SCOT goes POP!
A pro-independence blog by James Kelly - voted one of Scotland's top 10 political websites.
Thursday, October 10, 2024
James Cleverly's elimination is the perfect illustration of what can go catastrophically wrong if you try to "game the voting system"
Wednesday, October 9, 2024
The Tories opt for a hard right turn - as they almost always do
Well, if you needed any evidence that the betting markets are not some sort of predictive God, or that sudden movements on them are not proof that punters have inside knowledge, here it is (yet again). Robert Jenrick dropped like a stone on the markets earlier, probably on the logic that James Cleverly had enormous momentum behind him after his performance at the party conference (and in yesterday's ballot), and that Jenrick supporters would defect to Badenoch to stop Cleverly. That actually was a reasonable enough assumption, but it hasn't happened.
Robert Jenrick 41
Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Crossover nears: Labour's GB-wide lead over the Tories cut to just one point
The batch of three GB-wide polls that I mentioned the other day were ominous for Starmer, because they showed Labour had lower percentage support than under Jeremy Corbyn in the crushing 2019 defeat. But at least they still showed Labour in the 30s, and with a cushion of sorts over the Tories. Neither of those things are true in the new More In Common poll, which has the worst results for Labour in years and years.
More In Common GB-wide poll:
Monday, October 7, 2024
"We are SO disappointed in you, Keir and Anas": Scots voters say they expected Labour to behave better
Netanyahu fans on Twitter claim with a straight face that they might have voted Alba if it hadn't been for me. If I've single-handedly cost Alba the pro-genocide vote, my humblest apologies.
There are numerous ironies to my potential forthcoming expulsion from the Alba Party, which if it happens will ultimately be due to a blogpost I wrote in April arguing for democratisation of the party's internal structures - something which the leadership were seemingly more hellbent on thwarting than I could ever have dreamed possible. Many of those ironies relate to Alba's scathing reaction to disciplinary action that the SNP has taken against its own members - for example, Fergus Ewing's one-week suspension from the SNP parliamentary group. However unjustifiable the action against Mr Ewing was, and I do believe it was wholly wrong, a one-week suspension plainly pales into insignificance compared to the draconian action taken against numerous Alba members recently, including expulsions and lengthy suspensions. I myself have already been suspended from the party for longer than one week without even having faced a disciplinary hearing yet, and that's been purely at the arbitrary whim of one man - Chris McEleny.
However, as far as the ironies were concerned, nothing could have prepared me for what happened last night. I got into an exchange with Nicole Lampert, a London-based "journalist" specialising in pro-Israel propaganda and genocide apologism. She was going off on one about the fact that a pro-Palestinian counter-demonstration was audible during what she described as a "vigil" in Glasgow to "mourn the dead" of October 7th last year. "Give us 24 hours to mourn our dead in peace!" she histrionically demanded. My question to her was whether pro-Israel counter-protests should be banned for the next year to allow Palestinians to mourn their dead in peace, because of course almost every day for the next year will be the first anniversary of atrocities committed by Israel.
She then claimed that the pro-Palestinian protesters in Glasgow had been shouting anti-Semitic language, which left her on fairly weak ground, because she had already posted what she clearly regarded as a "damning video", and yet all that could be heard in that video were the familiar slogans "from the river to the sea" (which cannot be anti-Semitic because Netanyahu has used it at press conferences) and "free free Palestine" (which is perfectly consistent with support for Palestinian freedom in the context of a two-state solution). Oh no, that wasn't what she was talking about, she clarified. She was instead talking about anti-Semitic language that couldn't be heard in the video. She alleged that "Scottish Jews" had been called "genocidal scum and baby-killers". Did I think that was acceptable, she demanded to know.
I pointed out that she had supplied zero evidence of that language having been used, and also that even if she could find any evidence of it, she would have to establish that it was actually being directed at "Scottish Jews" rather than at the genocidal Israeli government - because of course if it was the latter, the language used would not only be acceptable but entirely accurate. That was the final straw for her - unable to grasp any distinction between Scottish Jews and Benjamin Netanyahu, she hilariously 'reported' me to Chris McEleny and Neale Hanvey, having noticed on my Twitter profile that I'm an elected member of three Alba committees. "You and I have our differences on Israel/Palestine but this guy claims to be one of your lot and SURELY THIS CAN'T BE ALBA POLICY!!!!" she screamed.
Desperately trying to keep a straight face, I explained the irony of her reporting me to someone who already has me suspended from the party, albeit for radically different reasons from the ones she might approve of. But over the next few hours, Ms Lampert was followed by at least four pro-Netanyahu accounts all claiming earnestly to have seriously considered voting Alba but declaring that THEY WOULD NEVER DO IT NOW BECAUSE OF THE VIEWS OF THAT BASTARD JAMES KELLY, THE ALBA COMMITTEE MEMBER. By that stage, I didn't even bother pointing out the comical irony of them saying that about someone who is suspended from the Alba Party, because there comes a point where all you can do is step back and quietly marvel at the sheer absurdity of a situation.
I must say I had no idea there was such a potential groundswell for Alba among pro-genocide voters (didn't they think to check party policy?), and if I've single-handedly managed to screw that up in what may be my last few days as a party member, what can I say. I'm so, so sorry, guys.
So were the pro-Palestinian protesters right to audibly disrupt the Glasgow "vigil"? I probably wouldn't have advised it, but there again you have to take into account what the true nature of the event was. Jackson Carlaw posted a photo of himself making a speech at the "vigil", in which he apparently argued strongly against any end to Israel's genocidal actions until the hostages are released. The fact that a right-wing politician was even invited to make such a speech suggests that there may have been an agenda that went a lot further than simply "mourning the dead".
Sunday, October 6, 2024
Tory MPs may have to *act* Cleverly to *stop* Cleverly
What I'm about to say will to some extent contradict my previous post, because looking at the latest Tory members' poll from ConHome, I really do struggle to see why Robert Jenrick is still favourite to win the leadership contest. (And as of this moment he is still favourite - I've just checked.)
There's going to be a head-to-head members' ballot between just two candidates, and regardless of whether he is up against Kemi Badenoch or James Cleverly, the poll shows Jenrick losing by a wide margin.
Jenrick v Badenoch
The message from Britain-wide opinion polls is consistent - Labour now have less support than they did in 2019 when they were heavily defeated under Jeremy Corbyn
Friday, October 4, 2024
More analysis of the Dundee by-elections
Dundee DEVASTATION for Sarwar as SNP humiliate Labour TWICE in by-election double-header - they don't call it Bash Street for nothing
Strathmartine by-election result, first preferences (3rd October 2024):
Thursday, October 3, 2024
Britain's "Little Empire of Leftovers" is gradually breaking up - and it would be naive of unionists to think that Scotland is immune to the process
I suspect that when Hong Kong reverted to Chinese sovereignty in 1997, the UK assumed that its remaining "Little Empire of Leftovers" would be its to keep in perpetuity, because the territories that were left had either fiercely pro-British populations (as in the case of the Falkland Islands and Gibraltar), or were too geographically remote for other countries to plausibly stake a claim on them and too small to be plausible contenders for full independence (as in the case of Pitcairn). Well, the handing over of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, albeit with all the imperfections of a 99-year lease back to the UK and US of Diego Garcia, is a massive jolt to that complacency, because the UK has been forced to this point by a brilliant diplomatic campaign by the government of Mauritius. It's entirely possible to see how that could be a model for picking off some of the other UK overseas dependencies.
Next in line is surely Cyprus, which is the most comparable to the Chagos situation, because the UK simply decided to confiscate 4% of Cypriot territory as a condition for the country becoming independent. The military bases on that retained territory have seemingly been used recently to assist Israel in its genocidal campaign in Gaza. The precedent of Diego Garcia surely means that those bases must revert to Cypriot sovereignty and any continued UK military presence there would only be acceptable as the result of an agreed settlement.
I've never taken the view that Spain has a legitimate claim on Gibraltar or that Argentina has a legitimate claim on the Falklands. Both territories have stable populations which have exactly the same right to self-determination as the people of Scotland, and they have exercised that right by decisively rejecting Spanish and Argentinian rule. But I do think in time those populations, probably starting with Gibraltar, may come to see the value of essentially keeping their current system but changing the title deeds, ie. becoming nominally independent but entering into a free association agreement with the UK to allow London to continue controlling their foreign affairs and defence. That would demonstrate to the world that decolonisation has occurred and make them masters of their own house. In the case of Gibraltar it would require Spanish cooperation to circumvent the provisions of the Treaty of Utrecht, but one day there might be a Spanish government with the foresight to realise that decolonisation of Gibraltar is actually in Spanish interests.
In the case of the small Caribbean dependencies, the increasing development of pan-Caribbean governance structures may eventually provide the architecture that would make it viable to shake off the London link.
Meanwhile, there are also broader "Little Empires", covering the independent states where King Charles is still monarch, or where the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council still has jurisdiction as the final court of appeal. Both of those empires are continuing to contract, with Barbados recently becoming a republic, and Saint Lucia becoming the latest country to abolish Privy Council jurisdiction last year. It's surely only a matter of time before Australia and Jamaica adopt home-grown heads of state, which will probably lead to others following their example.
The tide of history is only moving in one direction, and it would be naive of unionists to think Scotland is immune to it. I remember in my childhood hearing Alan Whicker talk about the upcoming Hong Kong handover. He said "when the sun sets on the British Empire, it'll set over Kowloon Harbour". But actually when it really sets, it may be over the cliffs of St Kilda.