Yesterday I called out Professor John Robertson for essentially fibbing about the results of an opinion poll. He had claimed that the new Survation poll showed the SNP "surging into a 12% lead", when in fact the previous Survation poll had also shown a 12% lead - so it was a static position rather than a surge. Rather comically, he then left comments on my post which more or less admitted he was trying it on, but claimed that it was justified because the unionist media do exactly the same thing all the time. He also encouraged me to join in with the fibs.
I published his first couple of comments, but it then went totally beyond a joke - he started trawling through ancient posts on this blog and leaving infantile insults on them, and predictably he also started lecturing me on his all-time favourite subject of how anyone who doesn't think a man can turn himself into a woman at the stroke of a pen is basically a Nazi. I told him that enough was enough and that he should take his identity politics extremism and his deeply peculiar attitude to the truth elsewhere. Predictably, he's now lashed out with a rant on his own blog, which randomly lumps me in with a "gang" that apparently also includes Robin McAlpine, Craig Murray and - of all people - Stuart Campbell. (I self-evidently have very little in common with Campbell and my views about him are extremely well known, but I certainly have no objection to being compared with Robin McAlpine and Craig Murray - I've often strongly disagreed with them on particular points, but they are both serious and principled people who I very much respect.)
There's remarkably little substance to Robertson's rant - it just seems to amount to "I used to think these people were brill but now I think they're rubbish". It's as if, since retiring from academia, Robertson has reverted to the primary school playground. To the extent that there's anything more specific, it's this -
"They were impressive then, but today, all are more bothered by a range of issues including gender recognition reforms, economic policies, the campaign strategy and now leadership election conspiracy theories, than they seem to be about winning independence."
I can't speak for the other three men, but anyone who has ever read this blog will know that the absolute polar opposite of that allegation is true of me. I would put up with almost anything from the SNP, and as a former member of long standing frequently did so, as long as they remained committed to independence. Neoliberal economics, the gender nonsense, uninspiring campaign pitches, the ruination of an SSSI at the behest of Donald Trump, you name it, I can and did put up with it. It was only when the SNP ceased to work towards independence that I became deeply concerned and started hoping Alex Salmond might set up a new party to pressurise the SNP into returning to the indy fold.
The best proof of my good faith came in the middle of last year, when I was still on the Alba NEC. As soon as Nicola Sturgeon announced the plan for a de facto referendum, I was very pleasantly surprised and said both publicly and privately that Alba needed to embrace the de facto referendum, make sure it happened, make it work, and above all else
not sabotage it by splitting the Yes vote. I also pointed out repeatedly that Alba's obsession with bringing down Nicola Sturgeon was counterproductive, and if I may say so, history has proved me spot on about that - as soon as Sturgeon was forced out, the de facto referendum plan disappeared with her. Not even Kate Forbes would have kept faith with it. It's unlikely that Robertson is unaware of the views I expressed, because on the very day that Nicola Sturgeon resigned, The National did a
two page splash about what I had said and featured a reply from Chris McEleny. (Arguably The National's intention was to cause as much trouble for Alba as possible, but only they can know for sure what it was all about from their point of view.)
Every step of the way, then, I have acted not as a partisan but as an independence supporter who always puts independence first. The reason I am now once again hostile to the SNP leadership under Yousaf is because they have, for the first time since at least the major split of 1942, indefinitely abandoned all attempts to secure independence. It is thus Robertson who has allowed his focus on independence to drift due to his side-passion for one particular devolutionist party and its non-independence-related policies. It goes further than that, though, because I defy anyone to seriously claim that Robertson would have remained a propagandist for the SNP if Kate Forbes had won and ditched GRR reform. I'm not quite sure what would have happened to his blog, but if it had continued at all, there would have been a very abrupt change of direction. I don't doubt that Robertson is genuinely pro-independence, but just like Stuart Campbell, the "women with beards" thing is his first love, and it will always come before absolutely everything else, including the freedom of his country.
Personally, I would always choose independence. With or without gender self-ID. With or without Tory rule. With or without Humza Yousaf or Kate Forbes as SNP leader. Can Robertson say the same? Spoiler alert: no of course he can't.
What happened in 1942?
ReplyDeleteThe SNP committed itself to full independence and the devolutionist wing led by John MacCormick walked out to pursue Home Rule within the UK. I think MacCormick eventually joined the Liberals.
DeleteAfter which he organised the Scottish Covenant for Home Rule. Two million people signed the covenant and were duly ignored by Westminster
DeleteProf Robertson is an increasingly preposterous figure. He used to be a radical leftist, but he's now reinvented himself as such a mindless SNP drone that he makes Wee Ginger Dug look like a free spirit. The standard of his blogging really is strikingly poor, especially bearing in mind what he used to do for a living. The only reason he has any sort of audience is that there's always a market for slavish loyalty to the SNP. It's the lazy way of running an alternative media site. Scot Goes Pop and Robin McAlpine are much more interesting because there's some sort of independent thought on offer.
ReplyDeleteAnd particularly disappointing, James, to see AuldMarcia supporting Robertson's attacks on you. I remember her as a stalwart of your blog but it seems she's in the "SNP right or wrong" camp. Very sad to see.
Et tu, Marcia?
DeleteShe does say she still likes James, if that's any consolation. But yes, there does seem to be this incredibly simplistic mindset that you only support independence if you support the SNP and whoever happens to be the SNP leader. That was never the case, but with Humza as leader the whole notion is completely dead. Some people just haven't woken up to that yet.
DeleteAgree 100%
DeleteWGD numpties regularly go to Prof Robertson for the truth. Just as they think they get the truth from the big dug, Sturgeon's gang and let's not forget Scottish Skier the sites very own self confessed liar ( Marcia's old pal on SGP).
DeleteOh and let's not forget the SNP President ( horsebox man Mike Russell ) and now temp Chief Exec who assured us all that the membership numbers were accurate and also assured us that the leadership election was above board.
Wait a mo let's not forget that SNP establishment figure Kirsten Oswald, Business Convenor and manager of the SNP NEC who told us that everything was just fine about the leadership election and how the SNP is run.
Wait there is more - how about the SNP treasurer - Beattie who introduced the term ' woven ' in to the accounts.
F*****g liars the lot of them - well maybe not Marcia who is just an SNP party drone who thinks she supports independence but in reality supports a devolution (Unionist) party.
It's no wonder even Stuart Campbell banned you from his site,
Deleteas well as being a Tory troll, you're unhinged Cubby
I'm surprised that Campbell has banned Indy from Wings as they are two cheeks of the same bahookie.
DeleteAw it seems I have upset some WGD numpties by posting the truth about the phoney Independence Party - the SNP - the phoney big dug and the self confessed WGD liar Skier.
DeleteSome news for you about your great leader.
Sturgeon is reported to be busy trying to set up her own solicitor company and is reputed to be calling it:
" Fakedit and Ranaway" but based on her own dodgy past as a solicitor it is unlikely to get official approval.
Just read it. What is John Robertson's f-in problem? He's starting an argument in an empty room.
ReplyDeleteThe de facto referendum idea of Sturgeon was a complete nonsense, embarrassing actually. Just desperation. A big part of the SNPs demise is down to her.
ReplyDelete"Embarrassing"? What does that even mean? How the hell do you expect to win independence without ever holding a vote on it? Doubtless Humza will now demonstrate. In your own time, Humza.
DeleteAnonymous - " a big part" - who else then is responsible for the remainder? Is it the Daily Express or the Daily Mail - go on enlighten us.
DeleteI'm have no idea what Robin McAlpine's take on the gender issue is, not having read an article by him that refers to it, but Craig Murray's is, unless I've misunderstood, relatively neutral with a lean towards being pro GRR.
ReplyDeleteAlong with what you've pointed out yourself here regarding the differences between yourself and Stuart Campbell I really don't see anything that groups the four people together other than independence. Anything other subject and I'm fairly sure at least one would be outside the consensus.
Campaign strategy is, of course, a subject intrinsically tied with wanting independence. During the independence referendum campaign the professor's work was excellent, and subsequently regarding BBC bias. One wonders what happened since.
It’s the simple absence of happy clappy go-go SNP! The only common thread between them is one shared by very many of us in the currently very scunnered Yes movement. We are not happy and the party is doing nothing to change that disconnect.
DeleteWhile I don’t agree with Robertson and Kavanagh that every Yesser’s calling is to Wheesht and aim all fire exclusively at the Brits, I know where they’re coming from. Any time I open my mouth about Murrell and Humza and the rest of it to my No and unconvinced friends (this is Edinburgh, there’s lots of them) none of it inspires their interest in independence. They see oozing sleaze and shrug that “we’re no better than London, so why even change?”
The thing is, though, to get to the point where we have a more appealing pro-indy leader to present those people with, first of all people on the pro-indy side have to recognise that Humza is the wrong leader and replace him. It's a painful but necessary process we have to go through. Short-term pain for long-term gain.
Delete"Craig Murray's is, unless I've misunderstood, relatively neutral with a lean towards being pro GRR."
DeleteActually he's strongly pro GRR. He does accept that Isla Bryson should never have set foot in a women's prison so there is an element of acceptance that sometimes trans women aren't women but in general it's TWAW.
I seem to recall reading that Murray supports GRR, but also that he supports the right to disagree with it. This is key: the suppression of debate; criminalization (literally, in Yousaf's hate crimes law) of dissent; on a lesser level, ostracism and political exclusion of dissenters; and through these policies the ready availability of the GRR issue as a weapon against anyone the ruling party doesn't like for whatever reason -- are the worst things about GRR, and are entirely in keeping with the SNP's intense authoritarianism. They, and what they say about our current political culture, are even worse than the impairment of women's rights. If I were left free to consider the trans case without fear, I would be more receptive to it.
DeleteI've been foolish. I should know better. I'm off to join an S Club 7 chat and suggest that their leader should not go pop.
ReplyDeleteAnother remarkably tasteful attempt at humour on the day after an S Club 7 singer died.
DeleteWe are witnessing the beginning of the end for the SNP. They are making the Tories look good now. Their demise will be swift.
ReplyDeleteRussell says no independence at moment. On the positive side he says we need new Yes movement with many visions - if that's going to include ALBA and Salmond then perhaps something positive will rise from this - but I doubt it.
ReplyDelete"Russell says no independence at moment."
DeleteWell that's the understatement of the century.
Alba will always be totally excluded for as long as Yousaf is leader. Under a different leader (depending on who it is), the door might be slightly more ajar, but under Humza, forget it.
That's a strange comment James, you make it sound like the SNP is the Yes movement. Now, whilst superficially it may appear that way I'd suggest that the two are slowly decoupling and we need to get to the point where the SNP are outside the Yes movement as I fear they are mortally wounded and will from now on only be an albatross around the movement's neck. Actually, we don't want Yousef accepting us, we don't want associated with him or his party from now on. They are toxic.
Delete"That's a strange comment James, you make it sound like the SNP is the Yes movement."
DeleteThey remain the leading part of it - to pretend otherwise would be more than strange, it would be wrong.
Russell said it was difficult to see Alba being welcomed by the SNP due to the vitriol that comes from them about the SNP and Alba's desire to take members away from the SNP.
DeletePeople like Mike (11 point plan) Russell seem to have conveniently forgotten Sturgeons disgraceful multiple attacks on numerous TV stations on Salmond and Alba before the May 21 Holyrood election including Covid briefings. Not to mention Sturgeons gang trying to send Salmond to jail with false accusations. Not to mention the disgraceful spectacle of the FM of Scotland publicly challenging the verdict of the jury, not because there was new evidence but because her pals were accusers. The SNP have a hypocrite for a President who either had no clue what was going on during the Murrells reign or, as is more likely, is a blatant liar like the rest of them.
Well, I am not surprised that the new wider YES movement would not include everyone after all - perhaps we should all fill out applications to see if we are acceptable to the high standards now being set by the party. Sad days, but the decoupling of YES from the SNP is long overdue. As for ALBA then fingers crossed they might start to make some impact seeing that Russell suggests that independence is in an ICU unit because of the antics of his party. I think we must be on Amendment 5 of point one in the 11 point plan.
DeleteJames says :- " They remain the leading part of it..." very true and that is the problem because Sturgeon has turned the SNP in to a devolution party which cannot be trusted to tell the truth about anything. They couldn't even run an honest leadership election.
DeletePromises promises:
1. A guaranteed referendum in first half of this parliament.
2. A referendum in October 2023.
3. A de facto referendum at next UK GE.
4. A special democracy conference in March 2023.
Broken SNP promises broken SNP promises.
Sturgeon just a bit tired to bother achieving what she claims to have wanted all her life - Scottish independence. Nowt but a lying phoney but still some numpties are fooled by her falsehoods.
I think something has happened with the Prof recently. After midday on April 1st he tweeted a bogus April Fool story. I sumply said that "it was bad luck to do April Fools after midday" (mainly because i had my guard down by that time and didn't twig immediately). He blocked me after several years of interaction. That suggests something is not right
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't worry about it. I've had a look, including recent articles, and his analysis of polls is on a level such that his next article is likely to be on the subject of "The comparative use of neurons and neutrons in brain surgery".
ReplyDeleteYeah, me neither.
Have you seen Mike Russell saying “independent can’t be achieved right now” because of SNP scandal? What a rat! I used to respect this man. How convenient that SNP scandal is now being used as yet another excuse for SNP failure on independence. What crap. He clearly doesn’t care about independence or he wouldn’t try so hard to link SNP fortunes with independence at this crucial moment. This scandal has got nothing to do with whether Scotland can be an independent country and everything to do with the SNP party having lost its way. Mike Russell and fellow careerists I hope you’ve got what’s coming to you. We made a clean sweep of Labour careerist MPs in 2015 and we can do the same again, don’t doubt it. The Labour MPs couldn’t believe it either, I vividly remember their disbelief as the tsunami swept toward them. SNP careerist don’t know what whirlwind they’ll reap for these cynical tactics.
ReplyDeleteThe 2015 tsunami wasn't just people withdrawing their support from Labour: 700 thousand Scots still did vote for them, even then. 2015 was a 1.4 million of us voting *for* the SNP.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Scotland
Name the party which will remove the SNP troughers representing us now. Disgust alone won't do it: we have to throw them out by voting for someone else.
But who? Alba? They've flatlined since launch. They got bugger all votes in 2021—mine was one of them—and haven't done any better since. Zero councillors elected, in PR, let alone FPTP MPs! They're nothing like the SNP of 2015. There's just no wheels on the Alba vehicle for independence.
Yousaf following in Sturgeons footsteps by grovelling at the coronation instead of attending the AUOB march in Glasgow as he previously promised. Can't say I ever remember seeing him at any marches in the past.
ReplyDeleteAre you proposing the First Minister of Scotland shouldn’t go to the coronation?
DeleteKnow a man the promises he keeps.
Deletehttps://www.thenational.scot/news/23444131.humza-yousaf-will-attend-king-charless-coronation---not-auob-rally/
I can't vote for a party that abuses us like this. What a pathetic day we're now in.
Anonymous at 9.50 am.
DeleteUseless Yousaf made a promise during the election campaign he would be both first activist of the yes movement and would attend the AUOB march in Glasgow. So by sending his deputy FM to the coronation and him attending the march in Glasgow he would send a message he is serious about independence.
The message he actually sends is that he is a phoney like his predecessor Sturgeon and that the SNP is a phoney party of independence.
I categorically believe that the first minister shouldn't go to the coronation. Having a family sponging off of the rest of the country day in day out is bad enough but wasting money on their pomp is another matter entirely. if the FM didn't go it would in itself become an issue. By going to it indicates an acceptance of the constitutional status quo. This is the guy who said he'd ditch them anyway. So why do it? Because he wants to and all that goes with it.
Delete