A pro-independence blog by James Kelly - voted one of Scotland's top 10 political websites.
Saturday, October 19, 2024
All of the last six GB-wide polls have put Labour in the 20s - that's the sort of unpopularity associated with Michael Foot, John Major and William Hague
Friday, October 18, 2024
So, Tory voters of Falkirk South: what was it that first attracted you to Keir Starmer's hard-right Labour party?
Labour 30.5% (+8.1)
Conservatives 14.7% (-13.9)
Reform UK 9.9% (n/a)
Independent - McKean 5.5% (n/a)
Greens 4.5% (-1.1)
Liberal Democrats 3.6% (n/a)
Find Out Now! Find Out How? Find Out WOW!!! Sensational MRP projection suggests SNP would win a 2019-style landslide victory if another general election was held now
There was a brief moment of hope for Robert Jenrick in the Tory leadership contest a couple of days ago when a Find Out Now MRP projection suggested he would win more seats in a general election than Kemi Badenoch would (although the results for both of them were fairly dire). That hope has now been snuffed out by last night's head-to-head GB News debate, which like all normal people I didn't watch, but which seems to have been a clear win for Kemi Badenoch. Hilariously, ConservativeHome's verdict on the debate was "that's two hours of our lives we won't get back".
Nevertheless, the Find Out Now results are still of interest for other reasons, because the hypothetical questions about whether Jenrick or Badenoch is Tory leader shouldn't really affect the SNP v Labour battle in Scotland, and in both scenarios the SNP are projected to score a landslide victory (remember 29 seats is the target for a majority in Scotland).
Seats projection if Badenoch is Conservative leader:
Seats projection if Jenrick is Conservative leader:
Thursday, October 17, 2024
The Gaza genocide could be a watershed moment in the relationship between the BBC and its viewers - from now on, social media may start to become more trusted than the state broadcaster
With the recent 'generation anniversary' marking the passing of exactly one generation since the independence referendum was held in 2014, I was thinking back to the day after the referendum, when a conspiracy theory went viral on Facebook about the vote having been rigged. A friend of mine posted it, and we probably all know at least one person who did that - feelings were raw, and a touch of wishful thinking was inevitable. The story wasn't even mentioned on the BBC, and people probably - and with some justification - saw that as an example of why the mainstream media could be trusted far more than social media. If an allegation is essentially without foundation, the mainstream media will ignore it, while it'll still be plastered all over social media if enough people want to believe it.
But contrast that incident with what happened the other day, when once again a story was all over social media but ignored by the BBC. For about 24 hours, every third or fourth post I saw on Twitter was a photo of Palestinian civilians being burned to death in a hospital tent by the Israeli military. I didn't watch the BBC that day, but I'm reliably informed that news bulletins didn't mention the story, even in passing. That wasn't because the story was in any sense a conspiracy theory, or because there was a lack of evidence to confirm what had happened, or because there was any doubt that Israel was responsible for it. The BBC simply made an editorial decision to ignore the atrocity, and it's extremely hard to see that it could have had any other reasoning than that the image of the Israeli state must be protected. If any other state's military had burned civilians to death, and if it had been so well documented, it would plainly have been deemed newsworthy and might well even have been the lead headline. The conclusion people are likely to draw from having been far, far better informed by social media is that the BBC is now less trustworthy than sites like Twitter and Facebook, because it is serving the agenda of a foreign power and acting against the interests of viewers by deliberately withholding important information from them.
This is one reason why the small minority of independence supporters who say "we're sick of hearing about Gaza, let's focus on independence" are so misguided. Obviously the main reason for not ignoring Gaza is that we're all human beings and you don't turn your eyes away from an ongoing genocide. But it's also the case that faith in British institutions such as the government and the BBC is being undermined before our eyes by the response to the genocide. The penny is beginning to drop for many voters, particularly young voters, about how power is exercised in the United Kingdom and in the service of whom. That process could indirectly lead to Scotland becoming an independent country, or at least prove to be a significant contributory factor.
We've seen a similar effect before - I have no doubt that the SNP wouldn't have crept over the line for their narrow win in 2007 if trust in the Labour party hadn't been severely eroded by the illegal invasion of Iraq four years earlier.
Wednesday, October 16, 2024
The Famous Hypocrisy of the Grouse
So it's a curious thing - as you may have seen on Twitter, I've been receiving some totally unprovoked abusive DMs from Grouse Beater of all people. I did have problems with him many years ago, but someone interceded to end the rift, I had a long phone conversation with him and we made our peace with each other. Since then, I've gone out of my way to tread gingerly with him, and when I've seen him have blazing arguments with other people (including in the comments section of this blog), I've just stood right back and let him get on with it, even when I thought he was in the wrong. But even those precautions weren't enough, it seems.
So what's his foul-mouthed harrumphing about this time? To be blunt, it's just sheer hypocrisy on his part. As you may remember, he was expelled from the SNP several years ago for alleged anti-semitism. Countless numbers of us defended him at the time, because his words were actually extremely ambiguous and were open to plenty of alternative innocent explanations. But no good deed goes unpunished, as the saying goes, and he seems to now have a visceral loathing of many of those who defended him most strongly, because some of them have since fallen foul of strikingly similar abuses of the Alba disciplinary process and have dared to speak up about it, just as he spoke up about the SNP's ill-treatment of himself. Suddenly he's become a born again Stalinist, saying that anyone who has been trampled on should just shut up and slink away where he doesn't have to think about them or remember their existence, because it's just so darn inconvenient to the party that large numbers of people should actually know that abuses of power have taken place. As long as he isn't the one on the receiving end, and as long as the people being silenced are ones he dislikes and would prefer to shut up, it's all totally fine.
In fact, let's be honest: he would be an enthusiastic cheerleader for someone being expelled for exactly the same reason he was expelled from the SNP, just so long as you first stick a blue Alba rosette on the Conduct Committee.
Bizarrely, what seemed to trigger him tonight was that the people he calls "the Famous Five", which seems to be an alternative name for Shannon Donoghue's "wee gang of malcontents", have been paying generous tribute to Alex Salmond and saying very complimentary things about him.
I asked Grouse Beater if he would prefer them to be making disrespectful comments about Mr Salmond at a time like this. Unsurprisingly, he didn't have much of an answer.
Could I just say to @Grouse_Beater, who has been sending me totally unprovoked abusive DMs and blocking me before I could reply: you, sir, are a hypocrite. You, sir, are a coward. I'm not going to tolerate this behaviour from anyone, no matter what my previous respect for them.
— James Kelly (@JamesKelly) October 15, 2024
Tuesday, October 15, 2024
So where does the independence movement go from here?
Robin McAlpine's latest piece presents the independence movement as having been "orphaned" by Alex Salmond's death, with a sudden realisation that "we're going to have to do it on our own", and with no sign of a new generation of Salmond-like charismatic leaders to guide us to the promised land. Others have expressed similar sentiments, but I must say I don't see it that way. If the orphaning occurred, it was several years ago. When Mr Salmond appeared on mainstream media in recent years, it was generally only to commentate on the fortunes of his former colleagues, in much the same way that Roy Hattersley used to pop up now and again to give his thoughts on New Labour. Mr Salmond was no longer really seen as an active participant in the political process, even though on paper that's exactly what he was.
It's possible that he could yet have become an active participant once again on more than just paper, and that was what all of us in Alba hoped for, but my own view was that was becoming less and less likely due to Alba's direction of travel - in other words its drift towards authoritarianism (with accompanying mini-purges), which made it more and more of a narrow sect centred around a few closely-knit families and friends, rather than the open, welcoming space for everyone on the radical end of the independence movement that it really needed to be to have any hope of creeping up to the level of support that might win it Holyrood list seats. Now is not the moment to be commenting in detail on the extent to which Mr Salmond's own decisions contributed to Alba going down that wrong path, although in fairness he may sometimes have been faced with impossible dilemmas given his heavy reliance on those who were keeping the party afloat financially.
So even without the tragic loss of Mr Salmond, it's highly likely that independence would have had to be won by a new generation of talent within the SNP's own ranks. (Unless of course John Swinney actually *does something* in his remaining time as leader, but we all know he won't.) Realistically, that probably means Kate Forbes and Stephen Flynn. The current ruling faction clearly want Flynn to be the next leader with Forbes in a lesser role, whereas I firmly believe it should be the other way around - Forbes as leader, Flynn as second-in-command. But either way they look like being the two key figures. Charisma-wise, how do they compare with Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon at a similar stage in their careers? I would actually say extremely well.
In my blogpost in the minutes after Mr Salmond's death was announced, I mentioned that he single-handedly converted me to the cause of independence with his persuasiveness in a 1992 episode of Election Call hosted by Nick Ross. That's absolutely true, but I have other memories of his TV performances from around that time which are much more mixed. When he stood for SNP leader in 1990, I was very, very young, but I was just about old enough to be taking a tentative interest in politics, and I remember him taking part in an informal debate with his opponent Margaret Ewing on Left, Right and Centre - Kirsty Wark's show, although Brian Taylor was the moderator for the debate. Taylor asked the two candidates how they differentiated themselves from each other, and Ms Ewing was extremely clear - she felt she had a stronger focus on social justice. But Mr Salmond kept speaking on her behalf, saying that Taylor was going to fail to identify any divisions because Ms Ewing actually agreed with him about absolutely everything. I found that tactic slightly irritating, and I bet I wasn't the only viewer who reacted like that.
Mr Salmond himself used to recount an incident from the late 80s, when he got annoyed with Robin Day for shutting him down on an episode of Question Time. Day asked him to watch the programme back and see if he felt the same way afterwards. He took that advice and phoned Day later to apologise, because he realised that he had gone too far and had been in danger of losing the audience, and that if anything Day had done him a massive favour by stopping him. So in a nutshell Mr Salmond was not the finished article in the late 80s and early 90s, and we tend to forget that. He was a good debater but he still had plenty left to learn, and plenty of rough edges to smooth off. Even by around 1995, when he was 40 years old and had started to rack up a few electoral breakthroughs, he wasn't yet being talked about as one of the finest politicians of his generation. He grew in stature over the late 90s, and even during the four years in the early noughties when he was no longer leader.
The pattern was similar for Nicola Sturgeon. Before Mr Salmond's dramatic comeback, she had been intending to stand in the 2004 leadership election, but no-one was in any doubt that she would have lost to Roseanna Cunningham. That seems incredible in retrospect, but the 34-year-old Sturgeon simply wasn't seen as the political titan she later became. I've said myself that I never rated the younger Ms Sturgeon - I thought she mimicked Mr Salmond's style of delivery but lacked his charisma. I felt she came across as an automaton.
Which is as much as to say that politics isn't tennis - ie. it's not necessarily a young person's sport, and there's no reason to assume thirtysomethings like Forbes and Flynn have yet reached their peak. They're already highly regarded and as they become older they could easily emerge as statesmen/stateswomen on a par with Salmond and Sturgeon. My question is not whether they're charismatic enough, but whether they're sufficiently committed to do what it takes to bring about independence, or whether other priorities will get in the way.
I had a long conversation with Alex Salmond during the 2023 SNP leadership election. Although that was eighteen months ago, I think that was the second-last time I spoke to him before he died - relations subsequently cooled after I started taking a stand against the Alba leadership's increasing authoritarianism. I don't think I'm revealing any state secrets in saying that he regarded Humza Yousaf as having no interest at all in delivering independence, and that he broadly sympathised with the strategy Ash Regan had set out (although he was at pains to point out that Ms Regan was genuinely not 'his' candidate and she was not doing his bidding - it was just a natural convergence of views). However, I knew Ms Regan had next to no chance of winning, so I asked Mr Salmond the only question that seemed to matter: "what about Kate Forbes?"
He paused for a moment, chuckled, and said "well, I think she does support independence". OK, that's a start, I said.
As far as Alba's own potential role is concerned, I and others have tried over the last year to democratise the party but hit a brick wall, which leaves power heavily concentrated in the leader. That means absolutely everything depends on who is elected to replace Mr Salmond. It shouldn't need to be as 'all or nothing' as that but unfortunately it is. If an authoritarian machine politician becomes leader, the party will be essentially finished. A reforming leader might just give it a fighting chance.
Monday, October 14, 2024
Alex Salmond's appearance on the Scot Goes Popcast, 6th April 2021
A couple of you have asked for the link to Alex Salmond's appearance on the Scot Goes Popcast at the time of Alba's founding. You can watch the video version below. I was one of umpteen alternative media people (and indeed mainstream media people) who were given a slot with him that day, so he'd already been going for hours by the time it was my turn - his mental stamina was incredible.
Although I was an enthusiast for the Alba project and I may already have joined the party by the time the interview took place, I didn't allow my journalistic pride (or my blogger's pride if you prefer) to desert me - I made sure I asked him a few awkward questions. One in particular had longer term significance than I could possibly have realised at the time.
It's only 25 minutes long, so sit back and allow yourself to be transported back in time three and a half years to what already seems like a very different political era.