The Gulf War
Yesterday we noted in passing that independence support now outstrips that of the SNP by more than 20 points, making the party into a gigantic liability as the vehicle for enabling Scots to leave the UK. Put simply, even when voters want independence (as most now do), they’re not willing to vote SNP to get it.
(Not, of course, that they WOULD get it if they voted SNP – the party still having no coherent or credible strategy to achieve it – but more than 40% of would-be Yes voters are no longer prepared to even try giving them the benefit of yet another mandate.)
And since what everyone loves most of all on New Year’s Day is a good old wade in some political stats, we thought we’d take a little more detail on that.
In the two years leading up to the referendum, support for independence and the SNP – logically enough – mirrored each other fairly closely, mostly bumping along between high 30s and mid-40s.
There have been a few significant events since then that break the last 11 years up into some handy sections:
(1) INDYREF TO BREXIT (Oct 2014 – June 2016)
A strong period for both Yes and the SNP, as Scots decided that having voted No, they wanted a distinctly Scottish party to look after their interests and try to secure the desperate promises made by the “Better Together” campaign before the vote. Unionist thuggery in George Square the day after the vote swiftly regalvanised the indy side in determination that while the battle may have been lost, the war was not over, and the prospect of Brexit on the horizon seemed to offer an opportunity.
(2) BREXIT TO COVID (June 2016 – Feb 2020)
Growth for indy as Scotland was indeed dragged out of the EU despite voting 62-38 to stay in, but the SNP’s failure to weaponise the vote for independence, and to instead try to overturn the Brexit vote for the whole UK, saw a significant drop in their support, and 500,000 SNP voters either stayed home or switched in the 2017 snap UK election.
(3) COVID TO HOLYROOD 2021 (Mar 2020 – May 2021)
Great times for the SNP, as calm daily broadcasts about the pandemic from Nicola Sturgeon contrasted sharply with the shambles presided over by Boris Johnson south of the border (even though in the end there was almost no difference in Scottish and English casualty rates). They recovered a lot of their lost vote, and indy support hit a sustained majority over a calendar year for the first time ever.
(4/5) REST OF 2021/2022
An unnecessary coalition with the Greens – whose only function was to save Nicola Sturgeon from potential embarrassment, and at the cost of pursuing some deeply unpopular and damaging fringe policies – plus the start of Operation Branchform took a chunk out of SNP support and put No back ahead on the constitution.
(6) 2023
After the shameful railroading of the Gender Recognition Reform Bill a few days before Christmas 2022 (see “deeply unpopular and damaging fringe policies”), the Isla Bryson scandal detonates under Nicola Sturgeon’s feet.
Hot on its heels, Sturgeon, Peter Murrell and Colin Beattie are arrested by Operation Branchform officers on suspicion of embezzling money raised to fight a second indyref. Sturgeon resigns a few days before her arrest and Humza Yousaf wins a leadership election very narrowly despite the overwhelming backing of the parliamentary party, taking less than half of the first-preference votes.
Indyref support holds firm but the SNP plunge into the mid-30s, their lowest ratings since before Alex Salmond’s historic landslide majority 12 years earlier.
(7) 2024
Yousaf’s administration implodes after he makes a hamfisted botch of sacking the Greens, and John Swinney is elected unopposed when nobody else puts themselves forward to lead the party of government in Scotland. He takes charge in time to see the party almost wiped out in the UK general election, losing all but nine of its 48 MPs. Indy support continues to hold but Swinney can’t arrest the SNP’s slide. Labour briefly take the lead in Scottish polling for almost the first time in nearly 20 years.
(8) 2025
But very quickly, Sir Keir Starmer’s jaw-droppingly inept Labour UK government drives both UK and Scottish Labour polling off a cliff, putting the SNP back at the top of the pile in Scotland even though their own support has only barely stabilised, let alone recovered. The party is a shambles – membership has fallen by almost 60% since the heady days of 2021, the coffers are empty and almost half their MSPs decline to stand in the 2026 Holyrood election, leaving their seats to be contested by unknown novices and a handful of 2024 Westminster rejects.
With chaos at Westminster and Nigel Farage waiting in the wings, independence support climbs back to just over 50% (albeit in a year when there were far fewer polls than previous ones – just 19 in 2025, compared to 29 in 2024 and 37 in 2023).
Averaged over the full year, the gap between it and those still willing to vote for the SNP is now 19.1 points. And here’s all the above in a single image:
The precise reasons for that now-massive gulf are of course a matter of opinion and speculation. But what’s beyond a doubt is that for whatever reason, the SNP are no longer synonymous with independence for Scotland – still supposedly the party’s primary purpose but to which it now only pays vague lip service in much the same way Labour has been doing for the last 120 years over abolishing the House Of Lords.
The bond between party and goal is broken, and it’s extremely difficult to even begin to imagine what could possibly restore it. The SNP remain the least unpopular of a bundle of Scottish political parties that have never been more despised by the entire electorate, but voting for them now is more like a matter of muscle memory and the (diminished) buzz of victory than a demonstration of faith in their ability to achieve anything. Only the paralysingly stupid and the infinitely gullible, their numbers shrinking every year, still actually believe.
The SNP richly deserves the fate of the Irish Parliamentary Party, but regretfully we must relate that as yet there is no sign of it on the horizon.
We hate to start 2026 as gloomily as 2025 ended, readers, and we hope we haven’t made your hangover worse. If you want to hold onto some small semblance of cheer between now and May, it might be an idea to just stay drunk.
SNP? Not for me. (From a YES voter). Happy New Year.
Great analysis, Rev.
“The bond between party and goal is broken” is truly a reflection of the association between the SNP and Scotland’s Cause.
I’ve looked at the relationship between SNP and YES in Norstat (formerly Panelbase) opinion polls over the periods 2020-22, on the one hand, and 2023-25, on the other. I found the following:
2020-22: Strong and POSITIVE correlation (coefficient = +0.7)
2023-25: Weak and NEGATIVE correlation (coefficient= -0.2)
Furthermore, looking at the relationship between British Labour and YES support:
2020-22: Weak and NEGATIVE correlation (coefficient = -0.4)
2023-25: Strong and NEGATIVE correlation (coefficient= -0.8)
Conclusion:
YES sentiment is now negatively linked to the unpopular and inept UK Government/British Labour party rather than any (perceived) positive actions of Scottish Government/SNP in pursuit of Independence (as there haven’t been any).
Excellent analysis as always.
A wee typographical lapse in No. 8 perhaps…..
“even though their own support has only barely stabilised, let alone recover.”
[Yes, I, know…. I DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN ]
Happy New Year to you and yours by the way!
Happy New Year tae all.
Surely even the most ardent SNP supporter must recognise that Swinney has tae go?
Most of the snp members are still saying vote 1&2 snp, they’re not even thinking of ditching the swine swinney
A guid New Year tae ane an aa / Bliadhna Mhath Ùr / Happy New Year
Indy for Scotland!
SNP Out!
How big does that margin need to be before it attracts someone to fill that vacuum? And who would it be? Or, more accurately, how can Reform be enticed to step in, to ensure their Make England Great Again project becomes are roaring success?
You don’t need The Union, but you do need some way of cooperating to everyone’s benefit – it’s a small, crowded island after all. Two independent nations, working together, along with Eire might be an attractive prospect, particularly if it stabilised Europe’s west coast (keeping the American’s happy) and provided a model on cooperation to offer European countries after the now near-certain implosion of the EU.
Suddenly, 2026 looks like the year of change.
The SNP has shown to the voters that they aren’t any good in government, they have no ideas and out source everything to privates companies here is where the SNP and its moronic leadership has failed and why Alex Salmond was a success. hence the leadership now portraying Salmond as a bully, when he’s wasn’t. Your leader isn’t a bully if he needs to tell you how to do your fucking job, its you who is the failure. Scotland doesn’t have a leader anymore we just have a caretaker in charge of a parliament full of tossers, taking orders from someone else down south.
The electorate do not like to be lied to. For those of us who are old enough to remember, this is why the SNP rose to power and the reason the voters fell out with the labour party. The SNP has taken over from the Labour party and have now become the labour party in all but name. Crying wolf in every single election on Independence or remaining in the EU, sooner or later this will of course turn the voters away from voting for the SNP and the poling suggest this is whats happened.
The SNP has nothing to offer any more. It doesn’t represent Scotland in any shape or form, it doesn’t even stand up for Scotland its people or its industry, our culture, or our history and it most certainly doesn’t stand up for woman or Scottish justice system.
For me I didn’t start voting for the SNP after the referendum I’ve always been SNP. I didn’t want to leave and to be honest I never did, the SNP left me hence the NUSNP. Now I all I want is for the SNP to be destroyed and this is exactly what the leader and membership wants as well.
The only thing I believe voters see in the SNP, is that they are Scottish and nothing more. The party doesn’t even want Scotland to exist any more and are happy for the English border to head all the way up to the Shetland Islands, this is what we who are still Scots need to fight against.
I don’t believe that the SNP will win a huge majority this year this is only thing me and Swinney agree on.
Happy New Year to you all from a pile of rocks off the West coast of the colony also known as Jockistan. My resolution for 2026 is to do anything I can to get rid of our MSP Ms Minto of the SNP. I was still a member when she was selected to stand and my last act before leaving was to try and get another candidate selected and no it was not Rhiannon Spear if any of you remember her. Sadly out here if you put a SNP rosette on a chimp it will likely get elected. During the hustings for the council elections held on zoom one of the SNP candidates kept sipping from a large mug and as the evening wore on his speech become slurred and he fell asleep and still got elected. At least this time round we have an ISP candidate standing under the Liberate banner so no need to spoil a ballot.
I remember back in about 1994 there was a similar gulf between support for independence (one poll had it at 50%) and the SNP in the mid-20s. I asked Alex Salmond about it but he didn’t seem to be concerned. He had various sociological/psychological explanations which were probably about right.
It’s a very different matter now though.
A happy new year to everyone,
The bond between party and goal is broken..
Or
The bond between politician and people is broken,
They all are hoping to reach the bibical Great Reset date of the Globalist in 2030.
When nations merge to become under one umbrella of one government,
Being aware of that bigger plan of union and further union might be considered during voting period.
Bottom rung local elections, next rung of ladder elections until there are no elections held at all like in England.
So amusing that unionists and globalist alike are trying to persuade Scotland where to place there X for the pretence of Scottish democracy,
While in England they are cancelling Elections, so millions cannot have democracy, it appears that the combination of unionist and globalist government can proxy vote for you.
But here they are using blindfold democracy to not telling the truth and the whole truth.
They decide the outcome results of an election regardless of whom put the X’s in the box or whare.
Managed voting.or prevent them voting. This is modern Britain,
The SNP do not represent Scotland any more than Nigal Farage does.
Both just turn their jackets inside out depending where the are Standing,
days of old they were called turncoats I think,
Or wolf in Sheeps’s clothing,
Nigel Farage is the NuSNP replacement for Scotland, as they morph into conservatives, and a union blend party,
However it will still be a union party.
Continental Drift will separate Scotland fae England, before the SNP does.
I like the picture your sentiment paints in ma heid, Vivian O’Blivion.
It is immense and it is glorious and as Scotland sails off to a happier place it’s vast anchor is cast adrift and the Sun breaks through a lang syne darkened sky warming the hopes and hearts of the Scots.
Let’s make a movie.
If your going to vote, do the Cross in box yourself, demand the votes are counted where they are and not transported, demand the results are made public, record it.
That way the votes can no longer be rigged, if you do not trust the politicians, why be so trusting to supply the results for you after they took those votes away from your sight like a fake majician.
Scotland is far to trusting.
Aye, ye hiv a braw talent, WoS, it cannae be denied.
Yer nous and wit kin see the patterns vague tae mony an ee an ye clearly and cleverly set thaim doun on the digi-page fir the rest o us tae see – an aften, if nae ayeweys, alang wi pictours tae.
Even to the casual eye the SNP now appears to have nicked Al Capone’s overcoat and casually thrown it about its swaggering shoulders whilst smoking a fat cigar and blowing its contemptuously exhaled smoke in the face of the Scots.
The SNP comes ower as a criminal organisation that can barely be bothered tae hide ahint its lazy air of respectability that feigns a political party; a mask tae cover the faces o’ a gang o’ thieves.
The SNP is a political party that would have the Scots believe it supports Scottish independence, and that its gangsta leadership stands in defence of the Scots instead of selling them out tae its maister for some coin and a pension.
Anyway, the SNP are juist aboot feenished… tho it might bugger the Scots aboot a whiles longer until its ‘death blooter’ can finally, and at lang laist, be brought doun upon its sleekit heid when the Scots utterly abandon it… hopefully next May.
A hauf bottle o whisky later and my alcohol addled heid came up wi theis (sarcasm of course… until the final verse):
Happy New Year, awbody. A howp it’s guid tae youse aw.
P.S. Remember tae stay clear of empires… ye cannae trust thaim – they’re dangerous tae ye and bad fir yer country’s health.
P.P.S.If I have made any typos the day, and fowk hiv noticed, just ignore them… recovering from the effects of a hauf bottle of whisky is not conducive to correct and precise grammar.
All the naysayer commenters on this site rip ma knitting.
James Kelly assures us that it must be “both votes SNP”.
By a process of arithmetic, if the SNP are at 31% in the polls, and we give them both votes, that adds up to 62%, and a landslide.
Hurrah for the SNP. Put your faith in Honest John, and James Kelly.
Honest John one of the first successful charisma bypass operations in our wee country. As for James Kelly and his pop goes the weasel site best ignore him as we are not supposed to mock the afflicted according to my late mother.
A Good New Year and a good article.
The bond between independence and the SNP has indeed been broken. Where the SNP has fallen is very much the same as that of the Irish National Party just over a hundred years ago.
History repeats and not by accident. But the Irish Party was swept away and replaced by a new Irish Independence Party and the demand and desire for independence did not, as even a rudimentary knowledge of history will tell, did not go away.
And that is true to in Scotland. The desire for independence has not gone away only the political party to deliver it.
But you know what, Ireland gained its independence and so will Scotland too. In 1920 Britain was still the most powerful country in the world. But it lost Ireland where thereafter it lost colony after colony after colony – and it certainly ain’t the most powerful country in the world now as it declines like a sinking SS Britannia.
Think about that and realise that Scotland’s day will come. They will be gone. So muse Rev Stu’s wise words but retain hope. Independence will come.
Question
Are those who support independence but not the SNP going to vote for someone else, or not vote at all?
Given the negligible support for Alba and ISP, assuming the latter?
Correct.
Can the talking heads here who brook no disagreement please advise; who should we actually vote for?
ISP and Liberate etc get absolutely hee haw analysis here, meaning few, even here, are “up” on their policies.
Why?
Hmmmm..
And then there is this “Labour and SNP” working together TOTAL nonsense.
Honestly!!
Labour despise the SNP as they reckon they are stealing their automatic birthright voting base and absolutely hate them.
Need to watch local authority elections closer Rev to see who Labour is actually prepared to work alongside (Tories)..
Personally I am sick and tired of the Reform talk here that is full of jolly-boy freaks and God knows what else that will (if in govt) make even Niklas mediocracy sycophants look competent- and that would take something!
Why not discuss these other independence parties/ initiatives as opposed to just leaving them as chum in the water for the Yoonist/ Site spoilers here to “Whang oan aboot” as they fervently type one handed having a ménage d ‘Un while listening to Enya with a picture of Fagman in front of them?
And yes, for the benefit of the Yoonists/ site spoilers this was posted in the wee small hours.
Big deal milk monitors..
AE and A:
Righto chaps!
Nothing new though I’m afraid to say in those 2 word salad “responses” though is there?
May I therefore direct you back to my simple and fairly straightforward question?
You’ve told us who not to vote for.
So..
Who should we vote for?
Thanks in anticipation of a straightforward answer..
I’m not sure which bits you’re having trouble with: perhaps if I use words with fewer syllables, or draw you a picture you’ll be able to follow. doubtless we’ll know because we’ll be able to see your lips move.
I’ve already said, but for the benefit of the slow learners up the back, vote for any pro-independence party or independent candidate supporting the principle of plebiscitary elections. If there are none, spoil you ballot.
Of course, if the lumpen electorate continue to vote for an unreformed SNP it won’t do any good, or make any difference at #HR2026 elections, but it might finally start to dawn on them when they realise they face the prospect of PM Farage after the next Westminster election.
Happy now? Good. Carry on.
AE @ 9.21
Ahh..
And those parties meeting your criteria are??
They’re not my parties or my criteria. Presumably Alba, ISP, I4I, Liberate Scotland….?
There may be others no doubt.
AE @ 7.02
Nobody said they were your parties, just those who you feel meet the criteria that YOU stated.
Anyway, let’s go full circle.
I originally asked why parties such as those you have just named as presumably suitable to warrant your cross in the box have no real presence on this independence supporting site?
Would have saved a lot of time in word salad tedious sermonising from you if you had simply responded in better fashion in the first place.
Have a nice day.
@ YL 2.11am
The issue was with your OP not my response. Any party advocating plebiscitary elections would potentially get my vote. In recent elections there haven’t always been any such parties standing where I live, so I spoiled my ballot.
Do your own homework and research the party programmes yourself: I’m not that interested in them because I don’t feel any of them offer a way out of our current dilemma.
I think you can discern where I might want you to stuff your passive aggressive response. (Hint: it isn’t sunny there).
Have a nice life.
‘Sovereignty party leader Brian Nugent announced this morning he would be standing for both the Shetland constituency and the Highlands and Islands regional list’
We need to nail this ongoing bullshit argument that the reason “minor” pro indy parties are failing to make progress is either that people don’t know about them because there’s no MSM coverage, or – even more outlandishly – that it’s the result of some grand conspiracy theory by the MSM and/or other sinister actors.
Of course lots of zoomers otherwise insist the MSM is dying on its arse and has no influence, so…you know….make your mind up folks!
The chances of ISP, Liberate Scotland and others making progress when Alba appears to have failed to do so seem pretty slim. There’s nothing stopping the general voting public finding out about the policies of these parties, but given the negligible percentages any of these parties are polling at or gain in elections, it’s hardly surprising they gain little coverage.
Also, nothing stops advocates of the ISP, Liberate Scotland et al on here telling us in detail what their policies are. We do have some proponents of Salvo and cunning plans for indy banging on often at extreme length about their hot takes on how they’re going to deliver indy without recourse to pesky details like referendums, elections or demonstrating an actual majority.
Although they keep assuring us the logic of their case is self evident and overwhelming, their confidence is not reflected in any uptick in popular support, or any significant academic, legal or constitutional experts.
The fact is lots of Scots appear to have been convinced by the idea of voting for Reform, but there’s been no equivalent of people deciding to vote Alba, ISP or Liberate Scotland. Doubtless most of those planning to vote Reform would otherwise vote Tory and will be convinced unionists, but significant numbers come from the less savoury fringes of the nationalist movement: we’ve seen the evidence here. Anti-EU, anti-immigration, anti English, pro Uncle Vlad, keen proponents of Jockistinian narratives.
They represent a tiny minority of Scots voters overall or of the general independence movement.
The only way to progress our common cause is to have a commitment to plebiscitary elections. That doesn’t need an umbrella movement, or even for all the parties signed up to the principle to like each other or agree on policies except that ONE principle. The SNP, being the prime obstacle to that must either be destroyed as the IPP in Ireland was in 1918, or changed from within. The latter seems very unlikely…so lets concentrate on doing the former.
Re: some analysis on ISP/Liberate etc. on the current trajectory a good outcome would be to come in alongside all the other nutty/eccentric/extremist etc. parties/individuals that put themselves up for election every time. That’s because as far as I can see they are undertaking virtually no serious campaigning at all and so the vast majority of Scot’s will go into 26 with no idea of who these parties are or any of their policies.
That means all almost anyone will have to go on is the name they see written on the paper in the polling booth, and we know voters don’t make decisions that way.
I see we have some of the usual grumbling about why this site doesn’t come out with a big public endorsement. I’ve no idea of Stu’s view on this, but it smacks of an enormous amount of hubris and arrogance to think that any candidate or party is entitled to an endorsement from anyone, let alone a popular commentator. For a commentator to make a political endorsement is not a free or neutral act, it inevitably comes with a cost, leads to accusations of partisan bias and puts others off side. It is particularly ridiculous in a context where those expecting the endorsement are unable/unwilling to put the work in themselves.
At a minimum, I would have thought if any of these characters were serious they’d have visited this and other site owners in person to try and make the case. Has that happened?
Aidan @ 1.34
That post is a ridiculous piece of arrant politicking sophistry.
An independence supporting site can, and should, look at, and criticise if need be the other parties.
To claim that is an “endorsement” is rank mendacity truly worthy of Better Togethers tripe..
Perhaps it suits your own worldview in the “SNP must perish” mantra in that no dialogue in legacy/ successor party is tolerated.
That only suits the Union.
I couldn’t find an accurate number for how many candidates put themselves forward in 21, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the number is in excess of 2,000, with many of those belonging to similar microparties to Liberate etc. who have absolutely no impact on the outcome at a national level. Should Stu nevertheless go through each and every one and often a long and detailed analysis?
The point remains YL, if they want to be taken seriously as a national force then they need to act like one.
The now ever widening gulf between votes for SNP and votes for independence may be likened to the established business strategy theory known as ‘strategic drift’. This ‘strategic drift’ occurs where the strategy of an organisation no longer fits the ever changing business environment it exists and competes within.
This widening gulf is usually exploited by organisations offering ‘the market’ (in this case voters) what it wants, in this instance independence.
Hence LIBERATE SCOTLAND gives the market/voter what they want – ‘independence, nothing else’.
Liberate Scotland are not polling as yet but they surely stand to fill the SNP/independence gap, following on from the continued ‘strategic drift’ of the once dominant national party onto the jaggy rocks of colonialism.
“…the continued ‘strategic drift’ of the once dominant national party onto the jaggy rocks of colonialism.”
An apposite metaphor, one that paints an immensely satisfying picture in the imagination.
Alf, I’m afraid a lonely fart will have more effect than liberate Scotland will.
We need to stop fucking around with misinformation, it isn’t help Scotland at all.
The SNP needs to be removed from office and no matter how you or I wish Liberate Scotland isn’t it, it has to be a political party who is polling high in the polls.
The SNP the Scottish government and that British parliament called Holyrood is Scotland biggest problem and the only way to get rid of them all at once is to vote for Reform.
The Rev has rightly again pointed out the ever widening gulf between votes for SNP and votes for independence. By May this could be an even wider gulf, also as the colonial establishment, msm etc move into gear with its strategy aimed at reducing votes for independence parties.
The question many have raised already is, so where does this pro-independence vote go? We might say there are 3 main options:
1. the vote steys at hame, which is what happened at the last UK election, making it easy for UK Labour to win FPTP seats;
2. it votes for Reform, attractive from an anti-woke ideology perspective;
3. it votes for bona fide independence parties such as the Liberation Scotland alliance or Alba.
I would argue the latter is the LOGICAL option for anybody serious about independence, even though polls suggest few people appear to behave logically.
An exception could be for those who don’t have a bona fide independence candidate standing in their constituency. In that case voting Reform on the first vote may be an option and then voting for e.g. Liberate Scotland on the Regional List.
“…just stay drunk.”
No. Just keep watching the Scotland World Cup-qualifying goal replays. I do! It does wonders for my mood.
link to theconversation.com
“People’s views on how Scotland should be governed have always reflected to some degree whether they feel Scottish or British. In 1999, only 6% of those who felt wholly or predominantly British said Scotland should become independent. In contrast, 44% of those who said they were “Scottish, not British” wanted Scotland to leave the UK.
Now,[Oct 2025] however, the link between people’s sense of national identity and their constitutional preference is much stronger. Support for independence among those who feel wholly or predominantly British is, at 14%, only eight points higher now than 25 years ago. In contrast, among those who say they are “Scottish, not British”, 74% now support independence, an increase of 30 points.
In 2000, those on the left [lower tolerance of inequality] on our scale (38%) were 15 points more likely than those on the right (23%) to say they supported independence. Now the gap is 34 points; 64% of those on the left are in favour, but only 30% of those on the right…
“…No longer is it simply about how much sovereignty the country should have. Rather, it has become more strongly embedded in differences of identity and disagreements about the proper direction of public policy.
Yes, national identity and therefore national consciousness (based on culture and indigenous languages) is a central feature in colonial societies and in an oppressed people’s quest for liberation.
Independence and decolonization ‘is a fight for a national culture’ (Fanon). Peoples in self-determination conflict are always linguistically divided and us Scots are nae different.
Hence the Scottish ‘independence movement depends on the solidarity of the oppressed ethnic group’ (Hechter), i.e. the Scots, and our national consciousness/culture and identity.
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
I wonder if they used the nativist bigot definition of who was ethnically pure enough to be a Scot before they asked the questions….?
Westminster will never allow Scotland’s money to escape no matter what.
We know that Westminster initiated the murderous Highland Clearances and the million people deliberately starved to death in Ireland, paid illegal loyal paramilitary groups to kill
people that they couldn’t prove were militants.
They lock away their murderous activities as top secret for 100 years so try bringing the culprits to justice when exposed.
MI5, MI6, Anti-Terrorism, Special Police Services, the Armed Forces would all be deployed to ensure the media poison any fair representation for independence.
How easy is it for those who control the printing and gathering of ballot papers.
1,000,000 pre ticked No’s should keep the money flowing in and Scotland’s chains tightened.
“Westminster will never allow Scotland’s money to escape no matter what.”
It isn’t up to Westminster… it’s in the gift of the Scots alone to decide their fate – they’ve just forgotten the power they wield as a people and the ‘magic’ that underpins that power.
Those who don’t believe in what humans call magic should take a much closer look at what they call reality.
You humans are hilarious – ‘reality’ – how funny.
You don’t seem well.
Happy New Year, ane an a. Great piece, Rev. If the Sandie Peggie appeal is successful on the grounds that the ‘errors’ were too egregious were too numerous to have led to a fair decision, the SNP are going to be in hot water again because political interference will be assumed – by the public, if not the appeal tribunal. Somebody biased almost certainly had a hand in the decision. Don’t buy, and have never bought, the AI element suggested by some. Even AI could not, independently, come down on the side of the ‘trans’ lobby.
The decision is written by the Tribunal judge and his panel.I doubt they were stupid enough to believe this would escape scrutiny.
It looks more like incompetence to me.
link to scottishlegal.com
“The original 300-page document contained material purported to be from another judgment from 2021 – the case brought by Maya Forstater against the Centre for Global Development Europe.
But the quoted text never appeared in that judgment, leading some to suggest that AI was used in the preparation of the Peggie judgment.
Ms Forstater told The Courier: “I know that judgment inside out, and I thought [after reading the NHS Fife judgment], those words are not there.”
Yesterday, Judge Sandy Kemp admitted the mistake after the newspaper reported the controversy.
The Judicial Office, which supports non-devolved tribunals across the UK, said it was a “clerical mistake, error or omission”, with the incorrect section now replaced by a new paragraph from the Forstater judgment. It has, however, refused to explain what caused fabricated quotations to appear in the judgment.
Ms Forstater said: “I knew this was wrong and it’s good it’s being amended. But I am astonished that it happened and I would like an explanation of how it happened. Errors like this just add to the growing feeling that this is not a sound judgment.”
Judge Kemp and the panel wrote in the judgment: “Secondly, there are different protected characteristics under the act but there is nothing stated specifically within the act itself, or the court’s decision, that one protected characteristic takes precedence over any other.
“In Forstater v CDG Europe and others UKEAT/0105/20 the Employment Appeal Tribunal had emphasised that: ‘It is important to bear in mind that the [Equality Act 2010] does not create a hierarchy of protected characteristics’.”
But this line was never in Forstater. To compound matters, The Telegraph reports that there was a second fabricated quotation in Judge Kemp’s original ruling.”
Lorna Campbell says:
1 January, 2026 at 2:41 pm
“Somebody biased almost certainly had a hand in the decision. Don’t buy, and have never bought, the AI element suggested by some. Even AI could not, independently, come down on the side of the ‘trans’ lobby.”
=========
Happy New Year, Lorna.
AI can have (technical) hallucinations.
“AI models are trained on data, and they learn to make predictions by finding patterns in the data. However, the accuracy of these predictions often depends on the quality and completeness of the training data. If the training data is incomplete, biased, or otherwise flawed, the AI model may learn incorrect patterns, leading to inaccurate predictions or hallucinations.”Wiki
I encountered one myself last year in my sickbed when I watched too much daytime TV, including “The Sound of Music”. An AI search on Maria von Trapp had that lady mothering over 12 children, including some when she was in her 70s. The large language model had put together data from more than one woman of that name, including her daughter by Captain George von Trapp.
I suspect Judge Kemp fell victim to a several such “hallucinations” in the rather more serious matter of Nurse Peggie.
Voters decisions.
One nation has spent over three Centuries trying to rid themselves of the indigenous Scots vermin from Scotland,
They have banned your language, banned your national dress, banned your hearth, banned you from your own land and banned from parts of your sea and shore. But took you in as cannon fodder to their constant wars,
That Country was called England that stipulated that enforced control in Scotland and many went along with it, many still do as we read often on Wings,
But now they come begging to Scotland for your vote to save England
Not Scotland. No not Scotland…
For those that beg for you to give them power down South have also stated that they would never allow Scotland independence or self determination no matter how you vote,
Now England is claiming all over that it has a ("Tractor" - Ed) government and needs saving by Scots, welsh and Irish pests and vermin.
We have our own trator governances to deal with,
Swapping one for another will obviously not incur any favours towards Scotland independence,
What we need is Scottish parties to vote for that run on no agenda except independence, not attached to any other vague promises,
And we need them swamping all election areas, not sparsely populated as they are now.
Give Scotland some one or something worth voting for that is not rigged in favour of more union and globalism.
What I find totally unbelievable is how people actually do believe Liberate Scotland or the Alba party is going to win seats in Holyrood next year, it just isn’t going happen and its wishful thinking on your part and all you would be doing is wasting your vote and helping the SNP.
We need to support a party who is high in the opinion polls and get behind them even if that party is Reform, the most important thing we can ever do this year is to remove the SNP and the Scottish government from office.
Happy New Year everyone and all the best, and may this year be the death of the SNP.
AI is a computer,
A computers output is only as good or sound as the creators imput. That why you need to retain books, record keeping and paper work,
Instead of turning a few select people opinions feeding into the computers as a one world voice.
Dangerous territory to be heading towards when just a few set the narrative, and not unlike the BBC action recently only on a larger scale.
And the errors and mistakes are already coming to light.
Guid New Year, James.
I used AI to get this information. The sources quoted include “thebarristergroup.co.uk”.
“Search Assist
Yes, there have been significant mistakes in the legal field due to the use of AI, particularly with the generation of fictitious legal citations, known as “hallucinations.” These errors can lead to serious consequences for legal professionals, including sanctions and reputational damage.
thebarristergroup.co.uk linnearlegal.co.uk
Mistakes in AI Use in the Legal Field
Overview of AI in Legal Practice
The integration of AI in the legal field has grown rapidly, with many firms adopting tools to enhance efficiency. AI can assist in tasks like legal drafting and case preparation. However, this reliance on AI has led to significant risks, particularly concerning the accuracy of information generated.
Common Errors: AI Hallucinations
One major issue is the phenomenon known as “AI hallucinations.” This occurs when AI systems generate plausible but entirely fictitious legal cases or statutes. Such errors can mislead courts and result in serious consequences for legal professionals. For instance, in the case of Mata v. Avianca, attorneys submitted briefs containing fabricated citations generated by AI, leading to sanctions for failing to verify the accuracy of their sources.
Regulatory Responses and Consequences
Regulatory bodies have begun to address these issues. The Bar Council of England and Wales has warned that blind reliance on AI can lead to incompetence or negligence. Courts are increasingly imposing sanctions on lawyers who submit AI-generated inaccuracies, emphasizing that the responsibility for accuracy lies with the legal professionals, not the AI tools.”
sam said;
“This occurs when AI systems generate plausible but entirely fictitious legal cases or statutes. Such errors can mislead courts and result in serious consequences for legal professionals. For instance, in the case of Mata v. Avianca, attorneys submitted briefs containing fabricated citations generated by AI, leading to sanctions for failing to verify the accuracy of their sources.”
This problem is not limited to AI.
Human Intelligence (HI) is vulnerable to precisely the same issues. A key example of relevance to this site, and certainly important to me, is the hallucination that England’s MPs are entitled to overrule Scotland’s MPs on any matter of UK governance. This has arisen because the English establishment badly wanted that authority, and pretended that the 1707 Treaty gave it to them, particularly with regard to England’s huge MP numbers justifying their ability under a single flat voting system to ‘outvote’ and thus overrule Scotland’s MPs despite the utter lack of any actual agreement for this in the Treaty, and began to assert this pretence in legal documents, and the rest, as they say, is history.
That hallucination is regarded as the actual formal provenance of Westminster’s ‘unlimited parliamentary sovereignty of the (English only) Crown in parliament’, a stance vigourously promoted by one Albert Venn Dicey.
The fact that this is a hallucination can only be made clear by examining the actual basis of the Union in its formal documents of the time, the Treaty and Acts of Union, and within the context of the relevant legal and constitutional actualities of that time, thus forming the official Status Quo Ante of the 1707 Treaty.
That Status Quo Ante is the only legal and constitutional context within which the supposed powers of the British parliament from May 1707 onwards can be properly understood, and that proper understanding eviscerates the authenticity of today’s constitutional and legal ‘reality’ as constantly averred by the likes of Aidan, and others.
Of course though the example you give isn’t human hallucination, it is an accurate statement of the UK’s constitutional structure as described in and implemented after the Treaty of Union. Your own personal reinterpretation of the terms of the treaty is both;
A) absurd as a piece of statutory interpretation given that it is expressly contradicted by the explicit wording of the first article of the treaty; and B
B) does not enjoy any support or recognition by anyone anywhere with authority or standing.
So you can continue insisting that everyone else has this wrong. If you were really insistent you could of course launch a judicial review along these lines so that you could be told, in person, by a judge that you are wrong. I suspect this would do nothing to curb your enthusiasm for it and no doubt would be yet another dubious piece of evidence for Alf’s “Scotland is a colony” nonsense.
Aidan said;
“Of course though the example you give isn’t human hallucination, it is an accurate statement of the UK’s constitutional structure as described in and implemented after the Treaty of Union.”
My example was an accurate statement only of what was implemented, Aidan, not of what was agreed and stated in the Treaty. I made that clear.
“Your own personal reinterpretation of the terms of the treaty is both;
A) absurd as a piece of statutory interpretation given that it is expressly contradicted by the explicit wording of the first article of the treaty; “
But that is NOT given, Aidan. Article I of the Treaty does not ‘expressly contradict’ the example I gave in any intelligible sense. It very obviously says no such thing. You need to cite some other relevant source beyond Article I to support your statement, because Article I is silent on that matter.
And you still need to re-assess your understanding of what the word ‘expressly’ actually means.
“and B) does not enjoy any support or recognition by anyone anywhere with authority or standing.”
That may be so, Aidan, but that isn’t relevant as evidence that clearly refutes my example. You’d have to presume the accuracy of their understanding of the historical constitutional background, ie, the Status Quo Ante, and the actual texts of the Treaty to do that, and I deny that they were properly instructed on the matter, given the obvious disparity between the actuality of the texts of the Treaty as agreed, and the actuality of what was implemented. That disparity cannot be resolved unless either the Treaty or its implementation was bogus. And I am certainly not alone in seeing that disparity. Others that do have authority and standing have noticed some disturbing aspects; Professor Robert Black, KC for example.
“So you can continue insisting that everyone else has this wrong. If you were really insistent you could of course launch a judicial review along these lines so that you could be told, in person, by a judge that you are wrong. I suspect this would do nothing to curb your enthusiasm for it and no doubt would be yet another dubious piece of evidence for Alf’s “Scotland is a colony” nonsense.”
But I don’t need to be ‘really insistent’ at all, do I, Aidan? That ‘judicial review’ is precisely what Alf and the Salvo team are planning to bring about. Granted it may well fail one way or another, but that’s not guaranteed, and it’s still on track for now.
Should Scotland be an independent Country,
Scotland is a independent Country, just that England and media controls the narrative not Scotland.
It used to be the Tories that said ” vote for us, only we can get rid of the Snp,”
Then labour said the same,
There is a pattern here.
Now reform, vote for us to get rid of the SNP.
Gain independence of your minds and we will get rid of the SNP ourselves and very quickly.
James Cheyne says:
1 January, 2026 at 3:49 pm
“Scotland is a independent Country,”
Well, so glad to hear that’s what you believe…
maybe you can shut up now and stop constantly spamming this site with your nonsense ???
Stop yer whining.
KID-ON SCOTLAND
Cardboard box
with two holes
cut for eyes.
Wee boy in there
pretending he
wants out.
In reality
happy inside
nibbling a biscuit.
ALBA MAS FHÌOR
Bucas cairt-bhùird
le dà tholl geàrrte ann
airson sùilean.
Pàiste na bhroinn
a’ leigeil air
a bhith an sàs.
Leis an fhìrinn
air a dhòigh a-staigh
a’ criomadh briosgaide.
Are you upset… didums. Trying to control the narrative, as far as I am aware it still relates to Scots voting in a Scottish election.
@ James Cheyne as our infested deluded yoonionists keep telling US the ONLY one who has the authority or right to REMOVE posters from this site is Stuart Campbell or as the franchise fanny calls him STUEY
So I would advise the fuckwit posting as the insider to fuck off with his suggestions, unless STUEY is the insider
Seconded!
Thirded.
Suspect that the best route to independence is to vote Reform – sounds absurd but Farage is a little Englander who has some disdain for Scotland and will have a uk wide referendum on Scottish independence- playing to his little Englander base he will do his best to convince them that England will so much better off without Scotland – perversely it may be the English voter that gets Scotland its independence.
Now and again I read the Guardian for a laugh. There’s an article in it “Labour needs complete ‘reset’ to defeat Reform UK threat, says strategist” – apparently “New Labour advertising guru Chris Powell says urgent plan needed to ‘wage and win the daily war for attention’”.
See this is exactly what’s wrong, NuLab think the only problem is the window dressing. The politics of fkn braindead neolib Blairities who are all just craven toadies to Washington. Take that thick thug Lammy – when Biden was the emperor he was all “Trump is a Nazi”, now he is busy licking Trump’s rse. They are so bad that they’re going to lose to that spiv and conman Farage (people think they’re going to get ‘remigration’, all they’ll get is Boris mk.2 and the NHS sold off to the Yanks).
If Scotland can’t outfox these clowns, it doesn’t deserve indy!
@Hatey. Off topic.
As I mentioned here:
link to wingsoverscotland.com They’re doing it again and as you’re a fanboy I thought I’d give you a pointer so you could add you good wishes and message of support; for both parties.
link to eadaily.com
I can’t imagine how you rationalise all this.
Actually, Stu, “most” Scottish voters DON’T support Indy–even in the rather blatant push poll you cite.
The actual figures from this poll (sponsored by The National) show 50% would vote Yes on Indy, 44% no, the rest undecided. 50% is NOT “most”–51%+ is. You pull the discredited slight of statistical hand (worthy of the SNP) by making the undecided voters magically disappear, as if their beliefs don’t matter.
But they do, and should be counted, just like any other group of voters.
Don’t be silly. If you can’t be arsed to vote, you accept either outcome.
The fatal flaw of this excellent site is the dogged insistence on taking these independence polls seriously. Thus a ‘six point lead for independence’ is treated as ironclad, gilt edged proof that if there were a referendum tomorrow then Yes would win 53 – 47. I highly doubt it. There is nothing easier than saying yes to a pollster when nothing is at stake, and it probably ,for most Scots, feels like the right thing to say, perhaps even the safe thing to say. Even if those that said they would vote Yes actually turned out and did so (and even the editor of this site said once he might not vote) the ‘don’t knows’ will almost certainly vote No and that would put us into better together territory. And yes, I know that Yes surged during the campaign last time but that was with a clever, charismatic front man who is sadly no longer with us and the whole idea was fresh and exciting (for some). With Swinney in charge next time, backed up by, any of the current SNP ministers, the opposite is likely to happen. I find the polling for pro-union parties in Scotland which is currently well over 60% far more credible. Bottom line, if Scots really did support independence as a serious near term proposition, then Alba would be doing far better.
It pays to be suspicious of folk who cast doubt on polls carried out by reputable polling companies using accepted criteria. The results of one poll don’t necessarily tell you much: it’s a truism that they’re a snapshot of the limited number of people polled at that point in time.
However, if the number polled is large enough, if they’re properly screened and weighted to be representative of the population as a whole, if the questions are well framed and – most importantly of all – if they demonstrate a trend by being in line with a series of other polls, then what grounds are there to think they shouldn’t be taken seriously?
Polling for unionist PARTIES in aggregate may indeed be >50%, but as you say yourself, people can only answer the questions they’re asked. It’s been recognised for some time that around 30% of Labour voters are pro-independence. A similar number of pro-independence voters are anti-EU membership.
Right now its easy to see why quite a lot of people who would happily vote for a yoon party in an election because they feel there’s no credible pro-indy party after the SNP’s melt down of the past few years. It’s exactly the same principle behind lots of unionist voters in the past supporting an SNP led government at Holyrood because they thought they were a better bet than “Scottish” Labour or Tories.
The movement today finds itself in an invidious position. There probably IS a current plurality of the Scottish vote in favour of independence – particularly amongst voters under 55. They do not currently however have any way of turning that majority in to a reality, because the former engine of the movement – the SNP – has driven itself up an electoral and constitutional cul-de-sac.
Since Alba and other minor pro-plebiscitary election parties have signally failed to reach electoral escape velocity and/or cannibalise the SNP vote, there appears little prospect of any progress until the current log jam is broken. The only black swan event on the near horizon is a Reform victory at Westminster.
If that prospect doesn’t give Scottish voters the heebs, nothing will. Given their apparent lumpen determination to stick with the SNP despite all the evidence of their unfitness for office over the past decade, the smart money is on very little progress until AFTER the next Westminster election.
In the final analysis, the only ones to blame for that are Scottish independence supporters themselves.
“In the final analysis, the only ones to blame for that are Scottish independence supporters themselves.”
That’s not even a good analysis never mind a final analysis, Dr. Ellis.
The census tells us that well over one million people have moved into Scotland since 2000, mostly from England, and over the same period that well over one million Scots have either left Scotland or died. This represents a massive ‘shift’ and fundamental change in both the identity and culture of the Scottish population over a relatively short period of time.
We also know from previous studies that people from other countries and of other national identities and cultures (and extraction) have the highest propensity (perhaps 80% or more) to vote against and hence to block independence, and thus to thwart the ‘inalienable right’ of Scots, their host people/nation, to self-determination. This is aided as you know by an irregular and non-reciprocal ‘local government’ voting franchise used for national elections and referendums in Scotland.
In-migration and rapid population change plus the irregular franchise is what is holding back the independence vote. This is not therefore any fault of “Scottish independence supporters themselves”; the latter ‘explanation’ is simply your dubious snake oil take on the matter due to your bias and intentionally limited ‘analysis’.
On current demographic trends and absence of controls over migration into Scotland, the next 20 years will see a further rapid rise in in-migration and hence a further significant reduction in the number of indigenous Scots, plus a dubious voting franchise weakening the Yes vote even more. As many colonies have found due to such population displacement by colonial powers, once the indigenous population falls below a certain level independence becomes less likely.
This explains why independence is the most urgent matter facing Scots, and that DEMOGRAPHICS forms a key determinant of independence, as explained in my book Doun-Hauden’ and summarised here:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
Will you once again decline to offer us a suggestion as to how this ethnicity-based voting franchise would be defined and enforced? I’d suggest that a public endorsement of that kind of nativistic race-based bigotry designed primarily to alter the outcome of a democratic vote by disenfranchisement based on ethnic lines might be a step too far even for some of the Wings BTL commenters. Far from the contrived myths about people voting who were only flying over Scotland at the time, you would need to explain publicly why large numbers of people who have been resident in Scotland for a long time and for whom Scotland is their home should nevertheless not have a right to a say over such an important question.
I would also question what the purpose of a referendum would be in such circumstances, since it would not be accepted either democratically or domestically as a genuine and legitimate democratic exercise.
Westminster uses a ‘national’ franchise for national elections, not a local government farnchise. Westminster excluded EU citizens living here from voting in the Brexit referendum.
Westminster also now permits national votes to UK citizens living abroad, which is a global norm. However, Scots-born living abroad are excluded in a ‘local government’ franchise, ‘replaced’ by non-national residents living here.
Ultimately, as all former colonized peoples will tell you:
‘his liberation is a matter only for the colonized’; as is ‘what he does with his freedom’ (Albert Memmi).
Are you telling us that English people living in Scotland should not be entitled to vote in any future independence referendum? If so, how will that be defined and enforced?
‘Self-determination’, and here a key word is ‘self’, concerns ‘a people’ (usually defined by a common language, heritage, history, common suffering, will to be a nation etc) seeking decolonization (i.e. independence), often from an oppressive and exploitative colonial power.
One of the UN conditions in the self-determination process is that there should be ‘no external interference’.
‘Secondary criteria’ may be used in a voting franchise, notably where the indigenous population has been altered by colonialism, e.g. where much of the native population has been removed and/or replaced/displaced.
Self-determination is also therefore a determinant of independence:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
@Aidan 3.16 pm
Are you telling us that English people living in Scotland should not be entitled to vote in any future independence referendum? If so, how will that be defined and enforced?
Yes, Aidan, that is what nativist bigots like Alf and his posse of blut und boden ethno-nationalists are proposing. They have abandoned the civic nationalism which characterises the recent progressive self determination campaigns in liberal democracies such as Quebec, Catalonia and Scotland because they believe – without much in the way of evidence – that restricting votes to native born Scots would change the future result of a referendum, and indeed would have delivered a Yes result in 2014.
There are of course multiple issues with this deeply regressive worldview, and the arguments have been well rehearsed in here over the past few years. The regressive franchise restriction argument is still very much a minority view in the independence movement of course.
No major party accepts it, and no major political figures endorse it. It has no academic, legal or constitutional hinterland apart from a small extremist fringe of amateur pundits like Alf, who are totally captured by the erroneous application of post-colonial theory to the Scottish case.
Large sections of the current Yes movement would not accept any attempt to “queer the pitch” in the independence debate by excluding several hundred thousand Scottish residents, so even on its own terms the ethno-nationalist “population exchange” argument dies on its arse. Horrified supporters of civic nationalism would sooner vote against any such proposal, so it would probably lose you more support than it gained.
Alf and his cronies will of course continue to flog the “we wuz robbed” and “we’re being swamped by Sassenachs” dead horses, but nobody reputable is listening to them, as can be seen by the failure of their arguments to be taken up by any political party, or to make any headway in terms of mass membership organisation.
All they have is the ability to infest BTL discourse on here, throwing rocks at their ideological opponents and accusing them of being secret unionists, British nationalist agents or (heaven forfend) English.
When their quixotic attempt to have Scotland designated a non-self governing territory fails – as it inevitably will – they will have to come up with some other cunning plan. Until then, expect more of the same wishful thinking and constant self referential links to Alf’s vanity published book and half baked articles and a tsunami of references to Fanon, Memmi & Cesaire misapplying post-colonia theory to our cause.
The twa Franchise Fannies circling round again changing the meaning of others posts.
It’s easy. Ten years residence, or born here.
Just like many European countries.
UN guidelines etc.
Que “naw they dinnae” any minute….
Absolutely Andy I agree with all of that, and I suspect the reason why we are treated to endless riddles from Memmi etc. rather than any straight answers is because those straight answers (if they were given) would sound indistinguishable from the works of Hendrik Verwoerd or Heinrich Himmler or any other of the famous ethno-nationalists.
The idea that franchise restrictions are in any way either encouraged or even tolerated within international law is equally nonsense. The right of peoples to self determination does not provide anyone with the right to an ethnically homogeneous state or to exclude minority ethnicities from participating in democratic events. I’d refer in particular to UN General Assembly Resolution 1761 when such policies are described as “abhorrent to the conscience of mankind” if anyone were to be in any doubt.
” the civic nationalism which characterises the recent progressive self determination campaigns in liberal democracies such as Quebec, Catalonia and Scotland”
Aye, the recently floated political ideology of ‘civic nationalism’ has had gey limited success, yet still the so-called ‘progressives’ punt it, just like aw the ither ‘progressive’ nonsense that diverts the independence movement up a blind alley and keeps us held firm in the ‘colonial corset’.
The Scottish Referendum Survey established that a majority of ‘Scots’ had in fact voted for independence in 2014, and concluded that:
“Scotland only remained in the Union because of the views of those who were born in other parts of Britain and further afield”
And that was mostly thanks to the fancy new notion of ‘civic nationalism’. All we discovered here was that if fowk fae somwhair else dinna want to be ‘new Scots’ they will vote to reject our offer of Scottish citizenship. But they shoudna be invitit tae block the indigenous Scots ‘inalienable’ richt tae be Scots, which is precisely what occurred in 2014 and stands to do so again.
@ James 5.27 pm
There’s no precedent for anything more than a 24 month residence criteria for a self determination referendums though James. You know this. The franchise used in ALREADY independent countries for elections or constitutional changes is a different kettle of fish entilrely.
An independent Scotland will set its own frnachise and establish its own citizenship criteria. Departing from accepted norms and custom and practice in the many other self determination examples since WW2 would jeopardise any realistic prospect of international recognition.
The international community will not accept the disenfranchisement of several hundred thousand permanent residents.
Luckily for the majority of Scots the views of bigoted ethno-nationalists like you are shared by only an extremist fringe.
“…Ten years residence…”
You’re very generous, James.
That’s at least 290 fewer residency years than I was thinking.
I think we’ll need to put your suggested residency period to a vote… Scots only, mind.
“… such policies are described as “abhorrent to the conscience of mankind” if anyone were to be in any doubt…”
Aye, colonialism is a scourge on humanity right enough…even the United Nations described it as such.
“The right of peoples to self determination does not provide anyone with the right to… exclude minority ethnicities from participating in democratic events…”
But isn’t that what ‘Britain’ did for the Brexit voting franchise?
Europeans who had lived in ‘Britain’ for years were denied a vote on the future of their adopted nation.
At least that’s what I heard – maybe I’m wrong.
Or maybe I’m right and the Scots are expected to be held to a higher standard than
England‘Britain’ by theEnglish‘British’, though.I’ve just realised something germane to the ‘franchise’ argument RAGING (chortle) below the line here in this place.
The Scots voted overwhelmingly to stay in the EU and in doing so were much more inclusive of other nationals living in Scotland than were the English who mostly wanted to throw the majority of EU nationals out of the country bar those who might be useful as servants. </p.
That's how I remember the 'Bonkers Brexit Bin-fire of the Vainglorious Brits Fiasco', anyway.
The error Alba made and still make is trying to emulate the Snp old party that had long gone.
That cinderella shoe did not fit Scotland or Alba any longer,
One of the unforseen changes that may persuade don’ knows and No’s voters that live in Scotland for peace, space and tranquillity is the thought of Englands uptalk and instigation of a proxy war on the horizon being turned into a political war of power stuggle and mr Starmer has increased this rhetoric publicly and not sought peace,
Most people do want to live in peace and tranquillity and make very little money from constant war as a industry,
And no one wants to die as a way to live,
The people whom died in WW11 fought for our freedoms, our rights in a free Country a Britain that was saved from invasion, and freedom of Speech, would be horrified to see how quickly they have been let down , removed so soon after they had died, not by the enemy but due to our own government behaving in such a similar manner of control as any other dictatorship did….we used to stand and fight to save democracy and Freedoms.
If they have already been taken or given away to the new invasions by our own government or any other government, why would the people come when being called. This feeling is widespread around all nations today,
Go Woke go broke is the saying, but go against your people and what many gave their lives for, will not be forgiven, you may find that you stand alone isolated and isolated from your potential fighting armies,
Sue your veterans after war and leave them lying on the streets, in the cold and wet, throw them away like discarded trash when you finish using them,
And yet ask the younger ones to join your army to fight for freedom false promised freedom.
If governments cannot reasonably work this out or understand it…….
The SNP are infiltrated to the hilt by careerists, unionist sympathisers and brit state collaborators.