The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

The long drop

Posted on April 16, 2019 by

Almost exactly two years ago, this website suggested that it might not be the smartest idea for Labour to go along with Theresa May’s call for a snap election. (Under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, it couldn’t have happened without Labour’s support.)

And it occurred to us today that if they hadn’t, the current government would only have a maximum of one year left to run.

And in reality that would have meant a general election this year, since governments – and certainly under-pressure ones with small majorities – don’t tend to leave elections to the last possible minute. it’s unlikely that the Tories would have tried to stagger on until next May, because in the light of what’s happened with Brexit that would have left them contesting an election in the midst of a truly epic shambles that they might have contrived to lose even to Jeremy Corbyn.

(This would have been true whether the current Article 50 extension ended in May’s deal, no-deal, a second referendum, a third extension or a revocation.)

So one way or another, we’d have been looking at a decisive resolution to the situation within a matter of months. But as things stand, we’re stuck with the Tories for three more years because they and the DUP would rather leave the country paralysed in chaos indefinitely than risk letting Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street.

We said at the time that the election was a stupid and terrible idea from Theresa May’s own perspective, and we were right.

(Though modesty demands we note that we weren’t right in every detail – we thought the Lib Dems and SNP would do better than they did and that May would have the basic dignity to resign if she blew her majority. Boy, do WE ever look like idiots.)

We said Labour should think twice before going along with her plan and we were right about that too. They got a result that was better than most pundits expected but not good enough to actually achieve anything, and have subsequently been landed with a sizeable chunk of the blame (quite rightly) for the Brexit mess as well as giving the Tories two extra years of breathing space.

If only people listened to us, eh readers?

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 16 04 19 14:56

      The long drop | speymouth

    170 to “The long drop”

    1. Proud Cybernat says:

      May kicking the Brexit can all the way to the next Scottish Elections. (But only if the EU let her away with it).

    2. Muscleguy says:

      I agree with this in spades. Except as the SNP did not defend the right for a referendum under attack by the Ruth Davidson party they lost a lot of seats to the Tories as their supporters sat on their hands. Without the feeble 13 the DUP10 would not have been enough.

    3. Chas says:

      Credit where it’s due. Very insightful, well done!

    4. Labour could well have been in power if Scottish Labour voters had not listened to Kezia Dugdale and voted tactically to keep the `hated SNP` out,

      not only Scotland but all the other nations/countries of the UK are heading for a catastrophic sh@tstorm of a brexit and it is all down to Kezzy,

      65,000,000 UK citizens will be worse of because of Scottish Labour and their partners in crime BBC/Herald/STV/Scotsman.

    5. desimond says:

      2019..the year of the long stare off into the distance.

      Is it Halloween yet?

    6. orri says:

      The irony is that given 13 > 10 if the “Scottish Conservatives” were to actually go it alone they might have more relevance than the DUP. However I rather suspect that when they were pre merger they simply sold out Scotland without any actual input, regardless of how diluted, into the Conservative Party of England and Wales. Simply took the whip and voted regardless of the mandate they stood on.

    7. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Stu writes:

      So one way or another, we’d have been looking at a decisive resolution to the situation within a matter of months.

      I wish that were true. But in present circumstances, I don’t believe a UKGE will solve anything, alas. Just compound the difficulties. Who can Remainers in England vote for? Would Corbyn do any better than May? Really?

    8. galamcennalath says:

      Brexit – mistake compounded by followup mistake, compounded by the next mistake, and on and on. That’s beyond the lies built on lies, built on lies, etc etc.

      To my mind the first mistake and deceit in the saga was false IndyRef promises, then EVEL, then Smith. That totally failed to secure the Scottish constitutional situation before Cameron embarked on his next big adventure. I have always believed the two, Brexit and Indy, are intertwined. English nationalists want to leave the EU but aren’t willing to do that at the cost of destroying the UK. That existential threat to the UK effects how Brexit has stumbled along.

      EURef was a gamble to try to stem UKIP. The winning side had no plan. Before a consensus plan was agreed, May triggered Article 50 and set hard red lines. Then May called an election which only gave the DUP power over her.

      The EU wanted NI to take a different route from mainland Britain. May wanted the backstop instead. Then reality sunk in that the backstop might snooker hard Brexit plans. Thus, May ends up with a finalised divorce deal, the Withdrawal Agreement, which few MPs will vote for.

      And the latest is, May delays leaving and the English Nationalists turn their backs on the Tories.

      Laid out like that (which I believe is a reasonable summary) the 2017 general election is just one total cock up among many. What is the collective noun for cock ups? Maybe it should be a ‘Parliament of cock ups’, like owls. Owls, however, get the name of being wise. There’s no wisdom among the Tories!

    9. mogabee says:

      The way I see it no-one does forward planning or thought and ‘strategists’ employed by political parties are being paid for what?

      Labour just agree to most things in Westminster as seen in their rush to vote for article 50 without putting forward a plan. Of course the heid bummers wanted BRexit!

      Good article Stu. 😀

    10. Dr Jim says:

      @Scot Finlayson

      When you come to think of it you’re right, Kezia Dugdale caused the whole thing

      All that power she didnae know she had eh

    11. frogesque says:

      The ups and downs of the Westminster Magic Roundabout.

      Can I have some of Dylan’s teacakes please?

    12. McGregorG says:

      i am new to the site and do not wish to be called a troll nor anything else. in fact, i don’t wish anyone to comment on my post at all.
      i am giving my personal opinion and my personal interpretation. just like stu campbell, i believe in independence but i am not inexorably aligned to the snp although i have voted for them for the past ten years.

      i was aghast at the comments from mike russell in which he was categoric in saying that it was only possible to hold indyref2 IF westminster agreed ( which they will not) and the snp will not go down any other route as they would not have legality.

      i am bemused at the timing of mr russell’s statement ( just before nicola sturgeon’s LONG awaited statement)

      i have to say that it all now becomes much clearer to anyone who actually wished to see the reality.

      it should no longer confuse those who wondered why nicola did not march under the AUOB banners when they reached up to 100,000 marchers yet she went on the LGBT march in glasgow.
      it should no longer confuse those who wondered why nicola supported a People’s Vote and the Revocation of Article 50.
      it should no longer confuse those who wondered why nicola kept putting off her statement on indyref2 for the ‘next few weeks’, which turned into months.
      it should no longer confuse those who wondered why nicola was so intent on ‘saving the english from themselves’ even though her unused triple lock mandate for an indyref2 goes unused.

      the reasons are now there for us all thanks ( belatedly) to mr russell.

      the snp and nicola were hoping to help engineer a People’s Vote to enable Brexit to be cancelled and thus there would not have been a ‘material change’ to which the snp have conveniently ( for them) tagged their call for indyref2 to.

      now that the time has come for nicola to finally speak we get mr russell’s excuse as to why indyref2 is on hold ( permanently?)

      i for one am feeling rather used by nicola and the snp and don’t see why the continue in existence if independence will only ever be at the grace of westminster ( when our resources run dry and they don’t need us)

      politics and indeed our politicians have been found out by the brexit farce.
      it is quite clear that they are not and never have been in parliament (westminster and holyrood) to serve us.
      they are serving their own and their party interests.

      i thought the snp were different. we all know now that they are not.
      too many people jump to their defence at the slightest criticism. remember labour? no one could lay a finger on them. they could put a monkey in a red rosette up for election and they would have won by a landslide.
      see where labour are now in scotland. their lies came back to haunt them. their deceit and greed and disregard for those who voted them into power came back to haunt them.

      it seems the snp may have been in power a little too long.
      those controlling the party do not allow debate. they do not countenance views from within the party nor their supporters if it does not chime with their views.

      mr russell’s statement has opened up a chasm.

      what now? where now? what is the point?

    13. Essexexile says:

      As you’ve previously stated Rev, there’ll be no GE as things stand.
      But, I do wonder, from Corbyn’s point of view) if he declared publicly for EUref2 if that might actually destabilise the situation enough to make a GE happen.
      The problem at the moment is one party, officially at least, offering something nobody wants with a leader who everyone is sick of against a party that’s offering nothing of any substance with a leader you wouldn’t trust to run a bath.
      If Labour became the vehicle for Remain support to get behind it may just make something happen.
      Which is what Scotland needs because from the rather jaded mood on these pages lately, it’s obvious we’re stuck until this Brexit log jam is shifted.

    14. I don’t give a toss when England hold their next Bun Fight.
      Roughly 200 to 220 Mps on both cheecks of the arse that is WM are guaranteed Red or Blue Tory, with a delightful mix now of schisms, call them TIGgers or UKIPpers, or Brexiters.
      It’s all just a game to them.
      There is no Them without Us, no Deity without a De’il.
      Atop the putrid pile, the Iron Heel Oligarchy will always rule.
      Scotland can’t hang around any longer.
      Let them try and declare our next Independence Plebiscite ‘illegal’.
      That’s the point of ‘Self Determination’.
      Scotland decides; we are not a colony or Region of England/The UK.
      The Acts of Union were political constructs, over 300 years ago when most of us lived under the thumb of Robber Barons who slaughtered anyone who got in their way.
      The world has moved on.
      We go now, not to the beat of England’s imperial and quite frankly, maniacal drum.
      What’s stopping us?

    15. schrodingers cat says:

      political sunamis are rare in england, the fall of the libdems being the last smallish one.

      however, brexit has pissed off loads of folk, both tory and lab.

      i think in the up coming ge we will see exactly that. traditional labour voters who generally dont give much thought to politics at all, (ma faither voted lab etc) may well switch to a no deal supporting tory party. traditional tory voters, farmers and business types may well switch to labour.

      many may not vote at all

      many may switch to smaller parties, eg greens and libdems.

      the upshot will be that while such an event may not win the greens and the libdems more seats, it may effect result and decide who actually wins any particular seat.

      so unless either the tories or labour open up a sustained lead in the polls (which are fluctuating wildly at the mo) it is going to be extremely difficult for psephologists to predict the outcome. previous election results will be much less reliable as a possible indicator.

      (the reason i didnt mention ukip/BP is because if there is a ge, treeza will resign and the next tory leader will almost certainly pro no deal brexit. ukip/BP would not stand in such a case, they would probably join the tory party)

    16. Gary says:

      Well, I agree, in part.

      IF May hadn’t called the election she’d still have had enough of a majority to get her deal through in spite of ERG. She’d have had us on the implementation period from October last year then (2 years) and would’ve had enough time (just) to get the future relationship deal through as well.

      Therefore we WOULDN’T have had the ‘Brexit Shambles’ that we currently face. The deal would be going through in what they like to call ‘an orderly manner’ and THIS would reflect better on May personally. PERHAPS enough to mean that the (notional)election next year would be a possible WIN for her remaining as leader.

      Although perhaps NOT, who can really say. Labour would have been able to avoid ANY interaction over getting the deal done (keeping their hands completely clean) and would be able to point at ANY disruption as being the result of a ‘Tory Brexit’ whereas in our current situation they ARE now involved. They either agree something and become ‘complicit’ or fail to agree something and therefore become responsible (in the eyes of the public) for delaying Brexit (a LOSE/LOSE situation for them)

      Brexit WILL happen as none of the parties have the guts to overturn a referendum and have publicly committed to honouring it. The result of May’s snap election was to slow it down and ensure we get caught in an interminable loop of Parliament ensuring no deal will ever go through.

      On that point I am annoyed both BY Brexit and by parliament’s inability to implement it and here’s why. Parliament wants to do the right thing for entirely the wrong reason. It’s not that they actually care about the people who will be effected, it’s that THEY weren’t the ones making the decision and so they will cause unending chaos until we, the public, demand that we can change our minds. They don’t care about the problems caused to the poor, they just want their own will done regardless of the public. Because they think the voting public is stupid. This is EXACTLY the same situation as when SLAB were routed in the GE and were left with one MP. I saw more that one ex Labour MP who weren’t just upset, they were LIVID! They were not livid that they hadn’t campaigned hard enough or hadn’t gotten their policies across, they were livid with the VOTERS for having the temerity to DARE vote for anyone but them!!

      ALL political votes are tactical votes, politicians need to realise how transient and unimportant they are. THEY work for US, not the other way round…

    17. Terry callachan says:

      I agree galamcennalath….

      England’s Westminster only want brexit if they can force Northern Ireland Scotland and wales to do the same, Wales was easy they voted for brexit.
      England know that if Scotland becomes independent the follow up will be the reunification of Northern Ireland with the rest of Ireland and then wales may well seek independence too followed by Gibraltar.

      Scotland’s oil and gas and fishing rights are important to England too not just for the resource but for negotiation as we have seen in the brexit negotiations.

      Where are we now ?
      Sadly Nicola Sturgeon is saying nothing which disappoints me greatly ,there have been so many people asking why she is using up so much time and energy trying to reverse England’s vote to leave the E.U. and yet she says nothing about that ?


      I still believe that when you choose a political leader, you must stay with them as long as possible.
      To give them every possible opportunity to carry out the task they were elected to do.
      So for now I’m sticking with Nicola Sturgeon.

      Sometimes politics requires a politician to keep their intentions secret until the time is right to release , I just hope that is why we have heard nothing about this matter from Nicola Sturgeon alternatively I hope that it turns out that I have misinterpreted matters.

      I just hope “the plan” as a whole is not “keeping the UK in the E.U.”

      Nicola Sturgeon was not elected as SNP leader “to keep the UK in the E.U.”

      Nicola Sturgeon was elected to lead the cause for Scottish independence and was given the mandate to call another Scottish independence referendum if Scotland was taken out of the E.U. against its will which does not include overturning England’s decision to leave the E.U.

      We will see.

    18. schrodingers cat says:

      Robert J. Sutherland says:
      “in present circumstances, I don’t believe a UKGE will solve anything”

      hung parliaments are rare, the fptp system is designed to avoid them. logic dictates that their will be either a tory or labour majority. regardless of which view of brexit wins out, a majority will enable whoever wins to vote it through wm.

      it is the lack of a majority which is the reason for this goat rodeo

    19. Breeks says:

      I wouldn’t be so quick to write off May’s election as a total disaster. Yes, she did forfeit her majority and suffer a dependency on the DUP because of it, but it is difficult to ignore the fact the Election result did give the SNP a shock, forced a strategic rethink upon them, and despite the occasional noise, Theresa May has had an easy run for her Brexit in the context of disruption from Scotland. She might argue the dark money was well spent.

      I don’t believe it for a minute, but if Theresa May and Nicola actually had done a deal to put Independence on the back burner, just until Brexit was “steadied”, it is difficult to see what events would have unfolded any differently. What resistance there has been has been excruciatingly pedestrian.

      Scotland could easily have secured a Constitutional backstop based upon our Constitutional sovereignty to match Ireland’s, but the SNP has shown no appetite for pursuing such a thing. Not SNPBAD, but statement of fact.

      When Mike Russell appears to suggest IndyRef2 is dependent upon Westminster’s cooperation, it doesn’t sit easily beside Ian Blackford’s assertions about Scotland’s sovereignty being ascendant. But in wider context, it is Ian Blackford who seems to lack consistency with the previous three years of relative caution and timidity from the SNP. Who knows? All we are treated to is more enigmatic kite flying.

      I have tried my best to think positive thoughts about a People’s Vote and second EU referendum, but can’t avoid the anxious belief we have simply boarded the wrong bus.

      A lot is going to depend on the SNP conference, because faith in Nicola as this master tactician who has everything under control is getting a little threadbare.

      I hope I’m wrong, if the SNP Conference chooses to focus on EU elections which might not even happen, rather than aligning itself with Ian Blackford’s Constitutional escape from Brexit, then I fear the disappointment will be very damaging. There is a point when being an enigma ceases to be convincing. As a strategy, it is leaving the grassroots strength of YES2014 sidelined and politically malnourished. I see no genius in that.

      Try as I might, it is difficult to account for a 6% rise for support for the Greens with 1.2% rise for the SNP as a quasi protest vote for Indy supporters who want more from the SNP.

    20. schrodingers cat says:

      Terry callachan

      Sometimes politics requires a politician to keep their intentions secret until the time is right to release ,

      Nicola Sturgeon was not elected as SNP leader “to keep the UK in the E.U.”

      Nicola Sturgeon was elected to lead the cause for Scottish independence

      leading the cause of independence means getting more than 45%, convincing the 55% to switch from no to yes. the PV is a popular idea amongst the 55%. support for a policy which will never happen which at the same time increases support for yes is an example of a politician keeping their intentions secret.

      the campaign for a PV will die the death the moment a ge is announced

    21. Arbroath1320 says:

      So two years ago after repeating numerous times that she was NOT going to hold a General Election Feartie disappeared into the Welsh hills where she was heard saying, repeatedly, as she climbed the hills “I will NOT be holding a General Election.” As she appeared coming back down the hills she was heard, repeatedly, saying “I WILL hold a General Election.”

      Jump forward two years to 2019 and we have the situation where Feartie has repeatedly denied wanting to hold another *YAWN* General Election. Apparently Feartie is reportedly to have disappeared up the Welsh hills … AGAIN!

      Now some folks may call me a cynic but could history be repeating itself here perhaps?

    22. jfngw says:

      The SNP would still have had 54 MP’s, and 50% of the vote, the claim of ‘now is not the time’ would have been impossible to maintain. The reduction of SNP MP’s gave Theresa May breathing space regarding Scotland as she could claim the SNP had lost support. It didn’t matter they were still the largest party the narrative was to be they had lost seats, the MSM were given their instructions and have stuck to them.

      I think we remember that during the 15-17 period the MSM decided that every SNP MP they could smear they would. Only one has come to anything, strangely now back on the Herald website front page.

    23. mr thms says:

      “We said at the time that the election was a stupid and terrible idea from Theresa May’s own perspective, and we were right.”

      I am not so sure.

      It looks like the UK will participate in the election for the parliament of the European Union, if the MEPs from the UK are sworn in, the Withdrawal Agreement wins the approval of parliament, the UK leaves all of its treaties with the EU AND enters a ‘transitional arrangement’ then not only will she have achieved her goal of an orderly withdrawal, she will also have set up the UK for an orderly succession. Article 50 has five parts and I expect the fifth part will be used by the successor states.

    24. yesindyref2 says:

      I think we need to look at Theresa May. No, really!

      In her mind she’s the best and the only one to steer the UK through these difficult times, she’s Thatcher, she’s Churchill, the weight of the UK is on her shoulders.

      From that point of view, her revolting party is second, despite what everyone says. She wants to be in the history books. For the Tories it might be all about the Tories, but for her, it’s about the UK – and her perhaps.

      That’s my Devil’s Advocate hypothesis!

      My usual fee of £squillions per hour is, I presume, in the post.

    25. Clootie says:

      If Labour listened we wouldn’t be in this mess now!
      However nothing has changed as regards to “We always get what England votes for”

    26. Welsh Sion says:

      Orri says:

      16 April, 2019 at 1:59 pm


      However I rather suspect that when they were pre merger they simply sold out Scotland without any actual input, regardless of how diluted, into the Conservative Party of England and Wales. Simply took the whip and voted regardless of the mandate they stood on.


      Point of order for future reference. Of course it’s a Branch Office, but the Welsh Conservatives (yuk!) are actually apart from the English Conservatives. Doesn’t mean to say they don’t do HQ’s bidding, mind.


      Robert J. Sutherland says:

      16 April, 2019 at 2:02 pm


      Who can Remainers in England vote for? Would Corbyn do any better than May? Really?


      My problem in a nutshell. Although have been ‘in exile’ for less than 15 years here in England and a Member of both PC and SNP I can not vote for them. (Ex-pats overseas for less than 15 years, can …)

      We have already received our voting cards for the Local elections here in England (3 May) and unless I can think of something better, I’m going to vote Green (of England and Wales – no devolution there) or spoil my paper.

      What do you advise?

    27. Petra says:

      You could say that it was all Nicola Sturgeon’s fault, lol. SNP Baad.

      Nicola called for an Indyref2 on 13th March 2017.

      Less than 4 weeks later (9/04/17), Big T made the decision to hold a GE during her walking holiday in Wales: Announced on the 18th April 2017.

      On the other-hand maybe Big T was taking advice from her mate, Dirty Money Davidson, on how to stymie Nicola’s request which would get Nicola off of the hook.

    28. schrodingers cat says:

      Breeks says:
      16 April, 2019 at 2:54 pm
      I wouldn’t be so quick to write off May’s election as a total disaster. Yes, she did forfeit her majority and suffer a dependency on the DUP because of it, but it is difficult to ignore the fact the Election result did give the SNP a shock, forced a strategic rethink upon them

      this is correct, however it is worth looking at the actual voter numbers, rather than the % or number of mps elected

      2015 turnout 66.4%
      snp 1,454,436
      lab 707,147
      tory 434,097
      lib 219,675

      2017 turnout 71.1%
      snp 977,569
      tory 757,949
      lab 717,007
      lib 179,061

      labour increased by a paltry 10k, no real increase on the 2015 result

      lib dems lost votes, but in line with lower turn out

      tories increased their support by ~30%

      the biggest causualty was us. our voters didnt turn up. it was pissing with rain that day if i remember.

      the tories didnt even produce a manifesto, or even a leaflet with the word tory on it, just ruth davidson saying no means no, now is not the time etc.

      however shallow this ploy was/is, it resonated with the unionist voters. it got out their vote

      I canvassed right across my constituency using our normal canvas sheet question, eg, who did you vote for last time who will you vote next time etc, but it was the last question on the sheet about ndyref2 which drew the biggest intake of breath. that the unionists said no was expected but it was the reaction of snp voters (and even a few members) which was the greatest surprise. with brexit dominating their replies. they were luke warm towards the idea of indyref2 at that moment.

      it was brexit they were more concerned about.

      this is only a personal anecdote, nothing scientific, but i believe this was one of the main reasons (that and voter fatigue) why we failed to get out our vote.

      we failed right across scotland to get our our supports and why nicola parked indyref2 (rightly so) until the brexit goat rodeo at wm comes to a conclusion. she continues to make the right noises while the uk media is desperate to focus on anything other than brexit in scotland, and when they do it is usually some lame attempt to blame us for the brexit failure. This wont wash, the tories and perhaps even labour will end up owning this fiasco, not the snp.

      nicola should carry on as she has been doing, (keeping indyre2 off the table) it is treeza that will be forced to blink first, by her own party. it is treeza that has run out of places to hide, not us

      snp 18k
      lib 14k

      snp 14k
      lib 14k

      we still won but by only 2 votes 🙂

    29. mr thms says:

      Welsh Sion @ 3:34 pm

      If people hold their nose and vote Conservative, a Conservative landslide in the local elections would boost support for a second referendum on independence..

    30. Ken500 says:

      The Tory support has just started falling. So even a GE now might have still left the Tories in (coalition?) power. Back to square one. Even with the Brexit shambles. Another few years of this the Tories will be finished. The average Tory member is male over seventy. Not much hope for them.

      Scotland will be off to Independence. Nae more Tories to muck up the economy. Labour are finished in Scotland. Win, win.

    31. Ken500 says:

      People always seem to forget the 30% of non voters who turn out for IndyRef. They will decided the result.

    32. schrodingers cat says:

      Arbroath1320 says:
      Now some folks may call me a cynic but could history be repeating itself here perhaps?

      no it wont since she has already told the tory mps she wont lead them into another ge.

      she has failed to pass her deal 3 times in the commons, fought and won an internal tory party vonc and a hoc vonc.

      her latest wheeze is to appeal to corbyn for help, even though it is destroying he own party. 2 tory mps are publicly calling for another hoc vonc.

      her last chance is corbyn and her jointly agreeing a deal. I cant see him doing that, why would he?

      vonc are a numbers game, the phones will be ringing off the hook, once corbyn and treeza know that corbyn has a majority. she will resign, probably towards the end of the holidays in 10 days

      why on earth would the snp announce indyref2 before then?

    33. yesindyref2 says:

      And another thing about May. Cameron was a bit of a democrat, May has no such compunction. I suspect she heard of Peter the Great, Cathering the Great and Frederick the Great (wonder how named them that), and thought to herself “Mmm, Theresa the Great sounds good to me”.

      She will hold on tooth and nail, already has.

    34. FIONA TOMANY says:


    35. Terry callachan says:

      Schrodibgers cat 2.58..
      You could be right ,it’s hard to fathom out what is going to happen because all politicians now tell lies half truths and spin.

      Hope for the best

    36. schrodingers cat says:

      yesindyref2 says:
      She will hold on tooth and nail, already has.

      yes, but only until she cant. if corbyn walks out of the talks what will she do then?

      she contested 2 vonc already because she believed she could win, and she was right.

      what happens when the whips show her that she cant win? what then?

      that’s when she will down the liquorice torpedo 🙂

    37. Petra says:

      Thanks for the link Ronnie (4:57pm). A real damning indictment re. Westminster democracy (what’s that?) from Alyn Smith.

    38. CameronB Brodie says:

      I think a Conflict Theory analysis of Brexit would be highly relevant but I haven’t found one yet. One thing is for certain, Westminster has chosen to violate the legal identity of Scotland’s residents, and subsequently the normative foundations of human rights and the rule-of-law.

      The Conflicting Identity Politics of Brexit
      Eurocrisis in the Press

      So far, for many people, the experience of Brexit appears to be one of real individual anxiety and pain set against a prospective, and increasingly unlikely, collective gain. This is the case for both non-British EU citizens resident in the UK, and the many British EU citizens who cherish and benefit from that extra layer of democratic citizenship, whether resident in the UK or elsewhere in the EU. It is highly unusual for a liberal democracy, in peacetime, to attempt to remove so many rights from so many people, including its own citizens, so rapidly. But that is exactly what appears to be happening, and it seems likely to have a damaging and polarising effect on many individuals’ sense of identity.

    39. ronnie anderson says:

      Petra and the SNP are sitting on their arses doing nothing , thats wan in the eye fur the Implement the Mandate Brigade

    40. schrodingers cat says:

      Terry callachan
      I already pointed out why it will be difficult to predict the no of lab and tory mps in england in the next ge, hung parliament might be unlikely but still a possible and desirable outcome for the snp. it increases their power to dictate, negotiate etc (s30?)

      in truth, i care little who the people of england elect, i only see red and blue tories now. but i do follow the changes in policy by the london hq’s and how this effects their scottish branches

      if wm tories swing to the right and elect a no deal tory leader, as is predicted, this will shatter the scottish tories, all of the tory msps are on record last week saying how bad a no deal brexit will be, there are even whispers of forming a breakaway scottish tory party, good luck doing that in the middle of a ge ruth. hell mundell will probably threaten to resign again 🙂

      if touchy thompson etal decide not to breakaway, the new tories could find themselves fighting against the old ones. it might be difficult to get their message out.

      in 2017, many unionists voted for the unionist party in their constituency most likely to beat the snp. that tactical voting wheel wont be so effective next time. the tory voting farmers in the borders will switch to libdem, which probably wont get them elected but it could split the vote.

      there was no corbyn momentum in scotland in 2017 and what bounce he had in his bungy is completely gone. his scottish branch mps and msps are holding out for the promise of a PV, which will evaporate the minute a ge is called. all he has to offer is a watered down unobtainable version of treezas deal

      polls show support for the snp recovering from 38 to about 43%, enough for us to win 5-10 of the seats we lost in 2017. if the tories move to the right in wm, we could be looking at many more gains

      so we wait, nicola continues to promote a soft brexit (sm & cu) and a peoples vote and keeps indyref2 off the table.

      we wait until the tories chose a new no deal leader

      we wait until the new tory leader calls a ge

      we wait until the tories, lab and libdems publish their manifestos

      then we change and publish ours



      with a majority of scottish mps (35)we will pursue a s30 for indyref2

      with a majority of scottish votes (50% +1)we will declare scotlands independence immediately and begin negotiations with westminster and brussels

    41. CameronB Brodie says:

      Still not found a full conflict theory analysis of Brexit, though I am finding lots of interesting stuff. What to post first, some International Relations Theory or something more along the lines of an integrative theory of intergroup conflict? Decisions, eh? 🙂

    42. ronnie anderson says:

      Phurp phurp phurp Sphincters tightening in the City of London , hope they have invested in toilet paper .

      Briandoonthetoon dont you be offering to help them oot from your stash .

    43. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      schrodingers cat @ 14:50,

      Up to a point, Lord Copper. The problem isn’t merely that neither of the Cartel has a majority, but that each of them is fragmented two or three ways. Which is why I say that a UKGE wouldn’t solve the problem, since it would only reshuffle the very same fragments.

      It’s richly ironic that the only thing that’s keeping them from fissuring completely is the ridiculous FPTP electoral system that they keep insisting on retaining.

      Because of the intervention of this “parallel” belief system – the mass delusion of Brexit, like the Salem trials of yore – the system which has kept the Cartel going for all these years is the very thing that is now destroying them.

    44. CameronB Brodie says:

      OK, let’s start with a wide-angle view.

      Battling prejudice in Europe

      Prejudice is not necessarily the result of conflicting interests, poverty and unemployment. It is more likely fueled by perceptions of illegitimacy, pushed forward by far-right politics.

    45. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      schrodingers cat @ 15:44,

      It seems very likely that back in 2017 The Ruth Davidson Party was able to exploit a general weariness in the public for elections and referendums. Brexit was still some theoretical thing on the distant horizon, with a lot of (sometimes deliberate) obfuscation of the fundamental realities. So there was a kind of corporate f-off of the SNP back then, which very evidently set the party back on its heels. So taking stock then was the correct move.

      I believe it’s very different now, with the Brexit monster’s fiery breath upon our necks and the Cartel in obvious difficulties that the media can’t help but expose. The RuthDavidsonites tried the “no to indyref” schtick again at the Leith by-election and it failed. Failed miserably. Their mojo has withered so badly across the UK that they are likely to slump badly in a new UKGE. And thus won’t be inclined to have one until the end-of-term. “Once bitten…”, etc.

      So if you are suggesting we continue to stall until another UKGE to put us back in contention, that’s a serious error, IMO, that concedes far too much initiative to the Cartel.

    46. CameronB Brodie says:

      David Cameron thought he could resolve internal Tory party difference through opening the British constitution to attract by far-right populism. The Tories have a hell of a lot to answer for, so it’s just as well that that is exactly where most Tories will end up. In a metaphorical if not spiritual sense anyway.

      Brexit: the day of reckoning for the neo-functionalist paradigm of European Union

      The unprecedented geopolitical shift resulting from Brexit reflects deep socio-economic fault lines within and beyond the UK. In many ways foreshadowing the US presidential election of Donald Trump, Brexit brought to the surface and gave a public voice to socio-economic divisions that were deeply embedded, sometimes illogical, but until now had either been ignored or hushed out of ‘respectable’ public debate.

      This Discussion Forum emanates from a spontaneous seminar organized 2 days after the Brexit vote on June 25, 2016 as part of the SASE conference held in University of California–Berkeley and followed by an open call for papers by Socio-Economic Review. The papers here draw attention to the origins of the Brexit vote in deep-seated socio-economic divisions (O’Reilly), widening differences in economic performance across sectors and regions of the UK (Froud, Sukhdev and Williams) and the growth of poor quality jobs (Warhurst). Meanwhile, the political dynamics of the Brexit vote were also shaped by the fractured nature of UK business elites (Morgan), divisions between locals and cosmopolitans (Grey) and creative but muddled actions of elites that arguably generated consequences they themselves failed to fully anticipate (Wood and Wright).

      From the perspective of Europe, Brexit reflects a history of dysfunctional economic policy in Europe that prioritized market competition in ways that neglected and ultimately undermined solidarity (Boyer). Here, Brexit reflects a political strategy to both renationalize and recommodify solidarity in the face of fears over migration, and which are likely to have major consequences for social solidarity in Europe more generally (Frerichs and Sankari). However, Brexit is unlikely to provide a durable social and political solution to the wider tensions between globalization and democracy, which also affect all countries throughout Europe (Rona-Tas). Ultimately, the Brexit vote underlines social divisions that combine class inequalities with regional ones, not just in Britain but throughout Europe (Le Galès).

    47. Graeme J McAllan says:

      Corbyn and May trying to bring England back to her colonial best 🙁

    48. Ann Rayner says:

      Interesting that Alyn Smith in the YouTube clip (thanks Ronnie) makes a point of asking for international observers to supervise a European Parliamenary election in the UK to ascertain that they are conducted fairly.
      This suggests very publickly that this is not the case in our elections which many of us recognise. In the event of another Indyref, there would be even more need for international supervision to prevent things like the last minute Vow, the dodgy postal votes etc.

    49. robbo says:

      Acht don’t worry , you call always rely on the classics to give you a laugh.

      See the Queen she brings in 20 million mate- this country wid b oan its arse ha ha ha -tears tae ma eyes that one.

    50. Dave McEwan Hill says:

      Terry callachan at 2.48

      The best position for us to campaign for independence from is from a UK that has cancelled Brexit. It removes the nawbags scare tactic of a “hard border between Scotland and England”.

      I can assure you that Nicola and the SNP’s attempt to save England from itself is having a very productive effect with a lot of previous NO voters and particularly among the English vote in Scotland. I am meeting them every day expressing support for a sensible independent Scotland.

      And if Brexit actually happens againat our best efforts our support will rocket up.

      Meanwhile lots and lots of work is going on behind the scenes. Be ready to be surprised.

    51. Welsh Sion says:

      Petra says:

      16 April, 2019 at 3:37 pm

      You could say that it was all Nicola Sturgeon’s fault, lol. SNP Baad.

      Nicola called for an Indyref2 on 13th March 2017.

      Less than 4 weeks later (9/04/17), Big T made the decision to hold a GE during her walking holiday in Wales: Announced on the 18th April 2017.


      Nah, Petra. Blame the air in my homeland. They say if you go up Cader Idris in the evening you come down in the morning as a poet or insane.

      You decide Big T’s affliction … 🙂

    52. CameronB Brodie says:

      OK, that clip make me think a bit of International Relations Theory is needed to help re-edumicate Scotland’s leftist No voters. IMHO, the EU in intrinsically more democratic than Westminster and British parliamentarian practice. It respects territorial sovereignty, though this can bring it in to conflict with the EU’s supportive position re. the human rights of individuals and peoples (see Catalonia).

      Globalisation, Agency, Theory:
      A Critical Analysis of Marxism in Light of Brexit


      There has long been a vivid debate about the growing interconnection of the world into a global system of interaction referred to as globalisation.[1] Two centuries ago, Marx and Engels postulated that the global expansion of capitalism would lead to a “universal interdependence of nations”[2] through which national differences become homogenised under a ruling bourgeoisie that “creates a world after its own image.”[3] The Marxist debate on globalisation and its effect on the nation-state has come a long way since, and yet, it still centres around the question of whether growing economic interconnectedness automatically leads to a transnationalising process that gradually surpasses the nation-state, or whether instead, the fragmented character of the nation-state system is an inherent feature of capitalist modernity.[4]

      This paper sets out to critically review these two main strands of the Marxist globalisation debate. The structure of this essay is as follows. Firstly, part one introduces Robinson’s theory of a global capitalist state formation and the decline of inter-state rivalry, which, to some extent, resembles Marx and Engels’ argument above. However, the essay argues that inter-societal fragmentation undoubtedly persists in the contemporary age of globalisation, which has only recently been illustrated with the British decision to exit from the European Union (Brexit). The second part then introduces the theory of ‘new imperialism’ advanced by Callinicos, who seeks to explain the persistence of geopolitical competition.

      Here, the essay supports the argument that a Marxist theory of the relationship between capitalism and the inter-state system must be able to take account of the centrifugal pulls of geopolitics, which demands the integration of the international as a determining feature in the analysis. However, in the following, it is argued that it is not enough to simply add the international as an external determinacy, as suggested by Callinicos.[5] Rather, in order to make sense of the complex socio-economic reality that shapes historically situated actors’ decision-making, the international must be re-integrated into an analysis of the social, as proposed by the theory of uneven and combined development (U&CD).[6]

      The third and last section of the essay is then applying this prior established critique to a case study of Brexit, in order to show that, while the theory of new imperialism enables the conceptualisation of the EU as an imperialist project in which national interests are at play, Callinicos’ ‘realist moment’ is unable to explain the complex social dynamics involved Britain’s decision to leave the EU.

    53. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Brodie, did you attend the last wings ‘meetup’?

    54. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist
      Why do you want to know?

    55. Lenny Hartley says:

      FFS Channel four news gittering on about how brilliant the UK economy is with record numbers of people at works in figures not seen since 1974, waffle waffle , no mention of the fact that a zero hours worker who works for 1 hour a fortnight is classified as being in employment. Wonder why they didnot mention that?

    56. ronnie anderson says:

      Cameron B Brodie

      I can say quite categorically that RN didn’t attend the Dow’s Wingers night out, did you meet anyone with that name , i already know your answer to that .

    57. CameronB Brodie says:

      ronnie anderson
      We know what we know. What I want to know is why RN wants to know about my personal life.

    58. geeo says:

      DMH @6.45pm

      Good post.

      There has never been an ounce of doubt that there has been an immense amount of work being done out of the public glare, by the Scotsgov, i totally agree with you there.

      Nicola has not been sightseeing on her trips to europe, well, not just sightseeing …!

      If England’s ever increasing right wing population ever realise that brexit has not happened because a Tory gov is petrified of losing Scottish resources, after 3 centuries of telling England they subsidise Scots and Scotland, they will be mightily unimpressed to put it mildly.

      I posted as such recently to an excellent post by Maria F on here.

      maria F 3.48pm

      Good post maria F, and totally agree that Ukexit has long since been about getting a ‘brexit’ that England wants, without losing the Scottish resources, by us gaining enough support for independence, because of our clear objection and rejection of leaving the EU.

      The SNP have been busy for a couple of years now, whittling away at the options for WM trying to stop ukexit driving Scots indy.

      The Continuity Bill highlighted brilliantly that WM think they can walk over Scots Law by employing “sleekit” means, but the reality is, Scots Law was indeed subjugated, as The Queen had no right to give the Wrecking Bill Royal Assent before the Scots Law Bill (Continuity).

      Sleekit means is still subjugation, it just moved to being sleekit subjugation.

      That alone is reason for Sovereign Scots to p unt Betty.

      The thing is though, WM knows that was not going to fly later in international courts, as once they are informed that the Queen had a LEGAL duty to protect the interests of Scots Law and CHOSE to allow WM to employ sleekit means, and not only that, SHE enabled them by giving Royal Assent priority to the wrecking bill, they will have no option but to rule with Scotsgov on that one.

      And that means that the international courts, must find the Treaty of Union in full and open breach, and Holyrood is recognised as the government of the now independent, Scotland.

      If WM think they are on strong legal ground re: over ruling Scots Law/Sovereignty of the Scots People, and simply saying ‘No’ to a Section 30 and tough titty, then why do they not simply ‘get on’ with a No Deal ukexit ?

      Simply, because they KNOW the legal position they sit on, is just not legally competent and will be eviscerated by a Scottish gov/parliamentary presented case to the international courts/bodies.

      WM is crippled by fear of losing Scotland’s revenues, and are apopletic with rage over Scotsgov refusal to show its hand too early, allowing WM to find more ‘sleekit’ ways to circumvent our case for indy.

      There is only ONE route WM can take, which allows them a hope of keeping Scotland tied to the Union.

      A Section 30 referendum, at a time of Scotsgov choosing, and on Scotland’s terms to the fore.

      Thanks to some great work over the last few years by the SNP (and others-revoke A.50 case) there are ZERO other scenario’s which do not involve the Scotsgov having the right to simply dissolve the Treaty of Union for subjugation of Scots Law (Continuity Bill) subjugation of Scots Sovereign Will (ANY ukexit) EVEL (denial of legally equal union partner status) amongst others.

      Even if Nicola writes to Treeza and states “We will be having an indyref on xyz day / date, with a S.30 order” and treeza tries her “now is not the time” patter, then its off to Holyrood and a dissolution motion as the United Nations charters, which WM is a signatory to, is VERY specific.

      3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.

      In other words, now IS the time.

      No matter the political shambles of ukexit, no matter if it destroys the WM led economy, no matter what, an indyref, with or without a S.30, called by Scotsgov/Holyrood, MUST be respected as by rights afforded by the U.N. never mind a cast iron mandate by Sovereign Scots and Holyrood.

      Imagine if English voters ever figured out that they are actually being denied their precious ‘brexit’ because WM gov is petrified of losing Scotland ?

      Having to admit Scotland keeps England afloat, after centuries of propaganda saying the complete opposite !

      Not sure English political establishment, as is, could survive such a monumental earthquake.

      THAT is down to the hard work and great patience of the SNP.

      Why would people think, after years of brilliant positioning/politiking, that the SNP have suddenly decided to contrive to shit the bed at the moment of proof ?

      Makes no sense if you examine the big picture, so i shall continue to keep the faith, and remain supremely confident in the job the SNP/Scotsgov are doing.

      We ARE winning, i have zero doubt about that at all.

    59. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Brodie, did you attend the last wings ‘meetup’? It’s a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer.

    60. Iain mhor says:

      Interesting analysis.
      Let’s take it from another angle: Assume Corbyn and Labour knew (and still do) they couldn’t win a GE – not then and not now – What to do in the meantime other than shuffle change in their pockets?
      Do damage to the Tories is pretty much all there is. Hope to do so much damage that they have a shot in coalition, or part of a ‘Government of National Unity” Neither of those options is possible without the Tories first being weakened.

      The first part they did with the obvious, go along with a snap GE – the second part is the trickier choice now – form a coalition with a party/parties or stir further anarchy and a potential ‘Unity Government’? That is their current phase: teetering between having to choke on SNP support, or push a further disruption in the hope they don’t have to.

      Decisions, decisions. They’ve already sat with May (and God alone only knows what was being cooked up there) which hints at the outside chance of a ‘Unity’ government or major concessions, even to the point of offering them the next 5 years in Government. Is that so insane? The Tories need breathing space from the toxicity of Brexit to regroup and consolidate their party. Brexit will already have happened, so half of the Tories will be filling their boots and the other half will cry all the way to the bank.
      5 years on the backbenches is nothing to them, especially when Labour can only be in the firing line and get weaker in government, not stronger.

      We know they are two cheeks of the same arse and it’s a Buggins Turn establishment. Labour wouldn’t care what hot potato they get, they are just desperate for government. All in all, there was no downside to jumping into bed with the Tories for the snap GE. Only disruption, chaos and desperation could bring them anywhere near power.

      As for Scotland – why should they care? They can abuse or ignore Scotland all they want, They only have to dangle the carrot of an S30 for SNP support if it’s ever needed – its a banker.

      Just a thought.

    61. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Ronnie, since you seem to be keen to confirm who didn’t attend, perhaps you can state ‘quite categorically’ if Brodie did attend.

    62. Capella says:

      The Tories were stupid to hold the EU referendum just to placate their psychotic right wing.

      But since they have committed this folly,they ought to do what the Swiss have done and declare the result void because the electorate did not have the information required for an informed decision. This is because the electorate were comprehensively lied to.

      So instead of a “People’s Vote”, they ought to have a second referendum. Of course, they don’t want to set a precedent for Scotland to also have a second vote because of the catalogue of lies told. So stuck.

    63. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist
      It might be a simple yes or no question but it intrudes in to my personal life. I’m more than happy to share personal details, I post under my real identity, but I try to be selective about how and why I open myself up for interrogation. Why do you want to know about my personal whereabouts?

    64. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      ‘We know what we know.’

      It’s quite refreshing to see you keep quiet about something for once, albeit unnecessarily.

    65. ronnie anderson says:

      R Nationalist the clue is in the 2nd part of my post ( read )

    66. CameronB Brodie says:

      ronnie anderson
      The guy has nefarious motives, please don’t give him any assistance. I’m more than capable of handling this particular “man of the world”.

    67. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Brodie, your evasion of a simple question, and now the exaggerated defence with the use of words and phrases like ‘interrogation’ and ‘personal life’, I have to point out are most amusing, and make you look very disingenuous (I mean more than usual).

      There are comments from you around the time of the last ‘meetup’ which show no reluctance to impart your ‘whereabouts’ on that day. So rather than claiming this is some sort of attempt to invade your personal life, view it as a request to merely categorically confirm your previous open claim of attendance.

      Simple, and nothing untoward.

    68. Clootie says:

      I think everyone should remember the prime objective of the Brit Nats – Divide & Rule.

      Time to pause the “post wars” and remember who the real enemy is!

    69. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Dodgy fucking bastards.

    70. ronnie anderson says:

      Cameron B Brodie I have no intention of disclosing anything concerning you , but dont let people get under your skin

    71. CameronB Brodie says:

      ronnie anderson
      I think know how to gudle reasonably well.

      Reluctant Nationalist
      “Dodgy fucking bastards.”

      That’s you in three words, wanker. 😉

    72. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist
      Sorry I want to be accurate and have no interest in your personal movements.

      That’s you in three words, wanker wank.

    73. jockmcx says:

      The snp is 85

      85 years is a short time in Scottish politics.
      someone shoould turn this vid into an SNP pp broadcast

      we’re old enough.

    74. ronnie anderson says:

      LOL tempest tempest or is that me & Cam tempests

    75. Essexexile says:

      CameronB Brodie
      Did you threaten to overrule him!? (x13)
      FWIW I wasn’t at the last Wings meet up either.
      I did once see a bloke at a motorway services (on the M25 I believe) reading Wings on his tablet. Who might it have been eh?

    76. ronnie anderson says:

      Cameron B Brodie aye we wur taught tae gudle at a early age

    77. mike cassidy says:


      Wings twitter drawing attention to reports of the necessity of staying ‘loyal’ to the EU if you are due a pension from them

      And want to receive it!

      Which raises the obvious question.

      How come Farage is going to be receiving a £73,000 pension?

      Surely if we come out he should be down the jobcentre.

      Where he will be told he has a long wait for universal credit because he voluntarily gave up his job!

    78. CameronB Brodie says:

      Right, shall we get back on topic with a bit of scientific Brexitology?

      Brexit and the psychology of identity
      Psychology of identity

      Your identity is your definition of who you are and it is partly influenced by your genes, early life experiences and enduring predispositions – your personal identity, or personality if you like. But in social situations your social identity is much more important[1]. This is the sense of self you get from categorising yourself as belonging to a social group. Self-categorisation is an unconscious cognitive process that happens constantly. In social situations, once you categorise yourself as belonging to a group you exhibit unconscious biases to favour others in your group and to be prejudiced against those outside it. We see this in obvious behaviours such as between rival groups of football fans, but it also happens in subtle ways permeating the way you think without you being aware of it….

    79. ahundredthidiot says:

      There is a recognised symptom, not quite nor completely defined, regarding soldiers after contact, emergency service responders after a shout, elite business people after the deal is done, even in people who have ‘achieved their goal’- people who are subject to intense and prolonged focus in doing their jobs/task/study – and what happens in that aftermath?

      Once it’s over, the ‘come down’ – some people call it, can be difficult to manage – it’s where negative emotions surface and petty indifferences dominate peoples thinking and emotional reactions.

      Might I suggest that the come down of all this Brexit nonsense (now we have a break) is having an effect on some people? Certainly, when I mentioned to my partner that now was the time to strike with Indyref2, she replied that she was pretty tired and fed up with it all, a bit knackered with politics (just for now)

      But we’re just so tetchy on Wings at the moment and as Clootie suggests, our enemies will be loving it. More tolerance maybe, debate and by all means we should debate robustly, but maybe less of the personal (I will take my own medicine btw).

    80. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’ve just found a group conflict theory that examines the dynamic character of ethnic competition, such as welfare chauvinism and attitudes towards immigration. I’ll save that for later, I’m of to look out some relevant personal and social psychology, which is nice. 😉

    81. CameronB Brodie says:

      I don’t think I’m exclusionary just because I’m a bit course. Perhaps I am but there is normally an ethical reason behind my actions. 😉

      Britain’s middle-class Brexit Anxiety Disorder

    82. Petra says:

      @ Welsh Sion at 6:49pm …… “They say if you go up Cader Idris in the evening you come down in the morning as a poet or insane.”

      So the Welsh air was to blame for the GE, Welsh Sion. Good Welsh air went right to her head? Too much for her to cope with being used to the stench of Westminster?

      Taking it that Big T can hardly string a sentence together, rather uses her political speech writers, I doubt that she came down as a poet. That leaves us with ….eh, eh, eh ….. insane. Sounds about right.


      Another night of Cameron B Brody being hounded on here? Give it a rest. Give us all a break. And Cameron PLEASE ignore. Responding to such people just keeps the whole childish saga going.

    83. Essexexile says:

      See that on the BBC website ‘Super jumbo lands safely at Glasgow airport’.
      Making out like it was touch and go there for a moment.

    84. CameronB Brodie says:

      At least I know somebody is paying attention. Will try to follow your advice, though sometimes I see an opportunity to shoehorn some relevant edumicational material into the debate. 🙂

    85. Cactus says:

      People who want to leave Europe and the EU are called…


      Scotland needs to exit from the Tory UK of England

    86. Cactus says:

      Speaking of the long drop…

      How low can and will they go?

      Nothing is beyond them in their pursuit of destruction

    87. Cubby says:

      Manchester City v Tottenham Hotspur has just been described as the all British affair in the Champions league on Wednesday evening.

      There is no British football league and no British football association. Both clubs are English clubs.

      Just another example of England and Britain being one and the same in the minds of many if not most English.

    88. call me dave says:

      Well Man Utd the British team exiting soon. 4-0

      O/T 🙂

      Jings! History programme on early inventions ‘you tube’.
      James Watt and James Nasmyth were ‘English’inventors who led the early production of the industrial ‘machine tools’

      Later American machine tools in the war armaments industry helped win the World War I and II for England.

      Nothing new there then 🙂

    89. ahundredthidiot says:


      well, perhaps that is a veiled nod at the fact the Staff at GLA were supposed to be on strike today and it was narrowly avoided yesterday with a breakthru in pay talks.

      You should’ve seen the clowns who were roped into carry out Ops/Fire/Security cover for the day as the ‘contingency’….so in fairness to the Beeb, for once they have it right! It DID land safely – or at least it was received into ‘safe hands’

      ABZ action also averted btw……safe holidays folks!

    90. Dr Jim says:


      I’m not that clued up on the Footy but I wonder how many of these great England British players for these two great all British clubs are actually from all great Britain

    91. Dr Jim says:

      Are these Footy players not the very same types from the EU the English want to get rid of or is it OK as long as they swear allegiance to erm eh can’t think of the words

      Their wages

    92. CameronB Brodie says:

      Time for a bit more scientific Brexitology? Try to bear in mind Brexit represents a breakdown in England’s social psychology and acceptance of multiculturalism. Scotland must minimise that harm this will cause to our civil society, and choose national sovereignty within the EU.

      Social identity, personality and connectedness: probing the identity and community divides behind Brexit

      The UK vote to leave the European Union in June 2016 surprised and confounded academics and commentators alike. Existing accounts have focused on anti-immigration attitudes, anti-establishment sentiment and on the ‘left behind’, as well as national identity. This paper expands the range of possible explanations for the vote by considering a wider range of identity measures, including class and racial identities, and by considering in detail how ‘connectedness’ to others and to localities may have played a role in processes.

      We find evidence that racial identity was a factor in attitudes towards the European Union for White British voters, extending our understanding of the relationship between territorial identities, ethnicity and attitudes towards the European Union.

      Connectedness via networks also structures attitudes, with those with higher levels of and more diverse connections having more favourable attitudes towards the EU. Whilst these effects are smaller than those of education and age, they are nonetheless comparable with those of class and income, and suggest that we should be wary of accounts of attitudes towards the EU that fail to locate voters within their social contexts.

    93. ahundredthidiot says:

      Brexit is like Fawlty Towers – pick your country/character

      anything goes, but Basil IS England!!

      Great show…..(not brexit of course)

    94. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Stand out paragraph in todays National for me (from Hamish MacPhersons “The Scot who gave Canada free healthcare” about Tommy Douglas) is this one:

      An avowed anti-fascist he warned in 1937 that war was coming in Europe and later said “Fascism begins the moment a ruling class, fearing the people may use their political democracy to gain economic democracy, begins to destroy political democracy in order to retain its power of exploitation and special privilege.”

      That pretty much sums up for me where the UK is today

      1. Westminster fearing us Scots using our political democracy and realising Scotland’s desire for independence (and our nations resultant economic benefit at rUKs expense) and so their answer, North of the Border is the opposition to Indy through the binary ‘No Surrender to IndyRef2’ One Nation British Nationalism we see.

      But as the UK is a Bipartite Political Union so it is a double edged sword of fear with the addition of:

      2. Westminster fearing being on the wrong end of the Blood and Soil English Nationalist genie they have actively encouraged and courted (which led to Brexit, and now they can’t put back in the bottle) threatening their grip on the power of exploitation and special privilege and it’s “follow through on the Democratic Will of the People” is their answer South of the Border

      As has been said before:

      Brexit means that England can either have the UK Union or the EU Union it can’t have both.

      This circle will have to be squared very, very soon.

      I for one can’t wait.

      I also love surprises @DMH says at 6.45pm 🙂

    95. Patrick Roden says:

      @Reluctant Nationalist:

      Brodie, your evasion of a simple question, and now the exaggerated defence with the use of words and phrases like ‘interrogation’ and ‘personal life’, I have to point out are most amusing, and make you look very disingenuous (I mean more than usual).

      Tell you what, why don’t you start posting on wings using your own name instead of hiding behind a nom de plume, and then you can start asking other posters give you personal details about themselves…Deal?

    96. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      Missing the point entirely there, P’rick. I’m not asking his name.

      The appropriate equivalent would be for me to say that I was not at the last wings ‘meetup’.

      The smell of shite around everything Brodie does just gets stronger. But I think whoever sees this absurdity of a comments section would have figured out something’s a bit off by now.

    97. Phil says:

      Gary said: at 2:46pm
      ALL political votes are tactical votes, politicians need to realise how transient and unimportant they are. THEY work for US, not the other way round.”

      Agreed generally, except politicians and most people ‘in power’ feel themselves and their programmes IMPORTANT. Too important to allow lessor mortals, like us, interfere. The notion should be correct that ‘They Work For Us’. But decades of observation leads to an exact opposite evaluation of their self-perception.

    98. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      mike cassidy @ 21:01,

      Farage is a hypocritical leech, constantly haranguing the EU for its alleged “wastefulness” while happily pocketing his salary/pension as MEP.

      Oh, and even having that salary docked for alleged misuse of EU funds, IIRC.

      It takes a serious disconnect from reality to be able to vote for that chancer. (But there’s a lot of that going around at the moment, unfortunately.)

    99. Essexexile says:

      What’s the problem you have with CBB exactly?
      I must’ve missed the moment where you took umbridge with him/her.
      If it’s the linking to academic article thing then so what? You don’t have to read them.
      Genuinely a bit scoobied here. You say he/she is ‘dodgy’ but I’m not clear what you’re getting at.
      I’m not taking sides btw.

    100. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist’s attempts to undermine trust in my credibility, suggests he is politically motivated and not concerned with moral reason. I’ve already suggested he’s David Torrance in real life. Can I change my mind to Prof. Tompkins? 🙂

    101. Capella says:

      Complete ignoral is the only answer.

      To return to real matters, here’s a Consortium News piece on the arrest of Julian Assange. Held in Belmarsh for a bail infraction (justified by the need for asylum in the Ecuador Embassy).

      Belmarsh is a high security prison where terrorists are incarcerated and is not a suitable place for journalists IMO. Theresa May says that his arrest shows that nobody is above the law in the UK. But we know that many people in the Tory Party and Tory donors are above the law. What she means is that journalists who expose war crimes of the US and UK will be persecuted. Shameful. The sooner we are free of this ghastly state the better.

    102. schrodingers cat says:

      Robert J. Sutherland says:
      “So if you are suggesting we continue to stall until another UKGE to put us back in contention, that’s a serious error, IMO, that concedes far too much initiative to the Cartel.”

      I dont really disagree with anything in your post rjs. but we have followed this path for quite a while, i believe we are nearing the end game. literally, we are now talking days and weeks. I merely suggest we dont blink.

      once treeza resigns, things will move very quickly. once the new pm is chosen, the ge called and the unionist manifestos published, the unionist will be commited to a certain path,
      that is when we strike. the present direction of travel of the london parties runs a very high risk of destroying their scottish branches.

      it is the scottish unionist branches who are our opposition, not the london groups, and westminster is in the process of defeating them for us.

      i merely urge caution and waiting a short time more

    103. Gary45% says:

      Robert J Sutherland @10.46
      Unfortunately the song was already written for the “leech”
      “He’s only making plans for Nigel”.
      He should be stripped of all benefits from the EU, 25 years? for trying to destroy his employer, surely there is some case against him and the rest of his maggots.
      If any of us did this knowingly against our employers, we would be shown the door quick enough.

    104. CameronB Brodie says:

      This might help folk understand why I’m hostile to RN.

      Political theory and the multicultural society

      Political cultures, cultural politics

      ….The political theorist is culturally situated and prone to its inescapable biases, thus raising the question whether and how he or she can rise above his or her culture and, if not, what the intended audience and theoretical ambition should be. He or she cannot theorise about political life without at least some general conception of human being, raising again the question whether and how we can arrive at the latter and, if not, how theory can avoid becoming a justi?catory ideology of society.

      Even if one decides in the light of these dif?culties to con?ne oneself to one?s own kind of society, as John Rawls has done in his later writings, one?s problems do not end. The theorist is located within or likely to be deeply committed to one of his/her society?s several cultures, and his/her concepts and assumptions might not carry conviction with fellow-citizens belonging to different cultural, religious or moral traditions, as Rawls?s critics have shown.

      A political theory of the multicultural society needs to address these and related questions. Since they are all in one form or another connected with culture, a political theory of the multicultural society cannot offer coherent answers to them without developing a well-considered theory of the nature, structure, inner dynamics and role of culture in human life.

      The traditional political theory either ignores this subject altogether or gives a highly misleading account of it. Broadly speaking, traditional political theory is dominated by two major approaches to the subject – naturalism and culturalism – one making human nature and the other culture its basis. Arguing rightly that a well-considered political theory should be grounded in a philosophical anthropology or a theory of human being, and wrongly equating the latter with a theory of human nature, the naturalists based their views on the nature and structure of political life on a particular view of human nature.

      This is as true of the Greek and Christian political philosophers, who took a fairly ?thick? or substantive view of human nature, as of their modern successors such as Hobbes, Locke, Bentham, J.S. Mill and Kant, who took a fairly ?thin? and largely formal view of it. For all of them human nature was universally uniform, unchanging, unaffected in its essentials by culture and society, more or less transparent, accessible in its entirety to philosophical re?ection, and capable of indicating what way of life was the best. Their thought left little conceptual space for culture, which was largely seen as epiphenomenal, dealing with the morally indifferent areas of customs and rituals, and making little difference to how social and political life should be organized.

    105. Heart of Galloway says:

      The upcoming European elections I feel are going to assume a significance far beyond their usual scope.

      Taking part in them at all will be hugely symbolic after May’s endless chunterings that ‘we’ would leave the EU on March 29.

      For Scotland they represent a chance to reinforce our EU membership ambitions by electing SNP MEPs. Winning three out of the six seats must be a realistic target.

      Labour and the Tories can’t expect anymore than one each, meaning the Greens are in with a shout of claiming the final seat if they out-poll the LibDems.

      Should that happen it would deliver a 4-2 Indy victory which would not only be a sensational result, but also a internationalist declaration of intent that Scotland will never give up her place in Europe.

      Meanwhile on the ither side o’ Tweed? By way of grotesque irony a likely scenario will be those parties who hate Europe most, Kippers mark 1 and 2, will profit from the situation they wanted least – remaining in Europe long enough to take part in EU parliamentary elections.

      English Europhobia will stamp all over the campaign and the rightward shift will widen the political chasm between Scotland and England even further.

      The FM is dead right – the incompetence of May’s lunatic government has been underestimated.

      And critically that fact is not lost on a large slice of the Scottish electorate who hitherto would never have contemplated voting for the SNP or independence.

      IF these elections happen – and I believe they will – a huge opportunity beckons. If those voters can be won over the positive consequences for our cause could be a game-changer.

      So stop the sniping and enervating navel gazing, and get out there. Agitate, educate, organise, persuade, even cajole if need be. Our opponents have never been weaker.

    106. Cactus says:

      This is an example of the long drop

      (the next long drop video on that AutoPLAY should be a movie promo)

      And here is The Long Drop (Reel)

      For your palatable interests

    107. Terry callachan says:

      Schrodingers cat
      Dave Mcewen Hill

      I admire your confident views ,I’m not so sure it’s as straightforward as you say
      Nice if it is
      Time will tell
      Brexit May still progress

      I will give you a pat on the back if you’re correct.

    108. yesindyref2 says:

      “WATCH: ‘Two shot salvo’ destroys mock ballistic missile in US test”. It’s actually a mock ICBM, “ballistic missile” doesn’t really make the point that it’s hoped to destroy ICBMs in space.

      Which does add a little rocket fuel to the debate about renewing Trident.

      Most peoples’ attack on Trident is that it’s a “murderous WMD”, which does somewhat miss the point that its very existence is supposed to prevent its use, and that has worked since 1945. No nuke has been fired in anger in 74 years. Quite bluntly it makes that argument against Trident a little “fringe”.

      Second argument against renewal is the cost, and couldn’t that be used better on more conventional defence? Well, at around 9-12% of the defence budget, it can be considered an insurance policy, the last resort of home territory defence – deter anyone from attacking in the first place. Hence a greatly reduced budget for actual conventional home defence. A secondary one for cost is that it could save lives if spent in the NHS. Indeed, that’s a good argument, but well, you know, defence and all that.

      Third one is detection of the single patrol boat of the CASD. Personally I think there would need to be a minimum of two at sea to be really effective. One can easily be taken out. There’s a standby boat in case of that, but that would be a little too late!

      But fourth, you manange to remain undetected until launch, fire all 16 SLBMs (Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles), get destroyed yourself, and what happens? Your missiles get destroyed in space.

      Some deterrent that is – not.

    109. CameronB Brodie says:

      Trident is an outdated “tactical” weapon of aggression. It is all about posturing and has sod all to do with defense, IMHO. My primary interest in defense concerns my biological security, as Brexitania threaten to be a very hostile environment for the vulnerable.

    110. Patrick Roden says:

      @ Reluctant Nationalist.

      I asked you to post your real name to see if you were either complete coward or someone who’s ‘task’ it is to disrupt wings comment section by insulting posters.

      I guess we have all now saw the answer and I would suggest strongly that Cameron Brodie should do what I will do from this point on and that is to completely ignore a sniveling little coward who hides behind a nom de plume,

    111. Cactus says:

      After the long drop there is the Drop Off

      Turtles can live for hundreds of years

      “Rip it, roll it and punch it!”

    112. yesindyref2 says:

      Strategic, not tactical. Tactical nukes, for the battlefield, things like short range nuke missiles, nuclear depth charges, mostly disappeared from inventories and tactics quite a few years ago.

    113. CameronB Brodie says:

      Ah, told you I was only really interested in the biological. 🙂

    114. Brian says:

      I have decided to get t shirts made up for the next Independence march with reference to Mike Russell’s statement.

      The slogan will read: Please Ma’am (front) Can we have a Section 30 order? (back)

    115. CameronB Brodie says:

      That’s the biopsychosocial, actually. Time for some more scientific Brexitology? 😉

      The myths of Brexit


      Cassirer’s notion of myth and Langer’s process philosophy are used to provide a novel perspective upon how feelings were both expressed and organised in the Brexit referendum, showing how multiple, overlapping organisations of feelings created a set of emergent rationalities. Political parties and campaigns, the media, and lived experience serve as analytic foci, and various feelings are identified. It is concluded that the result was largely rational on its own terms and that understanding this is central to the social psychology of Brexit.

    116. Cactus says:

      For and to the people of beautiful France

      Have ye all a good 17th of April 2019 everybuddy

    117. CameronB Brodie says:

      Honestly folk, the full-English Brexit poses a direct challenge to the rule-of-law and moral democracy in Britain. Subsequently, the full-English Brexit poses an existential threat to Scottish culture and the liberty of the Scottish public. An electorate who voted to avoid the chaos of the full-English Brexit.

      The Law & Politics of Brexit
      The Process: Brexit and the Anatomy of Article 50

      The chapter offers a holistic legal analysis of the treaty provision regulating withdrawal from the EU. Craig examines Article 50 TEU and maintains that the process of exit from the EU should be divided into three stages, each of which raises major substantive and procedural questions. Stage 1 is the triggering of Article 50 TEU. Stage 2 concerns the withdrawal negotiations, and stage 3 relates to the outcome of the negotiations.

      As Craig explains, each stage poses specific challenges both for the EU and for the UK, and there are legal questions that have been—and will have to be—answered along the way. According to Craig, however, politics will heavily shape the law, with both the EU and the UK seeking to leverage specific legal argument in support of their preferred bargaining position.

      Keywords: Brexit, process, law, EU treaties, UK constitution, Parliament, courts, government, withdrawal, notification

    118. schrodingers cat says:

      breaking news

      man filmed on 2nd floor of the notre dame after the fire started and before the fure brigade arrived

      the gendarme have announced that they dont know his name but……his face rings a bell


    119. Breeks says:

      schrodingers cat says:
      16 April, 2019 at 11:02 pm

      once treeza resigns, things will move very quickly. once the new pm is chosen, the ge called and the unionist manifestos published, the unionist will be commited to a certain path,
      that is when we strike. the present direction of travel of the london parties runs a very high risk of destroying their scottish branches.

      it is the scottish unionist branches who are our opposition, not the london groups, and westminster is in the process of defeating them for us….

      Define “defeating them”.

      The SNP had an outright majority at Holyrood, and virtually wiped out opposition MP’s at Westminster. You present “defeating them” as a material objective, but we have already defeated them before, in fact annihilated them at Westminster, and nothing changed. The Union has revealed considerable resilience against Scotland’s democracy.

      Defeating the Unionist parties at Holyrood, even Westminster too, is a game inside a game. We are playing that game at “user” level, where win, lose, or draw is an irrelevant and ephemeral result. If we want permanent change, we need to access the game at “super-user” level, which gives a higher level of access to alter and rewrite the rules of the game. We need to be a programmer writing the rules, not a player imprisoned by them.

      Trying to get people to grasp the significance of sovereignty, and what it means to be sovereign is like bashing your head into a wall over, and over, and over again. We are sovereign. If we decide we don’t need a Section 30 Agreement, NOBODY can overrule us, because that would mean we weren’t sovereign, they were.

      We are mesmerised by democracy. In fact, we are double mesmerised. First, we cannot grasp that sovereignty is an absolute condition that is infinitely more powerful than an ephemeral democratic majority. And second, we seem utterly flummoxed in how to deal with a democracy hopelessly compromised by corrupt media indoctrination, shady electoral malpractice, illegal funding and covert influence, and blatant unashamed outright dishonesty of the “Establishment”.

      Yet time, after time, after time, democracy is spun as the sacred cow, while the pure indefatigable principles of Constitutional Sovereignty are criminally misinterpreted and underplayed. It is beyond tiresome. When we cannot respect our own sovereignty, what chance is there in getting it recognised internationally?

      Sovereignty is a super-user concept. Sadly it seems beyond the grasp of our leadership and strategists, with the notable exception of Ian Blackford.

    120. schrodingers cat says:

      i understand very well the concept of a sovereign nation deciding its on fate

      but while only 45% of the people wish to become independent, it is the sovereign will of the people of scotland to remain in the uk.

      talk of user level etc sounds poetic but is short on actual detail.

      i merely pointed out that the actions of the london parties is damaging and will continue to damage the support base for the unionists in scotland. this is self evident the only question is by how much?

      i believe it will push support above 50%

      so we wait for the unionists to finally take a position on brexit and publish it in their manifestos.

      and then we change tact. the snp can put independence at the heart of their manifesto





      the main thrust of the unionist argument against indy is that most people dont want indy or indyref2

      if the snp gain more than 50% in the ge, then we wont need a s30 or indyref2. what would be the point after such a result?

      it is fairly certain the snp will win a majority of seats in scotland but might not win 50% of the vote. no matter, we can still pursue a s30 in westminster and the courts.

      at any time the polls show support for indy climbing above 50% we can dissolve holyrood and re run the same manifesto.

      in fact, from now on, this will be the snp position until we do win over 50% of the vote.

      at which point, we can point to the result and say

      “independence is the sovereign will of the people of scotland”

    121. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      P’rick, once again for you okay? I’m not asking for his name, his address or anything like that, and just because you decided to post under your real name (if it is your real name, P’rick) doesn’t mean you’re Superman. Despite clearly being something you’re proud of doing – like a child’s first jobby without help – it means nothing, you tiny gobshite.

    122. Breeks says:

      schrodingers cat says:
      17 April, 2019 at 3:07 am
      i understand very well the concept of a sovereign nation deciding its on fate

      but while only 45% of the people wish to become independent, it is the sovereign will of the people of scotland to remain in the uk.

      The Constitutional mandate of the 2014 Referendum carries the same weight as the 2016 Constitutional mandate to remain in Europe. The SNP backed away from the Constitutional argument in 2016 to promote a Soft Brexit Compromise with no Constitutional mandate to support it.

      The Sovereign will of the people in 2014 was also compromised by a dishonest campaign of manipulative propaganda, blatant dishonesty and breaking electoral rules of purdah. The media regime which conduct such activities hasn’t even been taken to task for it, despite further dubious conduct over Brexit, the 2017 GE, and the promotion of the far right showcased by Question Time and their doctored audiences.

      Democracy in our country is compromised. Our free will is being routinely manipulated. Democracy is not democratic when the electorate is being indoctrinated by hostile subversion.

      The UK propaganda factory cannot undermine our lawful Sovereignty because it is beyond their capacity and jurisdiction. It isn’t our Sovereignty which should be held in abeyance in these times, but our damaged and compromised “democracy”.

    123. Nana says:


      Alyn smith’s speech to plenary yesterday

      Reposting this. Say No to Flamingoland

      Glasgow Royal Infirmary ranked amongst world’s top 100

    124. Nana says:

      The burning historic buildings of Glasgow and Europe. Why do renovations often destroy what they mean to conserve?
      Catalan prisoners being denied the use of video evidence of police violence in their defence. Spanish Police get to construct a faked narrative.
      May sparks rumours of an imminent general election, by announcing a walking holiday in Wales.

    125. Nana says:

      Sinn Fein: British Government ‘covering up’ state killings role

      EU gives ‘high-level’ protection to whistleblowers

      Brexit: magical thinking

    126. Macart says:


      Ta for this mornings links Nana and yes, a break is a good idea about now. Dead water for folks on the ground whilst the politicians are doing their can kicking schtick. (shrugs) Been that way since January and it’s a hard slog for most people. They just wind up cranky, fearful, frustrated and such.

      Just take it easy and the kettle is definitely on. 🙂

    127. Hamish100 says:

      Give the poor and starving cake …sorry say oil companies and the mega rich we’ve spent it all on a cathedral. You can come and pray for forgiveness if you survive.

    128. Robert Peffers says:

      I leave this link here without comment:-

    129. stu mac says:

      I see that Glasgow council have rerouted the Orange march away from the church where the trouble was last year. Good … but…

      It was at the instigation of the police. I would have thought they shouldn’t have needed that instigation to do what is obviously the right thing. Disappointed.

      Question: route not given so are there any other catholic churches on the route?

    130. Famous15 says:

      Macart @ 8.26am

      Well worth a read indeed!

    131. Dorothy Devine says:

      Mr Peffers I hope you are well . I also have to say that link should carry a health warning!

      Nana, I hope you are better and thank you for the links . I have to tell you that I found the Brexit / ladybird tales more than a little disturbing!

    132. mike cassidy says:

      Cheer up, people!

      The Notre Dame fire explained at 3.00 in

    133. galamcennalath says:

      WGD ….

      “…the hypocrites of the British nationalist establishment in Scotland like to pose as neutral arbiters, keeping apart the two warring Caledonian tribes, smug in their sense of superiority that sectarianism is yet more proof that Scotland requires the civilising mission of the British state. “

      … which is precisely the false image they tried to portray in NI during the Troubles … there were two sides with the neutral Brits in the middle, or so goes the propaganda version. The more time passed the clearer it becomes how ‘integrated’ the pro-British terrorists actually were with the authorities.

      One of the sectarian tribes found in Scotland ARE the ‘British’, or perhaps more accurately advocates of a Greater England.

    134. chicmac says:

      On acronyms in Brexit vein:

      How about

      SCORE (SCOtland Remain in Europe)

      or acronymising a suggestion from the past,

      SCOOT (Scotland Out Of Thraldom)

    135. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Surely Orange marches fulfil the criteria of a “hate crime” and as such should not be permitted to take place by any of Scotlands Local Authorities or indeed the Police? @stu mac says at 8:52am

      “The Scottish Government defines Hate Crime as crime committed against a person or property that is motivated by ‘malice or ill-will towards an identifiable social group’.”

      “The motivation of the perpetrator is the key factor in defining a hate crime.”

      “Hate Crimes can take a number of forms, including, but not limited to…….intimidating or threatening behaviour including obscene calls or gestures”

      A bunch of Uniformed flute tootin’, drum bashing, sectarian song singing individuals marching up the main road of a weekend is most certainly designed to be intimidating.

    136. Robert Peffers says:

      I leave this link here without comment:-

    137. Robert Peffers says:

      Again without comment:-

    138. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist
      What your problem, not getting your way? Are you still opposed to multicultural society? You answer that than I tell you if I was at the last doo. Deal?

    139. Flower of Scotland says:

      @Robert Peffers 11.06am

      Really good video but disappointed that Alyn Smith says “its not about Independence”!

      To me it’s ALL ABOUT Scottish Independence. How long can the SNP keep waiting until Brexit actually happens or not. The BritNat Government is quite happy to keep kicking the Brexit can down the road.

    140. CameronB Brodie says:

      Reluctant Nationalist
      It’s a simple yes no question. Are you still a racist?

    141. Dr Jim says:

      @Robert Peffers 11:29am

      Support has doubled for Scottish Independence says

      Professor Keith Dickson Lyon University

      Oh and Jenny Marra tells more lies

      Strange watching these films of other countries talking about us then reading the anti Scottish bile from England and Scottish Unionists below in the comments, just filled with absolute hatred towards Scotland and it negates their entire anti Independence argument about being part of a Union that hates you

      I watched the Latvian representative in the EU Parliament’s description on when his country was part of the old Soviet Union and the conditions placed upon Latvia and they were exactly the same political iron chain tools that England uses to hold Scotland

      Every time I take a look at what’s going on in the rest of the EU with regards to Scotland I’m always taken by the quizzical way they don’t understand why Scotland doesn’t separate ourselves from the Union as if it should be something that’s much easier to do and I guess much of that lack of understanding comes from the fact that many europeans don’t understand that the UK they thought was a democratic place

      Just isn’t

    142. Cactus says:

      It’s a bonnie sunny day in Glasgow yipeeeee 🙂

      What y’all having for yer lunches…

      Anything tasty?

    143. Robert Louis says:

      Another day, another nail in the coffin of so-called ‘journalism’. A wee while ago, Adam Boulton of SKY ‘news’, conducted an interview with a climate change protestor. Whether you agree with them or not, what Boulton did was just behave like a smug, self opinionated, patronising bigot. The whole interview was conducted by him in the most sneering patronising and utterly biased manner.

      People of Boulton’s age bracket may not live to see the disaster that is looming with the environment, so maybe he doesn’t care, but young people KNOW that they really will face it, and they are right to be very, very worried.

      What an absolute joke SKY ‘news’ is becoming. Too many long in the tooth presenters now at SKY who have been their too long, whose massive ego outshines any journalistic merit. No wonder folks no longer believe a word they hear from these so-called ‘journalists’ in the mainstream media.

    144. Abulhaq says:

      SNP now stuck in web of ‘trans rights’. Party staffer is disguntled over lack of action on ‘transphobia’, apparently.
      Lack of action of independence, OK?
      All this displays signs of idle hands syndrome and total loss of purpose.
      SNP seems to be suffering from morbid independence-phobia.

    145. call me dave says:

      Old wifie in the cafe says the cathedral will be insured.

      Anyhoo! had a wee look see.

      Jings! Notre Dame is not insured it seems?

      Belongs to the French Nation (since 1905)and the state will pick up all costs.

      Lots of philanthropic donations coming forward which is a good thing.

      Maybe the wealthiest organisation in the world will chip in a few francs?

    146. Dr Jim says:

      The STUC complain in the Daily Record that Nicola Sturgeon’s promise of tens of thousands of jobs being created in the renewable industry by 2020 is hot air as the SNP has only created 45.000

      It’s not 2020 yet and you may have noticed folks that 45.000 jobs is actually tens of thousands, but the STUC claim the SNP promised up to 130.000 jobs in the sector but they fail to mention the governments they support in England put the mockers on half of it because at all costs Scotland must not be allowed to prosper under the SNP because that would allow Scotland to proceed to Independence and being even more prosperous and England can’t have that

      The whole of Europe is looking at Scotland and wondering why we haven’t become Independent yet
      News services from other countries report all the time on Scotland, they interview Scots regularly, they show these reports on TV in their respective countries all about how Scotland wishes to become Independent, and strangely unlike our own domestic English TV practically everybody they interview on the subject says yes yes yes, even the Scottish fishermen who the English media keep reporting don’t want Independence actually do want it because the foreign press and TV don’t have any difficulty at all in showing them saying so

      Of course the press and TV people right here in colonial Scotland keep saying the opposite and they ask Don Bertie Armstrong of the five families fishing mafia to agree with that position regularly and on instructions from Vladimir May and the Orange Bureau, he does

    147. CameronB Brodie says:

      The First Minister has a legal training, not a social science training. Perhaps this is why she has got this all wrong. Or perhaps her advisers have filled her head with mince (see Mermaids).

      Trans-women already have legal protection of their human rights. The TRA movement has misappropriated the terminology and language of third-wave feminism, in order to destroy feminism. It is not possible to change biological sex and sex is the single largest determinant of human health.

      @Scottish Governmernt
      You have been duped by pseudo-science and are now supporting the erasure of any meaningful sense of “womanhood”.

    148. Dr Jim says:

      You know what the SNP are suffering from? Parliamentary recess!

      No news creates even more invented or exaggerated news
      Evil loves a vacuum and the press feed on it

      In a couple of weeks there’ll be actual news instead of all this constant meh meh meh

    149. Petra says:

      Thanks for the links this morning Nana, Robert and Macart X

      @ Nana …. Alyn smith’s speech to plenary yesterday.”

      We’ll definitely need International observers, a whole army of them, lol, monitoring our next IndyRef plus exit polls and a postal vote system akin to the one that’s used in NIreland. We’ll also need to keep on top of exposing the Tories and Libdems use of dark money to win elections, imo.


      @ Flower of Scotland says at 11:47 am …. ”Robert Peffers – Really good video but disappointed that Alyn Smith says “its not about Independence”! To me it’s ALL ABOUT Scottish Independence. How long can the SNP keep waiting until Brexit actually happens or not. The BritNat Government is quite happy to keep kicking the Brexit can down the road…

      FoS, I reckon that his statement can be accounted for due to the timing of the release of the video, that is following the EURef result in 2016, nearly 3 years ago. All of his updates since then highlight that he’s as desperate as you and I to free Scotland from this dictatorship and he’s clearly been working his socks off to that effect.

      I would also say, that there’s no point in asking the people of Scotland to make choices about their future, at this time, if one of the ”choices” is still obscure, hence Nicola Sturgeon’s fine balancing act. It’s all very well for us to be impatient with all that’s going on. We don’t carry the burden of the future of Scotland on our shoulders and more than anything we’re not acquainted with all of the facts to make such a decision. We have no idea of what’s going on behind the scenes.


      @ Cameron B Brody …

      I can’t believe that you’re still falling into the trap CBB and keeping the childish saga going on here.

      And when it comes to Nicola Sturgeon whom you say ”has a legal training, not a social science training. Perhaps this is why she has got this all wrong”..

      What’s training got to do with it? I’d say that not everyone, most people in fact, needs ”training” or a ”degree’ to exhibit genuine kindness, understanding, compassion, sympathy and empathy which she has in bucket-loads. You’ve either got it or you’ve not got it like the Unionist cabal at Westminster. Amazing how some people seem to have a short memory on here, the fairweather friends, and would gladly stab you in the back at the drop of a hat.

    150. Petra says:

      Amazing to see that the rose windows, cross, altar and organ in the Cathedral have survived plus many other invaluable items that had been / have now been removed from the Cathedral.

      ‘The Miracle at Notre Dame.’


      I hope that we’ll be bringing her home when we achieve our Independence.

      ..”Mary in a white dress with a long train borne by two young girls, a diamond necklace and a golden coronet studded with jewels, was described by the courtier Pierre de Brantôme as ‘a hundred times more beautiful than a goddess of heaven … her person alone was worth a kingdom.’’..

    151. CameronB Brodie says:

      It’s disappointing that you appear not to have read any of the relevant science I’ve provided, supporting evidence based medical practice. Do you think it possible to change sex? I’ll look forward to your reply in OT.

    152. CameronB Brodie says:

      I suggest you get your head around this before you come back to me. Remember, “positivism” is old-skool science and underpinned the patriarchal society.

      Naturalize This! Analytic Philosophy and the Logic of Reactive Neutralization

      For the past twenty years, a sizeable segment of analytic philosophy has been openly promoting naturalization, a process that has implicitly defined the goals of this philosophical strand since its very inception. The object of naturalization is so diffuse as to include epistemology and phenomenology, jurisprudence and education, power and responsibility, and, indeed, any human phenomenon whatsoever.

      The sheer extent of this devastating trend makes it a good candidate for close critical scrutiny, which can help us diagnose the condition of analytic thought, structurally incapable of a sober self-assessment, and to explain its pernicious political consequences. What distinguishes naturalization in all its multi-faceted manifestations is, above all else, its reactionary core. Unlike naïve or pre-critical naturalism, it defensively responds to the denaturing of ways of thinking, as well as of socio-political and economic institutions, accomplished in nineteenth- and twentieth-century philosophy, sociology, anthropology, and literary studies, among other disciplines. It is not difficult to identify the reasons behind this quintessentially conservative reaction: critical thinking is threatening to the status quo, with which much of analytic philosophy is aligned.

      At the institutional level, a glance at the predominance of analytic philosophers in U.S. academia suffices for one to realize just how useful they are in their function of providing the ideological justification for the perpetuation of political and economic injustices both inside and outside the university. Those wishing to maintain this skewed balance of power understand that a simple dismissal of threatening currents of thought is not an effective strategy; rather, they strive to appropriate, domesticate, and finally neutralize whatever deviates from their self-proclaimed norm.

      And, most remarkably, the reactive and reactionary tendency toward naturalization proceeds in the name of overcoming the split between opposing styles and approaches to philosophy, reconciled on the grounds of an already hegemonic school of thought. The type of reaction exemplified by naturalization falls under the classical Freudian category of disavowal, the simultaneous acknowledgement and repudiation of a threatening piece of reality (such as, in the case of psychic reality, sexual difference).

      After a drawn-out process of de-naturalization, that which is natural is no longer accepted as a given but is, instead, re-established as the normative ideal in a gesture that, at once, recognizes and neutralizes the previous deviation from the norm. Of course, claiming its “natural” status, the newly recuperated normativity vehemently refuses its association with any social, legal, or political conventions, thereby effacing the evidence of its own, rather sloppy fabrication. Under this pretext, naturalization attempts to bring critical thought back into the fold of positivity, invariably modeled on the positivism of the natural sciences, and, in so doing, to assimilate everything in its path to the thinking of identity and instrumental rationality.

      Under the title of naturalization, which remains suspiciously vague in a discourse ostensibly committed to the rigors of argumentation and clarity of expression, we encounter nothing more than a reductivist comprehension of nature as a set of empirically verifiable causal relations and quantities of force. The proponents of this approach are loath to ask the obvious ontological question “What is nature?”—surely, bound to affect their reactionary operation.

    153. CameronB Brodie says:

      I’m trying to defend the civil liberties and human rights of biological women. Rights that are under threat from both the left and right wings of politics. Our social reality is under threat and will be diminished if “legal reason” accepts self-ID. My rights will be next.

      Teachers, Gender and the Discourses of Citizenship


      This paper reports the findings of a sociological research project ‘Promoting Equality Awareness: women as citizens’, funded by the European Commission. The first stage of the research explored how a new generation of teachers in Greece, Spain, Portugal, England and Wales understood the concept
      of ‘citizenship’ and how gender relates to it. Selective current debates on the nature of citizenship within the field of education are reviewed.

      Arguments about the cultural and historical basis of citizenship are used to develop an analytical framework identifying three main discourses; political, moral and egalitarian. We show how each discourse constructs notions of the good citizen. The data suggests that male and female respondents position themselves differently with respect to these culturally and historically dominant discourses of citizenship, and that each discourse has implications for women as citizens.

    154. CameronB Brodie says:

      My position my appear aggressively “Heteroactive”, but it is grounded in the biopsychosocial model of health and stuff. I like to live and let live. However, sex and gender are not the same. An apple is not an orange.

      Heteroactivism: Why examining ‘gender ideology’ isn’t enough

    155. CameronB Brodie says:

      Can I ask members of the SNP to please forward this link to their local party? Remember sex and gender-identity are not the same thing. Human sex is characterized by its’ dimorphism and its’ accurate recording is fundamental to successful health management.

      ‘Are we to become a gender university?’ Facets of resistance to a gender equality project


      Gender equality (GE) is something ‘we cannot not want’. Indeed, the pursuit of equal rights, responsibilities and opportunities for all women and men throughout a society freed from gendered oppression is widely visible in recent organizational GE initiatives….

    156. Cactus says:

      Ahm back here, batter in if ya wanna

      Oh freedom is coming

      And that’s a Jesus Fucking Yes!

    157. Cactus says:

      And there be the truth People… add an ‘ing’ and all’s good

      Pour examples…

      1) Fucking Glasgow! 🙂
      2) Fucking Jesus! 🙂
      3) Fucking Allah! 🙂
      4) Fucking Ganesh! 🙂
      5) Fucking Wings 😉

      Celebrate fucking!


      LOVE it all x

    158. Cactus says:

      Just to put a different but similar perspective on that, think about

      Pour examples…

      1) Celebrate Glasgow!
      2) Celebrate Jesus!
      3) Celebrate Allah!
      4) Celebrate Ganesh!
      5) Celebrate Wings!!

      Celebrate celebrating hehe!

      And if you believe in a God… then celebrate your ain 2


      LOVE it all x


    159. Cactus says:

      And let us all join NOW and celebrate fucking Scotland

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top