Thursday, May 8, 2025

Spare us your crocodile tears, Wings Over Argentina: former independence supporter Stuart Campbell backs Alba man's call for a referendum on abolishing the Scottish Parliament

The only thing missing from the collection now is Campbell calling for the abolition of Scottish local councils, so that even our bins are emptied (or not) by the UK state.  But doubtless he'll get there very, very soon.

Rather brazenly, Campbell starts his meandering demand for the abolition of Scottish self-government with yet another whinge about the SNP, which he claims is offering "an abject vision of a bleak future for independence".  Now, as regular readers know, I have my own concerns about the SNP's lack of a credible strategy for delivering independence, but the last person in a position to offer any critique is Campbell, who on general election day last year instructed his readers to vote Labour - and, get this, told them that in doing so they'd be bringing independence closer.  Given that he got the outcome he wanted, and dozens of pro-independence MPs were replaced with dozens of anti-independence MPs, I'd suggest what Campbell's readers really need to be hearing from him now is a progress report on when we can expect his brilliant "vote Labour, get indy" strategy to bear fruit.  While he's about it, he might like to apologise for unfortunate side-effects such as the scrapping of winter fuel payments for pensioners, devastating benefits cuts for disabled people, and the genocide in Gaza - although admittedly he seems pretty cool with the latter.  But hey, I'm sure all this pain will be well worth it once Keir Starmer delivers independence, doubtless within the next week or two.

Alternatively, Campbell could show some dignified remorse by falling silent for a few years.  I think that's what I'd be doing in his shoes.

As his post trundles closer to backing the call from Mike Dailly of the "pro-independence Alba Party" (ahem) for a referendum on the abolition of the Scottish Parliament and the resumption of direct rule from London, Campbell triumphantly quotes a string of "indy supporters" who want to get rid of Holyrood.  Yeah, just one snag, Stew: on what planet are people who want direct London rule "indy supporters"?  It's a contradiction in terms.  The words you're looking for are "hardline unionists".  One of these people is Morag Kerr, and yes, I remember when she used to be an independence supporter, because at the time she was a regular commenter on Scot Goes Pop.  But this is her quote - 

"Honestly, I remember the euphoria as the result of the 1997 referendum came in, and until 2015 I wasn't disappointed.  Now, thanks to her, I practically want to raze Holyrood to the ground and sow the ground with salt."

Those are not the words of an independence supporter.  And no, I'm not interested in any sophistry along the lines of "Jim Sillars opposed devolution in the 1990s while supporting independence", because his reasoning was very different.  In this case, we're expected to believe that people who despise devolved government with every fibre of their being would somehow support the same politicians (and it would be exactly the same politicians) having even more power in the parliament and government of an independent sovereign state.  Self-evidently, they would not and do not support that.  It's London rule they hanker after.

And so does Campbell, however much he tries to disguise it by modifying the original Alba proposal of a straight Yes/No referendum on abolishing devolution to turn it into a binary choice between full independence and total abolition of the Scottish Parliament.  He would face exactly the same question as above: how can he pose as someone who wants all powers to be transferred to Holyrood, when he's already admitted that the only reason he wants to put its existence on the line is that he viscerally hates the institution?  And that's before we even get to the inconvenient question of how he can justify subverting democracy with a 'stunt' referendum stitch-up that, no matter what its outcome, would end devolution - something that the Scottish people voted in favour of by an overwhelming 3-1 margin in the 1997 referendum. (And yes, the option of independence was excluded from the 1997 referendum, but opinion polls at the time left no doubt that devolution would have been the winner of a multi-option vote.)

46 comments:

  1. Losing 30+ MPs has made no difference to our immediate chances of independence but it has cost the SNP £1M in short money which theoretically could have gone towards an indy campaign.
    The nearer the Scottish Greens are to power the less credible Holyrood is. They are a toxic, incompetent shower and the SNP must make it very clear that there will be no BHA 2.0 if they want to retain my vote.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you don't like the government, vote them out..... democracy, you know.

      Delete
    2. There is an irony that the first comment on this post is a "pro" independence poster hating an independence supporting party.

      "I want independence but only my unique version of it"

      Made me giggle.

      Delete
    3. Don't need to worry about that, there's a ring fenced £600K set aside for any independence campaign.

      Delete
    4. You really haven't lived until you've experienced the rib-tickling hilarity of a "Rev" in-joke. Alf Baird is in stitches.

      Delete
    5. There was a Wild Colonial Bore, Alf Baird was his name...

      Delete
    6. Anon at 1.06. Not been a good year for you has it? Alba imploding, WOS struggling, and Indy support on the rise. Console yourself playing on your N S dart board.

      Delete
  2. Close down Wings. It's become a nest of yoons and quislings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, let's have a binary choice Independence v Close Down Wings referendum. Everyone's a winner.

      Delete
  3. Why the hell should we take any notice of a resident in England ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good question. Maybe Andy Ellis can explain.

      Delete
  4. Instead of a Scottish Parliament we get ruled by governor general Murray. Okay....

    ReplyDelete
  5. Only north Brits would vote to close Holyrood plus a few idiots in Alba.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's ridiculous to cast any doubt on the Alba Party's status as a pro-independence party, and I gather Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh made that very point to her great friend Richard Tice only the other day.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Campbell's upset cos naebody wanted his Wings party.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They really, really didn't want it!

      Delete
  8. Campbell and all his halfwitted frothing and increasingly right wing, conservative and unionist bunch of followers are now anathema to the independence movement.

    They seem to exist in their own small bubble of hatred and conspiracy theories and will never vote for an Independent Scotland if that involves the SNP forming its first government, as would undoubtedly be the case.

    As James said, Campbell's plan of voting Labour at the last general election 'because it would bring independence closer' was as half baked and stupid as his current idea of puting the very existence of the Scottish Parliament on the line.
    When you consider the sheer number of cruel WM Tory and Labour policies that Holyrood has managed to mitigate and the money and distress those mitigations have saved millions of Scots, only a complete fool would chance abolishing it.

    Campbell also has sickening views on the genocide in Gaza, just as he had on the Hillsborough disaster.

    He is a deeply flawed character and has a fragile and destructive personality which seems to attract like minded individuals.

    Scotland beeds none of them.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The fake rev is only interested in his bank account. That has always been the case, even in the lead up to the referendum. He played a huge part in promoting the Nasty Nat narrative that scared off potential yes voters. He has cornered the market in attracting and getting money from mouth frothers. And indirectly that helps the Indy cause by isolating these half wits and keeping them out of sight. Long may he continue doing so.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Reverend Weirdlove: How I learned to stop thinking and love the union.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The rev has his supporters like the fringe element of Alba as well as Barrhead Boy and his podcast frothers.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barrhead Boy has moved on to 'Liberate Scotland' and has been slamming Alba for not signing up to it.

      Delete
    2. What in Christ's name is "Liberate Scotland" when it's at home?

      Delete
    3. It's the ISP under another name. What unites them is their hatred of the SNP.

      Delete
    4. It's kinda funny that Alba is getting flack from their own supporters because MacAskill wrote to John Swinney to take part in a pro-indy summit and the suggestion of voting SNP 1 Alba 2 in the election.

      Delete
    5. Alba is itself a fringe element. It should just cease. Barrhead Boy? Where does he choose to live?

      Delete
    6. Barcelona...such a beautiful horizon sang Freddie Mercury.

      Delete
    7. Is he scared to come back to Scotland?

      Delete
  12. In our present world parliamentary democracy serves the interests of the rich. Should we be rid of it to get ourselves oppressed so much that we all turn, overnight, into revolutionaries ?
    Drivel !
    Currently we can at least have an independence movement. Human frailty and self serving today gives us a docile, troughing SNP leadership. It's our job to try to change that.

    Campbell has made himself a poisonous irrelevance and Alba seems to be not far behind him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He seems to be the sort of person who would complain if a local chef made a pear and almond tart.

      Delete
    2. Musk-Campbell Fruitcake CompanyMay 8, 2025 at 3:47 PM

      The reverend doesn't particularly like pear and almond tart. Living in England after all these years he misses Lees macaroon bars and Tunnock's teacakes. Most of he misses bottles of pop known as Iron brew.

      Delete
  13. lol! At one of the nostalgia 2014 hail Eck events, Tas introduced him as a hero to a heroes welcome. Maybe his wee Alba book was really a slush fund for Eck and Alba. That would be a ripper.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Moon howling pish, that could apply to Wings.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's almost the perfect description, in fact! Glad to see James has deleted the Rev's infantile abuse.

      Delete
    2. he deletes any comments that disagree with him

      Delete
    3. Anon 11.36 the Rev does.

      Delete
  15. They are wrong in stating that Jim Sillars "opposed devolution in the 90's". Sillars position was a good bit more nuanced than that. He was opposed to the SNP being directly involved in the Constitutional Convention. Like many of us inside the SNP at that time he did not want the SNP to become an instrument of the unionist parties in forming a settlement that wasn't going to acknowledge independence as an option for Scottish self government. The collective view of many of us in the SNP at the time was that a devolved Scottish Assembly was the unionists game. If they could deliver it then it would be a step forward. We saw the SNP's role as being the threat to Labour if they didn't deliver. The catalyst that sent Labour back down the devolution path was Sillars victory in Govan in 1988. That concentrated the Labour Party's mind. Prior to Govan, Labour had lost all interest in devolution.

    ReplyDelete
  16. That would be the same Jim Sillars who donated a couple of grand to Jackie Baillie's campaign fund ?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Sadly, the Jim Sillars that did that was not the man he was during the early years of the 1990's.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I could practically eat a horse between two bread vans

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hyperbole more than figurative.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yesindyref2: no, Morag Kerr does not support independence. Stop lying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://wingsoverscotland.com/to-the-national-secretary/

      Delete