing their bit in bridging the Red-Brown regime to that totalitarian Nazi regime devoid of any real choice and desire for true democracy or independence.
Doesn’t matter if they are Duplicitous Great Knight Dope Assange Gaoler, Starmer, the modern Brutus, or every shade of Liberal such as Clegg of Farcebook.
Hogging it up in their cushy jobs for their part in delivering Austerity and BrexShit or some service to the Imperium War Machine and every single mainstream Ken and Barbie from LauraKoftheCIA to the Cadwalladr Crew of the Groaniad to the bearded deepstate thug Sweeny, who like a true Irish Unionist betrays his Irish homeland to cheer on the English Crown in endless Imperial Wars.
I guess CM is a genuine diplomat and is capable of offering a fig leaf to Humza’s deluded supporters long suffering from Stockholm Syndrome under the destroyers of the SNP brand. We all know that election fixing got him the job and he would just as quickly put CM in jail as did Lady McNeepybeth.
Every single word of the quote from CM above will be pretty shortly reversed, including stabbing the long suffering Palestinians in the back like the good little Brutus he surely is.
That, funnily enough, is what gives me optimism, as the Indy-minded masses blink themselves awake from the mesmerisation of being hostages.
DunGroanin
You are right. Some are even still depicting Yousaf as a kind of socialist despite him having appointed Nicola’s neolib right hand as finance secretary. People like him do not get pushed to the top by interests like the Murrells & the Daily Record if they pose any threat of socialism, NATO scepticism or Scottish independence. Craig knows this intuitively but he is a good man as well as an optimist so is giving Yousaf an opportunity to defy all his sponsors & all logic.
He’ll be found out soon enough in that case. Therefore there’s little point in yet another anti-Humza hatchet job. SNP supporters will expect continued electoral success and a plan for independence. Without those Humza won’t last long.
Worth noting how he starts without the goodwill Sturgeon inherited as the natural, obvious successor to the then popular SNP leader and mentor, Alex Salmond. Salmond left to cheers in 2014, Sturgeon left to jeers. Humza hasn’t had the usual honeymoon bump in the polls either, as a result of her endorsement, which suggests her popularity was on the decline.
plunder and exploitation for decades past. Time for a twin track approach.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/a-liberation-salvo-special-broadcast/
Craig, you say above ‘Humza, in reality, is both talented and bright’.
But last June you said he was a dunce who could never aspire to attain mediocrity?
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2022/06/a-revolutionary-act/#:~:text=dunces