I know there are some readers of this blog who are either members or supporters of the SNP, but who live in other parts of the UK. So which parties will you be voting for on May 7th? Nicola Sturgeon suggested that people in England might want to consider voting Green, or for individual Labour candidates who have proved themselves to be on the progressive wing of the party. Speaking personally, I wouldn't vote Labour if I was in England, irrespective of the candidate, because the Neanderthal attitudes towards Scotland run too deep within Ed Miliband's party, and afflict even those who are the voice of reason on every other topic.
The Guardian made a heroic effort the other week to suggest that those in England impressed by Nicola Sturgeon ought to vote Labour in order to maximise the chances of the SNP holding influence. For the avoidance of doubt, that's complete drivel - a vote for Labour is just as likely to take Miliband to the point where he can govern without the SNP's help (probably in coalition with the Liberal Democrats).
So what are the attractive options in the rest of the UK for a typical SNP sympathiser? Let's start with the easy ones, and then work down to the more problematical possibilities.
Plaid Cymru : Left-of-centre, anti-austerity. Sister party of the SNP, and former junior coalition partner in the Welsh Government. In favour of enhanced devolution for Wales, and of full independence as a longer-term objective. Also very supportive of Scottish independence, and many members came north to work for the Yes campaign. Held three Westminster seats at dissolution, and should have a decent chance of adding Ynys Môn and Ceredigion, both of which were previously Plaid-held for long spells.
Mebyon Kernow : Left-of-centre, anti-austerity. Sister party of the SNP. In favour of substantial devolution to a Cornish Assembly, and would doubtless be an ally of the SNP in decentralising power throughout the UK. No realistic prospect of winning a seat this time around, but a serious party which has several local councillors.
Green Party of England and Wales : Left-of-centre, anti-austerity. Natalie Bennett proudly noted that the Greens were the only major English party to support a Yes vote at last year's Scottish independence referendum, and she visited Scotland personally to campaign. They held one Westminster seat at dissolution, and may have an outside chance of gaining one or two more.
Yorkshire First : Technically a sister party of the SNP, because it's just become an observer member of the European Free Alliance - and it's the first EFA member party in the UK from outside the 'Celtic Fringe'. Unlike Plaid and Mebyon Kernow, though, it doesn't identify as left-wing, but as centrist. Supports Scottish or Welsh style devolution for Yorkshire. If I lived in that part of the world, I would probably be torn between the Greens' lefty-ness, and Yorkshire First's emphasis on constitutional reform.
North-East Party : No affiliation to the European Free Alliance (not yet, anyway), but in every other respect appears to be very similar to Yorkshire First. Supports devolution for the North-East of England.
Wessex Regionalists : Left-of-centre, pro-devolution. A kind of "Plaid for Wessex" that has been around for ages, but with very little success. They're standing against David Cameron in Witney.
SDLP : Left-of-centre, and in favour (at least in principle) of a united Ireland. On the face of it, should be a perfect fit for any SNP supporter, but they're a sister party of Labour, not the SNP. It's even sometimes been said that they "take the Labour whip at Westminster", although that never seems to have been a binding arrangement. They famously helped to bring down the Callaghan government in 1979 - but strangely Labour seemed to forgive their Irish comrades within a week, as opposed to the 36 years they've been nursing a grievance over the SNP doing exactly the same thing.
Sinn Féin : Left-wing, anti-austerity, and in favour of a united Ireland - but carries a huge amount of historical baggage.
* * *
UPDATE : I overlooked the Northern Party, which only launched last month and is standing candidates in Lancashire. Seems to be very similar to Yorkshire First and the North-East Party, and is calling for "devo max", no less.
Maybe I better not say what I did for the 25 years I lived in England, given the huge issue that voter registration has become over the last year or so.
ReplyDeleteYou know, this year is the first time in my life I've been looking at even the possibility of voting in a constituency where my party of choice might win. (Yes, just my luck, the constituency I've been in since 2007 is forecast to be one of the last few to fall to the SNP, depending on how high the tide rises.)
Hope for a political tsunami!
DeleteRolfe - exciting, isn't it? I've *never* been represented by an MP I voted for either. It's quite a feeling that my vote might count this time.
DeleteWhen Labour go on about not doing deals with a party which seeks to break up the UK why don't any journalists ask them about their relationship with the SDLP? Uniting Ireland, by definition, requires breaking up the UK.
ReplyDeleteThe one time I lived in Wales I voted PC. She would have left me if I didn't! :) What can I say she was a great cook and took real good care of me :)
ReplyDeleteMy sister lives in England in a constituency that is bluer than blue.
ReplyDeleteThere is a Monster Raving Loony Party candidate and she has had discussions with him. He is in hope of retaining his deposit this time - which would be a first . I think in such a constituency, it might be worthwhile to vote for the MRLP.
If the Westminster parties are rattled by SNP and the growth in Regional parties, just think what the effect of people voting for MRLP would do to them.
I thought any Loony retaining his or her deposit got expelled?
DeleteInterestingly, the roots of Loonyism (under Screaming Lord Sutch) was a left-influenced form of protest at the craziness of mainstream parties and the inequality their policies led to. These days it's become more of a general apolitical silliness (but I think there was a split in the MRLP some time back led by some guy who wanted to get back to more of the political edge and less of the ale drinking with UKIP)
Somewhere, on a computer other than the one I'm using to type this (so can't link to it), I have a download of the MRLP manifesto from a few elections ago. It was really pretty good, and if I'd ever lived in a constituency where they stood, I would seriously have considered them.
DeleteI was in England from late 2010 to 2013, in a lab/con marginal. (In fact a proper bellwether, having an mp from the governing party for something like five decades I think.) I was really torn in the local elections as my choice was labour, con, or not voting, and i don't like the idea of not voting at all. Had I stayed for this GE then I'd planned to vote Green if they managed to put up a candidate, but otherwise my options would have been Blue /red/yellow/purple Tory. You can see why voter turnout is so low.
ReplyDeleteTUSC would be another very viable option that I would suggest to the good folks in WENI (Wales, England & Northern Ireland).
ReplyDeletehttp://www.tusc.org.uk/home
TUSC might well become the left party of unity
DeleteI've lived in England for most of my life and, as an SNP member and a socialist, have a recurring problem with who to vote for.
DeleteLabour was acceptable until I realised how Blair had conned me. I have voted Green but they turned out to be more evangelical than political. I even tactically voted LibDem in 2010 to keep the Tories out. That worked out well!
I was delighted to see that TUSC was standing in my constituency this time round. Here is a Socialist, anti-austerity, pro-people party that resembles the Labour movement of old. They can only afford to put up 125 candidates in England and Wales and, if you can, I'd urge SNP members to look at squidgybridge's link, read their policies and think about voting for them.
TUSC are also standing in 10 Scottish seats where they might take a few votes of Labour people who are still socialists but not ready to vote SNP.
With regards to Sinn Féin, I have wondered if this time round they will be just a little bit tempted to abandon their policy of not taking their seats. The prospect of being part of a significant block of non-Establishment MPs might appeal to them.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, I believe that the requirement that MPs take an oath of loyalty to the monarch is an affront to democracy, as it excludes from Parliament anyone who is opposed to monarchy and too principled to compromise on this issue. The oath should be to serve all the people of the country, not one individual.
If I still lived in England, I would write in SNP on my ballot paper. If I lived in Cymru or Kernow, I would have no problem voting Plaid or MK. If I lived in the Six Counties, I would go fishing for the day.
ReplyDeleteJames Coleman
ReplyDeleteIt will be Green for me in Huntingdon. But as it's a huge majority Tory seat, seriously considered UKIP just to kick Tories up the arse. Used to be LibDem but never again at National level, although will vote LibDem in Council Elections being held at same time as locals are very good in the community.
Come on James, UKIP are funded by massive tits
DeleteJames Coleman
DeleteI am well aware what UKIP is and abhor their policies.
I took part in this.
ReplyDeleteI note sky are correctly calling it a survey as I understand it was only of sky customers. As I am a customer, I got an email from Sky asking me if I would complete it.
http://news.sky.com/story/1470538/majority-of-scots-think-union-will-split-poll
It looked like it was done for them by a proper online pollster, maybe Yougov or Survation.
If I had the vote in England I would either vote Green, or Labour (I would vote for someone like John McDonnell). In Wales I would vote PC, and in Northern Ireland I would vote SDLP because I just could not vote Sinn Fein.
ReplyDeleteI would have no problem voting SinnFein if I lived in N Eire. People are not prisoners of the past as far as I am concerned. The British Military helped create the conflict in N Eire and no one questions their existance.
ReplyDeleteI believe that there should be a united Ireland. However, the actions of the PIRA did nothing for that cause imo. In fact they probably set it back.
ReplyDeleteJames, given the story about Neil Hay in the newspapers, do you think Edinburgh South is still winnable for the SNP, or as this story ****** up its the chances completely?
They tried the same tactic on Mhairi Black muttley but after a day or so it of course blew over.
DeleteMurphy, Dugdale and 'scottish' Labour can hardly throw tstones when they have the likes of Ian Smart spouting vile lunatic abuse for them among others.
This while every establishment newspaper in the land is still spouting barking mad hatred at Nicola and SNP voters with not a peep from Eggman Murphy and his idiot helpers.
The scottish public has actually noticed that 24/7 ferocious media onslaught against Nicola and will contrast it rather sharply with Murphy and Dugdale's fake outrage today.
Either way muttley, you need to start supporting your own and get real! Neil Hay, going by the reported tweets on the BBC (worst they can find I assume) has said nothing any one of us haven't said, and taken in context are totally innocuous and justifiable. All we are being told (again!) is that you and I do not control the context. It's that simple. Let's see what the voting public think of the 'outrage' shall we? (Do you remember the real vitriol that Fifi le bon bon used to spew?)
DeleteAs for Sinn Fein, I notice that you have become slowly more 'radical' in your politics after our experience of the referendum and the UK state's underhand, unfair and unacceptable behaviour during a 'democratic' vote. That's something you share with myself and a great number of other previously 'naive' members of the Scottish/British electorate. Does it really stretch your empathy and imagination so much to put yourself (and family) in a situation such as 'Bloody Sunday'? To condemn Sinn Fein would be to condemn every other (world wide) fight for freedom against the British Empire. The only thing each of those struggles had in common was the violence of their Empire opponent. For the weak, the resort to violence (by necessity) is always the last and final resort.
Let's just hope and pray that we never have that reality forced upon us as a movement. Be clear though Muttley, that decision is not entirely ours to make. Just as it is not entirely ours, it was not entirely Sinn Fein's. It was, of course, entirely the British Empire's. Just as it was in every other territorial war they fought against indigenous populations around the globe for control over those populations resources, natural, political and human. Unfortunately, the older I get, the more I realise that the world does not change that much.
braco
Mick, I hope you are right.
DeleteToo right Mick!
Deletebraco
Braco, The difference between us and Neil Hay is he is standing as a SNP candidate. The political environment we find ourselves in means that our lot have to be whiter than white, and if you want to get elected you have to follow the example of Alex Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon, Margo Macdonald. Winnie Ewing, Neil McCormack etc.
DeleteAs for saying the endorsing or supporting the Provos, no chance. They have committed countless atrocities. I am left wing, but I do not support political violence. There were far to many Kingsmills, Shankill Road, Birmingham, Bloody Friday's from PIRA.
Mhairi Black's tweets were about her not liking a football team. Neil Hay's equate people who don't agree with him with Nazi collaborators. Bit of a difference.
DeleteI'd certainly be reluctant to vote for anyone who was unimaginative enough to call Unionists "quislings". Doesn't suggest he's a very original thinker. If the Labour incumbent wasn't such a particularly odious specimen, I'd probably vote Green in that seat.
One eye Muttley. You do feel that it's acceptable to vote for British parties in this election that are, by definition, responsible for 'our' historic atrocities however.
DeleteOn the first point though Muttley, are you agreeing that candidates that are standing for election on behalf of our cause should naturally be judged on a completely different moral measure from their democratic opponents? Is it right that our candidates should be open to completely fabricated 'outrage' and media attention while their 'democratic' opponents wallow.
There comes a point muttley (and I would say 14 days to the vote is well within that time) that supporters of Independence should do exactly that and support those standing for Independence supporting parties. Especially when they are being smeared and unreasonably accused of what (as far as I can see) is fairly normal political banter. Are you condemning Neil Hay? If so, what are you condemning him for. If not, SUPPORT him!
I am unaware and genuinely interested in what you condemn him for. I may agree if you point it out. Until then I will, as always, go with experience and consider this a trumped up media shitstorm that has f all at it's core. These require folk like yourself, on our side, to give credence and 'reasonable' questioning to help the whole thing along.
'do you think Edinburgh South is still winnable for the SNP, or as this story ****** up its the chances completely' ... doesn't sound helpful or supportive muttley, does it?
(and all this from that non SNP memeber and yes alliance, vote splitter ;-)
braco
Muttley, I do not support or encourage the support of the 'PROVOS' or any other violent group. Sinn Fein is a political party. There is no 'British Army party' though it operates under political control. So let's just keep this discussion party political.
Deletebraco
Is calling people Quislings really acceptable?
DeleteAnon : I really think it would be a good idea not to post 'innocent' questions like that anonymously.
DeleteOK, I'll say it non-anonymously: the use of the word 'Quislings' is out of order in the context of Scottish politics, without exception.
DeleteI have been called a Nazi, a Fascist, a racist, a traitor , an insurgent etc. (not to mention all the non political insults such as a virus, moonie, etc etc.) and all by elected officials, reported and magnified by the media and state broadcaster. All totally acceptable. Quisling.... another fairly obscure word for political traitor that is now being removed from one side of the national debate, a word to express the possibility of political treason.
DeleteAs long as the concept of political treason is needing expressed, a word will be found.
braco
It'd be quite good if the concept of "political treason" was obliterated entirely.
DeleteYes Keaton,
Deletewhy can't we all just love each other?
braco
"I have been called a Nazi, a Fascist, a racist, a traitor "
DeleteYou should not have been.
"a word to express the possibility of political treason. "
Against whom?
Niall,
Deletenot relevant. If the concept needs expressed, words will be found to express it. I dare say 'Quisling' was not the first choice, dating as it does, only as far back as WW2 . It won't be the last.
This argument reminds me of the internationalist 'borders' bad argument during the referendum. Just as long as we don't mention the UK international borders.
Treason, political or otherwise, is a judgement upon an individual (or group).Very rarely do those 'committing' treason believe or accept that they are acting in that manner as they usually hold zero alliegence to those that make the accusation (Wallace famously).
It does not negate the concept of political or national treason however, and as such words will be required in a free society to express that concept. What words do you feel are currently acceptable to express the concept? We can then revisit those words in ten or fifteen more years of struggle and see how many are still deemed acceptable. The words may become unacceptable, but in that same time period the concept will of course remain and need ways of expression.
That's all.
braco
@Keaton
DeleteI agree with you about Mhairi Black. She is only 20 years old, some of her remarks were made at a post referendum rally, and I believe were the result of understandable disappointment at the result. I don't think there was any malice in them at all.
@Braco
I am not going to get into a big debate here over the merits or otherwise of the PIRA's actions. I have made my own opinions clear on the matter. I would like to add though that surely no-one still holds anyone under 60 years old in Germany responsible for the actions of the Nazis. There has to come a time when you stop justifying your violence because of a difficult history.
Hay did not call anyone Quislings -it was in the title of a piece on BBC Scotlandshire that he linked to. Check Wings-it's there for all to see.
DeleteI have voted Lib Dem in every General Election whilst living in England, but I won't be doing so this time for a host of reasons, in particular their political incompetence over having an AV rather than a PR referendum, and the tuition fees debacle, which is going to cost me a pile of money.
ReplyDeleteAs in my seat of Solihull, the Lib Dem majority is only 175 over the Tories., I expect my vote to count as bad news for them.
I will vote for the Green Party (who did not stand last time) because of their loose alliance with the SNP. A Lib Dem loss here will also increase the likelihood of the SNP having more seats than the Lib Dems and may even get University fees cut back from 9K to 6K per annum.
The Green party is actually the main opposition on the council to the Tories here, though most of their seats are in the neighbouring Meriden constituency.
The logic of the past twenty years in Northern Ireland has been to bring Republicanism in from the cold, convince the IRA to disarm and focus on purely peaceful, constitutional methods, and to in general demilitarise the six counties. As a result of that we have Sinn Fein ministers in government and a Sinn Fein speaker in the Stormont Assembly. Sinn Fein could play a role in the next government of the Republic of Ireland also.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate that some people would have a great deal of difficulty voting for them, especially considering the pasts of men like Adams and McGuinness, but getting to this point in Northern Ireland has required a lot of people on both sides to do things that they regarded as very distasteful.
As for voters in England however, I see no real attraction in a rag-bag of regional devolutionists, particularly those who have sworn allegiance to an old Anglo-Saxon Kingdom ( does 'Wessex' really have any meaning for people who live in modern-day Devon, Dorset of Hampshire?). My inclination would be to vote Green, or possibly for a progressive Labour candidate. Up until Christmas I was living in Lab-Con marginal Battersea, which would have given me a tough choice as I do want to get rid of Cameron, but since the Iraq War had sworn never to vote Labour again. Fortunately coming back to Scotland allowed me to dodge that particular bullet.
"I see no real attraction in a rag-bag of regional devolutionists"
DeleteI'm not sure what the justification is for calling them a "rag-bag". They're fringe parties, certainly, but so were the SNP for thirty years. Everyone has to start somewhere.
The Wessex Regionalists are probably the most eccentric of the parties I mentioned, but that reflects the fact that they've been around for forty years. Whether it's called Wessex or the south-west, the region clearly has a strong identity, although the boundaries are obviously a matter of controversy.
Oddly enough, Gerry Adams was railing against rule from "Wessex" only the other day, so the name clearly still has resonance somewhere.
"I'm not sure what the justification is for calling them a "rag-bag"."
ReplyDeleteWell, firstly they are fringe, as you point out, and secondly nothing much seems to hold them together beyond a support for some political expression of regional identity. In england I'd look for a strong left-wing, anti-austerity party first before wondering who will be best for regional identity in Cornwall, Wessex, Lancashire or whatever. Given the times we live in - foodbanks and so on, that should be the priority IMO.
Having said that, regional devolution in England is a valid political goal. But I don't see why you say you would face a dilemma choosing between the Greens and Yorkshire First, given that the Greens also support stronger local and regional government.
See their policy document here: (http://tinyurl.com/k7ug2gj). They support more powers for local government and regional government where people want it, albeit it's not necessarily clear how that would be measured, but also support a constitutional convention where these issues could be debated. So, why not support the Greens for both left-wing economics and regional devolution?
Who knows what the fuck Adams was on about.
"given that the Greens also support stronger local and regional government"
DeleteIt's a difference of emphasis. If a party has constitutional reform as its raison d'être, you don't need to worry about what its priority would be if it ever had influence. Look at the Lib Dems - they're supposed to be federalists, but they did nothing about it when given a golden chance.
OK, well there's another reason to vote green in england if one happens to be an SNP or PC supporter. Caroline Lucas has said she wants to work in a parliamentary bloc with the SNP and PC. Even if she is the only Green MP elected, if the Greens get a good percentage of the vote UK wide that bloc will have more legitimacy and political weight. If the SNP-PC-Green vote get around 10% of the seats and 10% or more of the votes, that's a fairly politically powerful group in parliament, which would have quite a good argument to use against the inevitable attempts of the right-wing press to discredit them if they support Miliband.
DeleteShouldn't we be due a new Survation/Daily Record poll soon?
ReplyDeleteIt's overdue if they are sticking to a monthly schedule, but I guess they might be holding it back until closer to polling day.
DeleteFor those that have a problem with the word 'Quisling', what other word would you use to describe folk that knowingly work against their own country?
ReplyDeleteI'm not meaning 'ordinary' folk that voted No. but folk in positions of power that knew they were telling a pack of lies to enrich themselves.
Yes Juteman that's what I would like to know and also have asked. Quisling was an acceptable word choice ten or fifteen years ago, now it's not. A similar phenomenon will occur with whatever word is deemed acceptable today. This is an issue of power. Authority is moving from loyalty to the UK to loyalty to Scotland and those loyal to the UK (proud Scots) who have been used to controlling the 'accusation' are now fighting a pathetic rear guard action by trying to 'ban' the use of certain words used to express the accusation.
DeleteMuch like their call, and threats, to remove 'first past the post' as totally unfair and undemocratic after landslide losses, but having happily resided over just such unfairness and non democracy for a century that returned Unionism.
braco
Juteman, if I voted No and heard some elements on the Yes side call unionist politicians "traitors, quislings" I would take it personally, just as SNP supporters and voters would probably take all these Nazi/fascists jibes being thrown at the SNP personally. A lot of people are completely turned off with this kind of a language, and to be honest it is perfectly understandable.
Deletemuttley,
Deletethat's a very good answer to a question Juteman never asked, but implies he did. You should go into politics. ;-)
braco
For those that have a problem with the word 'Quisling', what other word would you use to describe folk that knowingly work against their own country?
DeleteI'm not meaning 'ordinary' folk that voted No. but folk in positions of power that knew they were telling a pack of lies to enrich themselves.
Telling lies to enrich yourself at the expense of others is bad. Whether those others live in one's "own" country or another has no bearing on how bad it is.
"Loyalty to the UK" and "loyalty to Scotland" are as irrational as loyalty to one's ethnicity. It may well be that people will never get over these ideas, and that wishing we could deserves to be sneered at with "why can't we all just love each other?" - but don't claim that fealty to lines on a map is actually moral or rational.
I want independence because it will make the world, in a small way, a better place, not because Scotland matters more than anywhere else.
Braco
DeleteI'm not meaning 'ordinary' folk that voted No.
That was my point. Why would people who voted No not take personally the use of quislings and traitors to describe unionist politicians? You know fine well that many SNP supporters and voters are offended and angry when the SNP are called Nazis/fascists. It is disingenuous not to acknowledge this.
I know Juteman was not having a go at No voters. However, people do take it personally.
@Muttley.
DeleteYou did notice I excluded 'ordinary' No voters from my comment?
I never hear Unionist politicians exclude 'ordinary' Yes voters from their Nazi insults.
Incidentally, I feel like I may need to withdraw my earlier remarks about Neil Hay. The Daily Record has posted some of the offending tweets, and the only one that actually uses the q-word is a link to this BBC Scotlandshire piece, and all he did was replicate the title of the article (which is clearly meant ironically). Is that seriously what the fuss is about?
DeleteMaking fun of old people for being forgetful is a bit nastier, I suppose. Dunno if it's deselection territory.
@Juteman
DeleteYeah, I know you were not referring to No voters. I said it my last post. I stand by my point though. People on both sides will take the rhetoric personally, and to be fair when it is that overheated (Nazis/fascists/traitors/quislings etc) it is bound to happen.
Keaton,
Deletefeel free to express your own other worldly views and reasons for voting YES, they are very pleasant and definitely make good lyrics, but please don't assume to express what mine are or were. I can do that for myself. I do notice that the hints you make of the reasons behind my YES vote are, shall we say, less than flattering. 'Sneered at' indeed.
braco
muttley,
Deleteas I have already written, it appears that the Unionist authorities now want to deny words like 'Quisling' or 'traitor' to the Indy movement even when used in overtly satirical terms. (See Keaton's post above) Could you maybe write us a list of words that, when accused of using them by the unionist press (and national politicians), you would find acceptable (and that you think the 'no voter' would not get upset by)?
Another storm in a tea cup of manufactured outrage over nothing! What a waste of f'n time!
braco
@braco
DeleteYour "why can't we all just love each other?" remark sounded pretty sneering. I'd accept that I may have misinterpreted it if your last comment didn't have the same tone.
And I didn't attribute any particular reasons to you for voting Yes.
keaton,
Delete'"Loyalty to the UK" and "loyalty to Scotland" are as irrational as loyalty to one's ethnicity. It may well be that people will never get over these ideas, and that wishing we could deserves to be sneered at with "why can't we all just love each other?" - but don't claim that fealty to lines on a map is actually moral or rational.'
none of this applies to me or the reasons I voted YES. I am Scottish, true, I therefore want a government answerable to Scotland. I also want government as close to the people as is humanly possible. I too am an idealist but sometimes my cynicism slips out. I am sorry.
I just find this irrational denial of the actual world we live in (nations, national boundaries, cultures and international governing bodies) completely weak. Especially when I am being accused of nasty 'nationalism' by folk that are zealously defending their 'nations' membership of all those self same world organisations and demarcations to the detriment of my own. Not you I know, but not a million miles away from a very familiar line of argument made by British nationalists all the time.
Peace keaton Y ;-)
braco
Not you I know, but not a million miles away from a very familiar line of argument made by British nationalists all the time.
DeleteIndeed. That was why I included the line about my voting Yes, so that no one mistook me for one of these "internationalist" Brit nats. I didn't mean to imply anything about your own reasons for supporting indy.
I don't deny that we live in a world of nations and borders, or even that we should. It's the only practical way to organise things. I also think that any feeling of "loyalty" to these administrative divisions makes about as much sense as loyalty to an eye colour, and is to be discouraged when it comes up.
Yep, my thoughts exactly Juteman. However, I do judiciously avoid the word and say instead "people who have sold out their country for personal gain." A bit long winded but needs must...
ReplyDeleteSky news is reporting figures on the popularity of party leaders tonight. Is this just old figures being regurgitated? Anyone ken?
ReplyDeleteIt's a recent survey of their viewers, albeit demographically weighted. I got an e-mail from them as a customer and took part. Looked like a proper polling company did the questions and weighting from what I could see.
Deletehttp://news.sky.com/story/1470538/majority-of-scots-think-union-will-split-poll
Thanks for that, Scottish-Skier.
DeleteAlso, Ms Dugdale, lied to the Holyrood parliament when she claimed she did not know who Ian Smart was, yet she is a member of Smart's Twitter follower list. See WOS for details.
ReplyDeleteSaying that she follows him on Twitter is an understatement. She's had about a dozen direct exchanges with him, called him by his first name, and linked to articles by him. If she's really claiming she's never heard of him, she's much bolder than I thought.
DeleteMy clumsiness in writing. She denied knowing who NS was referring to in her reply. Very slight difference but equally wrong IMHO.
DeleteI am English, live in England & this year there is absolutely no one that I feel comfortable with voting for in my area. As I'm an SNP member I decided to come up to Scotland for two weeks to help with canvassing. I think that is a hopefully productive use of my time. Looking forward to it.
ReplyDeleteLooking forward to welcoming you. See you this evening. Margaret will have the kettle on.
Delete@Braco
ReplyDeleteIf you think using words like "traitors" and "quislings" does our cause any good at all then that is your problem not mine.
Except he didn't he quoted from a headline from the satirical spoof site BBC Scotlandshire from 2012. Is absurd the hysteria as pointed out in WOS website.
DeleteI can see you're not one for subtlety muttley, but come on! Are you in training for a career in party politics, because you have a real gift for answering questions no one asked you in such a way as to accuse others of statements (and positions) no one has made (or taken).
Deletebraco :-(
Who died and made you God. How else do you describe traitors except by using the word traitor? People who betray their country are traitors. Political traitors are quislings. If you don't like it then move to another Universe. No surrender to cowards, sleazebags and the unionist media!
Delete@Anonymous
DeleteI was not talking about Neil Hay. I have no idea what you are talking about?
@Braco
Murphy and co must absolutely love you and the traitors and quisling element in Yes. You do their work for them, take the bait, and still do not get it.
As for you Anonymous, what is the No surrender stuff all about? Go to Ibrox if you want to spout that shit. I see you and Braco get very anger when you are challenged over this nonsense traitors and quislings rhetoric. Is it because you both know it is never going to win over undecided and soft Nos to independence? What is it ever going to achieve?
'Murphy and co must absolutely love you and the traitors and quisling element in Yes'
DeleteMuttley, will you take a listen to yourself! Have a read of exactly what I have written in this thread and then consider the reason we are talking about this subject. A clue. It's from the totally fabricated story/accusation that the SNP/YES campaign have been (as usual) bandying around the Q word and being thoroughly nasty devils. And you were right there to condemn your own side for something that there was zero evidence for. This has been proven but you are not happy with that, you would rather stick with your (and the press') ' traitors and quisling element in Yes' theory. Not happy with that you have decided that I am a part of this 'element'. Thanks for that muttley, great that you our backs.
braco
There's a few points been made here that I'd like to challenge. There seems to be a widespread assumption that there is no difference between Labour & the Tories. There was some truth to this under Blair & Brown although people too readily forget that the 1997 Labour Government finally delivered devolution that the Tories had denied us for 18 years & introduced the living wage. In many other ways they were awful but they were still less awful then Thatcher/Major. Equally now to suggest there is no difference between Tory & Labour is untenable. Miliband has moved his party to the left to some extent & Cameron if anything is moving further to the right. If I lived in England & it was a Labour/Tory choice, I would vote Labour. I don't live in England, I live in Scotland & I shall be voting SNP.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Q word. I have no time for that, Nor do I have any time for personal abuse against anyone who holds different views to me. Apart from anything else, it is profoundly counter productive. To win independence we need to convince at least 1 in 10 of those who voted no to change their minds. Do you think calling them Quislings will help that process?
Maybe its easier for me to sympathise with no voters as I would have voted No myself had we held the referendum any time up until about 18 months ago.
There is a strand of thinking that says that a Tory Government would be the ideal outcome as that would enable us to continue the democratic deficit line & be most likely to lead to independence sooner rather than later. If that happens by itself that is fine. If it is anyway brought about by the actions of the SNP (e.g. helping to bring down a Labour government) I believe that will lose independence & the SNP more support than it gains. It would certainly lose the SNP my vote.
@John Silver
DeleteAs for the Q word. I have no time for that, Nor do I have any time for personal abuse against anyone who holds different views to me. Apart from anything else, it is profoundly counter productive. To win independence we need to convince at least 1 in 10 of those who voted no to change their minds. Do you think calling them Quislings will help that process?
Great points, but unfortunately ones they seem utterly oblivious to.
Apologies Sam, for delay in replying .
DeleteYes, there is much to criticise the Labour party for & believe me I will be in the front of the queue to criticise them. But they are prepared to shift some of the tax burden to the rich. I think that's good, Do you?
@John silver
Deletethat was needing said. well put.
but just for the record (pun not intended), only 1 in 18 No voters changing their mind takes Yes past 50%.
NOT 1 in 10.
AM.
John,
ReplyDeletewhat about just being ACCUSED of using the 'Q' word by an underhand and desperate Unionist Labour 'leader' and rabid press in order to alienate and manipulate no voters into believing the absolute worst of YES voters and so help secure their vote against the SNP (and Independence)? Would that lose your vote to the SNP?
We have no say in who or what we get accused of in the media by Unionist politicians. It would be nice if our own supporters were to acknowledge this and give their own side the benefit of the doubt until there is at least a little evidence to support the 'accusations'. We have all seen, again and again, the twitter death threats/cybernat bullying accusation headlines splashed all over the shop, with zero evidence. This stuff is not new so why keep falling for it?
braco
I have read WOS defence and, i wholeheartedly accept that the charges against Neil Hay appear to have been exaggerated. So if apologies are needed - you've got them.
DeleteHowever, two further questions arise. If you have any notion of pursuing a career in politics, should you be posting on twitter under a pseudonym? the quisling thing is debatable. I am quite fond of BBC Scotlandshire but I think they are close to crossing a line there. & his comments regarding old people were pretty tasteless.
My opinion: overblown & not a resignation/sacking issue but potentially one that could lose him a seat he looked like winning.
The point I made about the use of the Q word was not entirely directed at Neil Hay, however. it is a word i have seen used many times & i am deeply uncomfortable with it.
Oh, I probably need to say that I am uncomfortable with the media & the labour party jumping on this like they did on Frenchgate - my MP still hasn't got round to deleting his tweet gleefully linking to the telegraph story.
Quisling was used for the best part of 70 years without any problems. But suddenly political traitors got all huffy about being correctly labelled and the media decided I'm not allowed to use a perfectly good word.
DeleteFuck them. Every single labour MP is a Quisling. Always have been and always will be.
Anonymous. You have made my case perfectly.There are times in history when the Labour party's record stands up to scrutiny better than the SNP's. My son is named after Keir Hardie. You are telling me I named my son after a quisling.
Deletehave you read what i wrote?
Deletewhere is my "unmistakeable faith in this crew of ne'r do wells" ?
I am massively critical of labour, particularly Scottish Labour, I have opposed nuclear weapons all my life.
But to pretend that there is no difference between Labour & Tory is frankly bizarre.
"Speaking personally, I wouldn't vote Labour if I was in England, irrespective of the candidate, because the Neanderthal attitudes towards Scotland run too deep"
ReplyDeleteI live in England and I'm thinking of voting Labour (like it will make a difference) but I wouldn't want to vote for a party that is described like that ^. In fact, I thought Labour was quite good to Scotland.
Has Labour betrayed Scotland recently, because Scotland has voted for Labour quite a lot? Is there any particular reason/s? Is there a blog post on here that summarises this?
Labour whored itself with the Tories during the Referendum, what bigger act of betrayal do you want Bob? If Labour was so good then SNP would never have had the Holyrood 2011 happen.
DeleteOne of the issues that is poisoning politics in Scotland is the Labour party's tribal hatred of the SNP.
DeleteDoes anyone really think that it is helpful to reciprocate that with a tribal SNP hatred of Labour?
For Christ's sake, we need to be better than them.
There was nothing tribal about my response. I pointed out one fact. I will point out a second fact. The Labour Party watering down the Smith Commission proposals because they never had any intention of delivering on the Referendum Vow.
DeleteNow Labour is on a daily attack of the FFA black hole, translation -Scotland is too wee and too poor and too stupid etc to have even FFA/Devo Max/ Near Federalism etc.
Or how about Labour being hand in glove with the patently Brit Nat funded anti SNP tactical vote campaign John.
I feel sorry for him, Bob, because the Brit Nat Press and Media is keeping him and others in England in the dark about just how rank rotten the British Labour Party has become. It isn't the Party that my father was a member of for most of his life and it isn't the Party that he spoke up for as an RMT shop steward either.
With any luck he might live in a constituency with a Labour MP that would vote against Trident at the very least but Labour MPs when push comes to shove always like many Scots go into cringe and careerist mode once they get to Westmidden.
Well, I'm afraid I disagree with you. I think Labour massively misjudged how it should deal with the referendum, & I think it should never have stood shoulder to shoulder with the Tories but knowing we need to win over many Labour supporters, I would never ever use phrases like "Labour being hand in glove with the patently Brit Nat funded anti SNP tactical vote campaign " if I was trying to win anyone's support.
DeleteI am genuinely concerned that we are all retreating into out bunkers here. This is not how it was meant to be. There is less & less dialogue & more& more diatribe
Test
ReplyDelete" People who betray their country are traitors."
ReplyDeleteReally? That assumes our first loyalty is (and should be) to our country. Mine isn't.
It all depends on how you define yourself politically and what's important to you. Historically for socialists and communists their first loyalty is to their class. The first loyalty of second-wave feminists is to their gender. The first loyalty of some religiously-inspired political organisations is to their faith group. And so on.
Let's try a hypothetical. If a group of Edinburgh bankers were trying to promote an independence referendum in order to prevent Scotland being ruled by a genuinely redistributive, republican socialist government in London, I would have voted No without hesitation. I don't think that circumstance will ever arise, but if it did, I don't think I'd deserve to be called 'traitor' or 'quisling'.
Niall,
ReplyDeleteLet's try another hypothetical. If you supported the death penalty with all your heart, would you support the UK being subsumed as the 51st state of the USA if that ensured a death sentence for murder in the UK?
No, because you are a democrat and so you would, I imagine, fight for the death penalty within the polity that you identify yourself with. Any other answer exposes you as a non democrat.
The question therefore is simply, what polity is it that you identify yourself with and within which you are going to fight your democratic corner? Mine is Scotland. Jumping from polity to polity depending on which suits your own narrow personal interest is actually the definition of un democratic and at the core of the woefully corrupt nature of Westminster.
Example: Tories need not convince Scotland's electorate of anything, just rely on the support of another polity (England's) to gain total power over the Scottish polity. Why fight a losing philisophical battle in Scotland when it's irrelevant to gaining power over Scotland
If you identify as British, that's democratic. Fair enough. If you identify as Scottish and opt, for your own narrow personal wants (whither political or financial), to deny your chosen polity's voice in favour of another's (England's) then you are not a democrat. You are an opportunist. (all this is assumed to be in normal democratic conditions and not life threatening dictatorships or times of war etc.)
Hope this helps answer your question.
braco
"Let's try another hypothetical. If you supported the death penalty with all your heart, would you support the UK being subsumed as the 51st state of the USA if that ensured a death sentence for murder in the UK?"
ReplyDeleteI don't support the death penalty, but if I did I would still probably vote no as there are many other reasons (healthcare, police racism, its role in the world, etc) to not want to be part of the USA
"Any other answer exposes you as a non democrat. "
I don't see why. In theory there could be a democratic vote to join the USA - or the EU, or indeed a federal Europe.
"Jumping from polity to polity depending on which suits your own narrow personal interest "
Well, I'm a fairly comfortable, middle-class person so in the hypothetical I gave, it would probably suit me better to go with the Edinburgh bankers than with the socialist redistributive government in London. But I wouldn't do so, because some principles are more important than personal interest or indeed political independence for whatever given polity.
"If you identify as Scottish and opt...to deny your chosen polity's voice"
But the point I was trying to make was that for many people other identities than British or Scottish are most important. Like your identity as a woman, as a muslim, as a working-class person, as a gay person, and so on. I don't see why it would be undemocratic to believe that. People used to talk a lot about 'class traitors' in 20th century British politics, you know..
My assumption in your hypothetical was that the Edinburgh bankers had the support of the Scottish electorate, otherwise why would you want to 'change' polity to get your own preferred redistributive policies from Westminster.
DeleteThe point I am making is that that attitude is no different to that of many Tory (proud Scots) today. They prefer to deny the obvious democratic will of the Scottish polity as they personally disagree with it, preferring to rather hitch Scotland onto a much larger polity (England) that holds the democratic voice that they agree with. This negates their need to democratically convince their own Scottish polity of the wisdom of their political judgements. (This is only relevant to those Tories that see themselves and boast of their 'Scottishness'. NorthBrit Tories are not being hypocritical.)
Your personal reasons for your political choices are not relevant. In this case we are talking about what you consider to be best (not necessarily what is best for you). Even with this proviso, over ruling your chosen polity (even for what you perceive to be all the best reasons) is totally undemocratic.
This is totally different from a polity democratically voting to freely join or share sovereignty with another, or take part in supra national organisations etc. That is as you say obviously a democratic decision made by the entire polity.
What happens when your redistributive Westminster government is voted out and replaced by neo cons, do you simply subsume Westminster into the next redistributive polity big enough to make Westminster (UK) voting numbers irrelevant. This is simply not a sustainable attitude.
There is no big news in the fact that people hold many different identities simultaneously. This is the case in the 200 odd 'independent' existing countries and is the case within Scotland currently. Nothing will change that matter and raising it as you do is just another (usually unionist) straw man argument.
Stop Press: Countries made up of Millions of individuals have complex identities! Not news Niall, and yet the Nation State, however complex, seems to be the generally accepted and understood identity of the average human being alive today.
Scotland's current political position is the odd one, brought about through various non democratic means and bedded in through conditioning and time. And just to bring it all back to the original contreversy, That odd undemocratic position/situation which we are all engaged in trying to remedy after 300 years of struggle was, lets remember, initiated by a political leadership which sold their polity for Gold (Quislings? Parcel of Rogues? Traitors?) What would you call them? Genuine question Niall.
braco
"My assumption in your hypothetical was that the Edinburgh bankers had the support of the Scottish electorate,"
DeleteNot necessarily. Scotland could have been split roughly 50/50, as it was last September. In any case, surely on these questions you should vote for what you believe in, not based on what you think most other people around you are going to do?
"Even with this proviso, over ruling your chosen polity"
Most of us never 'choose' a polity. We just happen to be born into one. Some people genuinely don't feel very passionate about which nationality they are.
", initiated by a political leadership ....What would you call them? Genuine question Niall."
Probably just the Scottish elite, or Scottish Establishment. I don't tend to get too worked up about history, and I find it hard to get genuinely angry at people who lived 300 years ago.
Your comments on the SDLP and Sinn Féin are spot-on. Nowadays, with all major Northern Ireland parties signed up to the Good Friday Agreement, as far as the Assembly goes there isn't a great deal of political distance between the DUP and UUP on the one hand, and Sinn Féin and the SDLP on the other.
ReplyDeleteTraditionally the SDLP and UUP have been considered more middle-class than their respective rivals — but with very little read-over in economic orientation, since Northern Ireland will always depend on subdidies from Great Britain. No party attracts the hatred that Sinn Féin does, including from SDLP supporters. In practical terms, however, they hate them because of their past rather than their present.
Since in Northern Ireland elections are always treated as proxy referenda on Irish unity, in the wake of the Agreement electors on both sides have migrated to the less diplomatic party in order to press their respective cases. Sinn Féin are certainly more ready to rock the boat than the SDLP, but they would still be reluctant to collapse the Assembly.
Yes, there is the question of the SDLP's closeness to Labour. Yes, there is also the question of whether Sinn Féin take their seats. However, a third issue is whether a Unionist candidate might come through the middle and provide a vote to prop up the Tories. Unfortunately, the money-grabbing SNP caricature is the DUP reality, and the party has been open about its willingness to sell its support to the highest bidder. DUP influence over a Conservative Government would also be a disaster for the stability of Northern Ireland, with the party intent on an absolute right to hold sectarian marches (which would presumably have to implemented by Westminster overruling the Assembly, where nationalists can block changes they don't like). For those reasons, in all but the most firmly nationalist constituencies, I think the best thing to do is simply to vote for the nationalist party that gets the highest vote.
If we do find ourselves in a situation where the SNP and Plaid Cymru hold influence over Labour, I hope that they put pressure on it to pass an Irish Language Act, a promise made many years ago that has never been fulfilled. The language is currently banned from road signs and use in courts, and even simple things like bilingual street names commonly require two-thirds super-majorities among local residents in mandatory surveys (two thirds of residents, not respondents!). Speakers of traditional languages in Scotland and Wales, on the other hand, have enjoyed legal protection for years.
Scotland should be grateful that it does not have to resort to "historical baggage" to assert its right to self-determination.
ReplyDeleteNations do what they have to, to defend their rights.