The sincerest form of flattery
When you involve yourself in politics, the surest sign that you’ve got your opponents rattled isn’t that they start to copy you. It’s when they start to smear you.
Last night, an unholy alliance of prominent Labour and Tory activists (and some plain old-fashioned internet nutters) embarked on an extraordinary, co-ordinated and prolonged attack on Wings Over Scotland. We were accused of being liars, “needle-dicked fascists”, Nazis, misogynists, “sub-tabloid trutherists” (whatever the hell those are), “second-wave feminists” (ditto), “online vigilantes”, sectarian bigots (not sure on which side), “hate preachers” and probably of leaving the toilet seat up – it was hard to keep up with the sheer volume of abuse.
There were petty slurs on our professional standing and on where we live. We were, with no small measure of irony, accused of deploying “vicious personal invective”. It was the full kitchen sink of ad-hominem, as a frightened, panicky opponent threw everything they could think of in our direction.
We won’t delve any further into the details. The material outcome was the biggest influx of new Twitter followers in several weeks and a number of belated donations to our fundraising campaign, so that was nice. But what on Earth could have provoked such a poisonous and sustained onslaught?
We suspect this might have something to do with it:
In March, this site’s unique readership leapt from 33,055 to a staggering 50,304. That’s a one-month increase of 52%. Visits increased too, from 154,901 to 202,215 – a 31% jump despite losing several days of traffic stats to a domain move and a Denial of Service attack against our new hosts – and page views increased to 987,913, but it’s the number of unique users that’s the most significant.
This site’s fact-based, evidence-supported content is finding an ever-bigger audience, and a Unionist side used to having the media all its own way for decades doesn’t much like it. Our readership, having last month eclipsed the Scotsman’s daily sales (32,463), has now also comfortably overtaken the Herald’s (43,157), and is more than the Scottish sales of the Guardian, Telegraph, Independent and Times put together.
We should pay the likes of last night’s would-be lynch-mob a commission. But instead, we’ll keep bringing you the quality journalism you’ve paid for, and holding the mainstream media to account. Our next post will be our 1,000th. No matter how desperate our opponents get, no matter how much energy they devote to attacking the messenger rather than trying to debate the message, we’re not going anywhere. They should get used to it.
I suppose it’s almost flattering to receive that sort of abuse. It’s nice to know you’ve managed to get people’s backs up. Well done 🙂
i was on twitter yesterday and followed the invectives from the coven of unionists . you showed remarkable constraint, sir.
onwards with truth or (trutherisms! )
They don’t like it up ’em.
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they come to fight you, and then you win.”
– ‘Mahatma’ M.K. Gandhi
a truism
Great news on the visitor influx. This site is getting much deserved attention from the public. Part of that will be Yes voters looking for more and part will be those important neutrals and the last part are the frothing nutters who obsess over their party and put it first in every thought and consideration. You can expect the crazies to get ever more shrill as your success increases. No doubt they’ll be blaming you for crayfish being blind and the birds pecking at their milk bottles next.
They are running scared and desperate already. They now the game is up but a fanatic doesn’t surrender or change their blinkered ways. They’ll do the only thing they know to do, having seeing their parties do it in the same situations, and that is throw mud and abuse endlessly.
And that is why we will win.
Ye , I witnessed some of the bile last night.
The outcome,I suspect, will be increased donations ,increase in readership because folks just don’t suffer these arseholes anymore. Just under two yrs ago we all walked on egg-shells when discussing via twitter because we didn’t know if a person was a YES/NO/DON’T KNOW ,some could be persuaded and some were firmly fixed in their camp.
Now,that we are ahead in the game,we simply see attacks and bile.We need to just block them ,they won’t change,they won’t see our view ,they won’t stop defending the indefensible.
I am reminded of the famous saying attributed to Gandhi:
‘First they ignore you; then they laugh at you; then they fight you; and then you win!‘
Keep up the good work!
Was it something you said? 😉
What’s Wings got to do with 9/11? Did I miss that post?
https://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&gs_rn=7&gs_ri=psy-ab&tok=YhcWJ1Cz7x7mC08S9Fh8Lg&pq=truther&cp=12&gs_id=1f&xhr=t&q=truther+definition&es_nrs=true&pf=p&safe=off&sclient=psy-ab&oq=truther+defi&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44442042,d.d2k&fp=91f89cd7d7a50688&biw=1680&bih=955
A very odd exchange but it was highly entertaining following the responses on twitter. Did Gerry Hassan and Alan Bissett end up agreeing with that Duncan nutter that you were a ‘misogynist’?
I found nothing offensive in your post. You rationally argued the position that positive discrimination is no way to end discrimination. Move along.
Anyway, keep up the good work!
Alan said he disagreed with me about feminism and/or “positive discrimination”, but didn’t call me a misogynist. I didn’t see any other comment from Gerry after his first one, at which point a whole bunch of people heartwarmingly retweeted a message from someone telling him that if he had a problem with me he should man up and raise it with me directly. I think he’s maybe been in a wee huff with me since Christmas.
It just keeps getting better and better, they’re doing our job for us!
All this bile filled prattle and ad hominem from the hard of thinking serves us well!
YES!!
Keep up the fight Rev. As you say, they are in full blown coordinated attack mode as they don’t have a rational argument. And they claim WE are being directed by the SNP whenever we post something, (anything) in support of Independence AGAIN for Scotland.
The volume of the attacks passed me by I’m afraid – not a FB or Twitter user – but I guess this means that you must be doing SOMETHING right 😉
More power to your keyboard
(copied from the Caron Lindsay thread for obvious reasons)
I see Duncan Hothersall’s new trick s to declare the Rev a misogynist. Part f his evidence is some old tweets. If I remember correctly, that conversation was against special treatment for women in politics. That, if women want more women specifically) as representatives, then they should organise, as a block, to make that happen rather than imposed solutions.
It’s a point of view, that if people want to be treated only as a “type” and to get particular treatment because of it (say all ginger headed folk from Fife) then it’s up to them to self-identify, agree that that categorisation transcends all differences and to campaign together. Doesn’t make the Rev a monster. Neither does disagreeing with any one particular woman make you a misogynist.
What undercuts Duncan Hothersall more, though, is that his party just over-ruled the wishes of his nominal Scottish Leader, and rejected women only short lists . Once again, Duncan Hothersall condemns a point of view in others, that he fails to condemn in his own party.
I hope you are keeping a note of all the abuse Rev. I’m fed up listening to unionists, politicians and journalists complaining about cybernats when the volume and depth of abuse is far greater from the britnat side.
No surprise at the behaviour of unionists. Bullies always end up becoming name-calling cowards in the end. British bullydom is all over – only they can’t yet see it!
Good to see your Wings spread even further. Everyone who visits this site should mention it to friends and family, work colleagues, pensioner clubs etc etc. Lets get them even more rattled.
Congratulations on the visitor numbers, congratulations on drawing the glare of the eye of Mordor. What a good thing that among their many ignorances they have never heard of the Streisand Effect!
That’s great news Rev; our money well spent.
Keep up the good work.
What do you have up your sleeve for the 1,000th?
Keep it up Stu. Your easy to read sardonic style is what has got them rattled (and I include the indy literati in that). If we are going to win this we need folk to quickly understand the general principles, not debate angels on pinheads.
Last night was a perfect example of how the internet works to try and shut down debate. In all online communities, a self-appointed group of arbiters of debate quickly forms to dictate what is and isn’t acceptable discourse, and proceeds to try and ensure everyone follows that agenda. When someone comes along and goes against that – thus challenging the “authority” of that group – they’re shouted down until they either conform or go away. If that doesn’t work, they’re simply turned into persona non grata. Having failed to shut up the messenger, the group then turns its attention to anyone who listens to them, and tries to force them to choose between the pariah (thus becoming persona non grata themselves) or the rest of the community.
That’s exactly what we saw last night. It’s been decided by various people what the acceptable parameters for online debate are for the referendum. Stu doesn’t go along with them, and his popularity threatens the little clique that refer to themselves as either “reasonable unionists” or “pro-indy but not a nationalist”. It’s long since become apparent that Stu is not going to be shut up, so instead, attention is focused on trying to stop people from listening to what he says. That’s why we saw people basically saying to Alan Bissett “we’ve decided Wings is a big fat misogynist, therefore if you agree with anything he says, you’re a big fat misogynist too”. I expect nothing less from Hothersall, who is a sneaky little rat anyway, but I expected better from the likes of Gerry Hassan.
The amount of times I’ve seen people on Twitter sharing a link to Wings, only to be bombarded by the likes of Longshanker or Calum Cashley saying “uurrgghh, don’t share links to that guy’s blog – look at this article he wrote somewhere else on something totally unrelated to independence” is quite depressing. It is pure anti-intellectualism, which is the weapon usually used by oppressive regimes. If we were to decide never to listen to people who we disagreed with in some other issue, then there would be no sharing of ideas, and we’d still be trying to work out how to make fire.
(Besides, if there’s one type of person on Twitter that deserves to be told to “shut the fuck up”, it’s smug Tory arseholes like Allan D. Smith, which was pretty much what started off the whole thing.)
Ach, the Twitter stooshie wiz fun while it lasted!
When you DON’T get a response is when you worry about the effect you are having.
It often annoys me that fans of DH who should know better, often fail to see his other side.
Keep up the (very) good work!
By their enemies ye shall know them; keep up the good work. You certainly seem to enrage a particular kind of person, I’m guessing non-aligned success has that effect.
Incidentally, I didn’t see the Sunday papers, but I’m guessing they were all full of condemnation for George Fucks’ disgusting little rape slur, just as they would have been if it had been said by a “Cybernat”?
The answer to abuse is reason. I find that when I post on the Herald site, I get abuse from the likes of OBE. The more I answer with facts and reason, the shriller and more personal the abuse. It works a treat. Your excellent forensic analysis is getting up their collective noses, and they don’t like it. Their invective is the barometer of your success.
Ken Mac – this may be of interest to you. From the Scotsman (8th May 2012) an opinion piece by Jennifer Dempsie who is an SNP adviser but she is quoting from H of C literature.
Dr Mark Shephard last month hosted a discussion in the House of Commons -Discourse on Scottish Independence – Politicians versus Publics.
some comments from the discourse ” analysis of online comments under articles on independence, show the vast majority of posts are anti-SNP/independence and anti-Salmond rather than anti-English/anti-union.” “In terms of language, too, comments about the SNP and independence are much more vitriolic than about the union and the UK”. No! I don’t buy the Scotsman anymore but did keep this cutting for possible future use!
I’ve not been online much recently so only caught the tail end of all this. Seems to me it’s a good thing if you have a smug bunch of numpties all riled up. Must be doing something right. One of my initial reasons for liking the SNP was that sense that “well they’re clearly annoying all the right people”. Keep up the good work, Rev. When there are so many people so obviously troubled by basic freedom of speech, despite having the entire media on-side, that shows how important your work is.
I make it a point to inform any referendum switherer about Wings over Scotland.
Bwahahahaha!!
Rev … re Unionists and their monopoly of the MSM against good old cybernats like yourself, if only you had a cartoon on file that could illustrate this point …
I would like a little Wings over Scotland badge for my lapel to sit beside my Yes badge. I promote Wings jointly with the Yes campaign in any conversations. I’d be happy to purchase a dozen or so – at the right price!! Any progress on our Wee lion goods with Chris C? Cutting the balloon strings, and John Bull blocking the bridge to independence, are my choices.
Ref. Tom above and your sardonic style – I see NNS have the Ian Davidson interview at Glasgow Green but with the coarse naughty words deleted and so renders the interview bland.
So Rev, whether with your sardonic, or maybe even ascerbic style, WOS has the skeleton bones of BetterTogether rattling.
“I would like a little Wings over Scotland badge for my lapel to sit beside my Yes badge. “
I’ve been looking into little enamel Wings logos, they seem pretty affordable. Investigations continue.
Thought provoking site with much needed rebutting of convential accepted mainstream opinion.
But I looked at the twitter conversations and it looked as if there was too much swearing and invective. Sometimes its better to take a cold shower or ignore.
Thank goodness we don’t have a Twitter account.
We have dignity instead.
Regards
Her Holiness Archdeaconess Hermione
Actually I agree with Gordon. Nothing annoys bullies and trolls more than being ignored or finding people aren’t rising to them.
There’s nothing that these individuals hate more than being ignored.
Ignoring bullies etc only works for a short time then out of desperation sometimes a strong word is enough! Worked for me!
Anyway, I follow this site and donate ‘coz I want Rev.Stu to fight on my behalf….He’s better at it than me…
The big thing the Unionist parties haven’t grasped is that this is not a party political issue, and normal tactics won’t work.
The support for independence and self-determination is coming from many of those parties traditional voters, and they haven’t woken up to it.
We are voting for our country’s freedom and no amount of words will change our thinking.
I’m very much opposed to restricting the words people can use in debate, because it’s very much rooted in trying to deny certain people their right to have their voice heard. People who are more interested in getting you to shut up than actually debate the issue will use the utterance of a swearword as a short-cut to ending a debate – like the time I happened to say “sorry, but that’s bullshit” (albeit very calmly) when I was told an outright lie while complaining about something to First Bus. “I don’t have to listen to that sort of language” the guy said before slamming the phone down, satisfied with himself that he’d found an excuse to ignore my complaint rather than deal with it.
The only reason (historically, at least) we’re not allowed to swear in debates is because it betrays the fact you’ve not had a “proper” upbringing, and thus don’t understand the rules of polite debate – disagree with the person all you like, but for heaven’s sake, don’t DARE let a “shit” or a “fuck” accidentally slip into your speech. That simply isn’t cricket, old chum! That’s why we should resist attempts to stamp out certain words from debate, because all we’re doing is reaffirming the idea that “one has to know the rules of polite debate before one is allowed to make oneself heard”.
50 k.
That’s ~2% of the regularly voting electorate.
No wonder some folks are getting a little flustered. That and polls not going their way.
I missed all this since I don’t “tweet” (is that the verb?).
Anyway my view is that the misogyny attack is to reinforce the Independence/yes vote doubts in the ladies.
Sad really.
But know your enemy !
Just out of interest, does Dunc think Ian Davidson’s a misogynist? Y’know, for threatening to give a woman a ‘doing’?
Aye laddie you must be doing something right. But lets remember the problem for the unionist party followers is they dont control the internet like they do the MSM & BBC, therefore all their spin and double-speaking can be easily dis-proved, and they hate it.
Even on their own sites they heavly moderate any postings that disagree with their party policys, try ‘labour hame’ one of the worst sites on the net, you have no-chance of having an honest argument on there as they will never allow anyone to get all there posting’s published if they disagree with the articles. Bloody fearties.
And if in ‘Hollywood’ a ‘cross’ scares the shit out of a vampire it is nothing compared to what the truth does to a unionist, you carry on with the excellent work on WINGS, and having all the great comments from a great bunch of independence supporters makes me very confident of Scotlands future.
Hail Alba.
Not a twitter user, seems mainly rather puerile to me, but have just read the exchange between Hassan and Bisset on ‘feminism’.
How bizarre, I wonder if they have read the reams and reams on ‘anti – feminism’, they surely don’t mean misogyny.
The shades of grey in the anti-feminism debate well exceed 50. Anyway as a woman it’s always amusing watching grown men shout the loudest about who has the biggest feminist credentials.
Sadly Alan B did resort to CAPS.
Two years of solid MSM bias for the no-campaign has done it no favour at all. In the contrary. The unionist nay-sayers, particularly the Scottish Labour nay-sayers, have become so lazy and careless, because the MSM has allowed them to get away with it. Sooner or later, people notice these things. Now that the referendum date has been set, the nay-sayers are suddenly under the spotlight and they are looking bad. When I say bad, I mean bad, really bad! In the coming months, more and more people will start to engage in the debate now that the clock is counting down. The no campaign startegy of preventing a second question (and shooting Salmond’s fox, ha ha) may have looked great at the time but now it is looking incredibly stupid. Nowhere to hide! No wonder they are squirming and no wonder they hate WoS and other sites that challenge their scare stories.
I’m afraid I don’t follow either twitter or facebook, its bad enough troll dodging on most open forums. Letting them swing in the wind appears to be the best bet and leaving their barking comments unanswered is an exceptional way of highlighting their failure.
I’d “like” this post if I wasn’t required to have the evil Facebook in order to like it.
Can I just like it in a comment? It feels so inadequate, though.
“Dan Huil says:
2 April, 2013 at 9:56 am
I make it a point to inform any referendum switherer about Wings over Scotland.”
Me too!! The Rev ROCKS!!!
On a smaller personal scale I ust discovered last night that two of my pro union ‘Facebook friends’ have now deleted me from their friends list because of my pro independence links and posts. In the words of Catherine Taits character Lauren…”am I bovvered tho?” I must be doing something right if its annoying them.
Keep up the fantastic work Rev … you are doing a brilliant job ,you make your points simply and clearly, making it easy to understand the TRUTH of what’s going on! Same goes for your many informed contributers to this site.. I have learned Soooo much just reading Wings and don’t hesitate to direct people here for informed information!
Thanks to all!!!
Dan Huil says: 2 April, 2013 at 9:56 amI make it a point to inform any referendum switherer about Wings over Scotland.
Me too!!
On a smaller personal scale I was informed yesterday that 2 of my pro union “Facebook friends” have now deleted me from their friends list because of my pro independence views and links which now predominate my Facebook page. In the words of the Catherine Tait character ‘Lauren’ ….” am I bovvered tho?”
Keep up the fantastic work Rev! I have learned so much from your easy to read insightful analysis on this website. Also from the many well informed contributors, Its like a wee community on here of people echoing views of my own and which I am proud to be part of … its comforting to know that despite the rubbish and lies being spread by the mainstream media and the BBC, that the truth still has a voice! Long may you continue to do so!
I just wonder that when we tell one to f off or c this or that we might be putting off some people even if its meant ironic. I also think that fuck off can be construed as violent language of a sort.
Most important thing is could get in the way of the (strong) arguements.
Well that was worth saying twice.
Especially the multiple!!!! exclamation marks and CAPITAL letters. Very mature.
Well done from “us”.
Archdeaconess Hermione
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
2 April, 2013 at 10:40 am
“I would like a little Wings over Scotland badge for my lapel to sit beside my Yes badge. “
I’ve been looking into little enamel Wings logos, they seem pretty affordable. Investigations continue.
I’ll buy one for sure!!
Just noticed that I’ve posted twice on here!! Reason being, I thought the first post wasn’t displayed as I got one of those” we are unable to display the webpage” notices when I pressed submit!
Oh well … maybe it deserved saying twice!! hehehe!!
While it is interesting to see you compare the unique visitors to your website against daily newspaper sales, wouldn’t a truer reflection be to add the visitors to the various newspaper websites to the fish wrapper count? I appreciate such figures might not be easily available.
Well done Rev Stu, on both your site stats (which are very impressive) and the fact that based upon last night, you clearly have the unionistas feart. Last night, they were quite literally lashing out in all directions, like a scared animal.
Unionists in Scotland are used to the propgandist BBC and their ‘Scottish’ media chums running with their lies and dishonest bullsh*t, and backing them up. Suddenly, their brazen lies and dishonest behaviour is getting exposed in the clear light of day on this and some other news sites.
You are clearly getting to them. KEEP IT UP.
@Willie Zwigerland
As of a few minutes ago I am now denied access to the Herald pages. Even removing the cookies doesn’t help.
Strangely the “Politics” section still shows.
Oh well no more herald.
I enjoyed the comments even if I couldn’t read the articles
Admittedly I am not aware of all the Scottish political websites that are currently available, but I genuinely believe that this site must be one of the best for delivering outstanding political analysis of Scottish politics. I also believe that this site along with many others will help deliver a wining vote next year.
Clearly these facts are not lost on our potentially expiring unionist friends.
Robert Kerr
Me too. Strange as I had read articles earlier this morning
Me too, no more Herald.
Do you suppose they have this site bugged or are they just as useless at keeping their web edition up and running as they are at keeping up the sales of their inky fingers edition?
I think there’s something wrong with the Herald site. I don’t go there very often, I haven’t submitted a comment since I can’t remember when, and I’m on my work computer now anyway which as far as I know isn’t even registered. I’m only getting random adverts on the front page and news front page.
Doesn’t look like a denial of access to me, if that’s what you’re getting. It looks like an IT foul-up.
I’ve seen that one of the reactions of people like Grahamski, Duncan Hothersall and the like is to react to the effective and justified criticisms of Scottish (sic) Labour by the SNP eg corruption, misogyny, complacency and the like by claiming the same of its political opponents. On one level this is a very childish reaction on the level of ‘No YOU’RE smelly!’. But on the other hand it does something to cloud the waters and provokes a reaction of you’re both as bad as the other from the non-committed bystander.
However, there are other ways to lose and win arguments and here is an article from the New Statesman saying Scottish (sic) Labour are losing their hold on the union movement in Scotland with potentially great benefits for the Yes campaign.
link to newstatesman.com?
Re the herald what will poor OBEy do now that he has lost his audience? We may find him on here spouting his pearls of wisdom
” I’m guessing they were all full of condemnation for George Fucks’ disgusting little rape slur, just as they would have been if it had been said by a “Cybernat”?
Nope. All front pages are being given over to the Unionists’ brazen exploitation of sectarianism.
Well done Stu. The problem is they have relied for years upon the biased MSM to promote Pravda style material against Scottish Independence. They can’t handle the new IT world as it exposes the truth and consequently their deceipt and inability to debate rationally.
@Robert Kerr
I got threatened off the Herald site ages ago for commenting that an article
was just another one of their ‘daily scaremongering stories’.
The email I got was accompanied by a threat of legal action if
I shared the content (no doubt standard procedure so no big deal).
Apparently it was deemed ‘criticism of our organisation’s journalistic standards’.
So, a press FREE to write what it wants but a readership NOT FREE to
criticise. Childish?
I wouldn’t worry too much about being accused of leaving the toilet seat up.
I’m always accusing Mrs Seasick of leaving it down and she just ignores me.
“Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ? Sun Tzu, The Art of War
For people like me who see this as a long ‘campaign’, I believe our ‘strategy’ is the right one. We do not have any real ‘tactics’ as such, only the truth and belief that Scotland has the people and the economics to be a success. Truth and belief are strong advantages to have against any ‘enemy’. We have eighteen more months to go until the referendum, which I believe will be a resounding ‘Yes’ to independence. Slowly and surely will win this race.
What we are witnessing is the pro-Unionist “tactics without strategy” behaviour. They immediately went on the attack with, threats, smears, misinformation, distortions, fearmongering and lies. They have used up nearly all their ‘ammunition’ in the first months of a long campaign. They don’t have much left, maybe a few damp squibs.
We are already entering the time of the pro-Unionists’ “noise before defeat”.With eighteen months to go, theirs will be a long, lingering and painful death. And as they say aroon’ these pairts, Fuck thum!
The Herald has been blocking me for ages – on the very few occasions that I do get a post put up, it is delayed for between two hours and two days – impossible to have a meaningful debate, especially as idiots like OBE and Midlands have totally free reign.
For them to pretend it is some kind of balanced readers view is a total farce.
Hello Rev. Stuart Campbell,
I think you and your blog are just fab. Please ignore these unpleasant rattled people, for every enemy you make ten friends. Hey, they are going to get a whole lot more rattled before 2014.
There is an article in today’s Guardian by George Monbiot ;
link to guardian.co.uk
He says:
“Any movement that seeks to challenge the power of the elite needs to ask itself what it takes to shake people out of this state. And the answer seems inescapable – hope. Those who govern on behalf of billionaires are threatened only when confronted by the power of a transformative idea.”
This has been and must continue to be the message from the YES campaign – that there is hope of a better future in an independent Scotland. Leave the negativity and name calling to the unionists and their acolytes!
I’m off to a Yes meeting in Prestwick community centre this evening, 7pm start.Interested?
The Gandhi quotation on your heading page is proving very useful, many readers here refer to it. Hope you keep it there as a reminder on strategy – constancy to purpose.
Well done Rev Stu, keep it up as the truth will out.
To the rattled opponents, I don’t have a graphic I’m afraid but, I’m sticking my thumbs in my ears, wiggling my fingers and sticking out my tongue.
@Seasick
“I’m always accusing Mrs Seasick of leaving it down and she just ignores me.”
ROFLMAO 😀
Coffee and hobnobs everywhere.
With sites like Wings shining the light on the very politicians of certain political parties that the Unionist msm shy away from exposing, in fact many would say ‘they have these certain politicans from certain parties backs’, this is now a whole new ball game in Scotland. It allows the general public to make up its own mind rather than have our mind made up for us by the Unionist msm. The easter weekend vid of Ian Davidson on camera at the bedroom tax rally in Glasgow lets us see this in action in all its gory unedited detail and it scares the hell out of the Unionists.
This would tell me that something is seriously wrong with our democracy in that the msm in Scotland has not been doing its job in exposing the truth from all our politicans and political parties. The Unionists can try getting the vid pulled and shout abuse all they want but its too late as the genie wont be going back in the bottle anytime soon as more and more of the public is finding them out for what they are as the Rev Stu’s latest stats for wings testify to. So keep doing what youre doing Rev and co. We’re holding them to account like never before whilst they look confused and bewildered in return. The peoples day is coming.
link to dailyrecord.co.uk
Did I really just see this – from the Record? The end is nigh.
In order to have an enemy, one must be somebody. One must be a force before he can be resisted by another force. A malicious enemy is better than a clumsy friend. And Rev, you sure got the better of that deal. Malicious & clumsy to boot. Too smug by half with no earthly reason to be so. So confident in victory but yet incapable of seeing their future closing around them like a fist. Yes or No the only future these bloviaters have is Scotlands thumb in their eye for as long as they live. If they for even one minute stepped out of the echo chamber, they’d realise just how much trouble they’re in.
@doug daniel
There’s a problem with swearwords. It would be good to get our younger 15/16 year old voters to visit this site (especially as we have difficulty in targeting information – due to the confidential elec register). But it would be difficult to endorse WOS on a Yes leaflet (for example) because of the bad language. Not that most 15 year olds would mind the odd F word – but their parents/teachers/supervisors might -and it wouldn’t be long before we had unionist propaganda complaining of obscene Nats sullying young minds.
For that reason alone I think we need to exercise a bit of self-censorship
Good post EdinScot. I think the MSM’s failure to hold the Unionist parties to account in Scotland has greatly damaged democracy here in the last 50 years or so. We see it in their complete failure to confront (or even ask questions of) Unionist politicians, such as Jackie Bailie, over their lies. They are only held to account by the electorate and the alternative media. This means that the MSM has failed to educate voters in Scotland. They have served no purpose other than to be against independence.
Thanks square go, explains oe twitter traffic this morning.
Hiwever I do wish Ms McAlpine hadn’t blindly accepted the Unionist definition of “CyberNat” as a nasty piece of work, since they declare all Indy supporters who use the Internet to be Cybernats.
It doesn’t help, accepting the demonisation of your supporters, no matter how mild mannered they might be
I agree Erchie, although we’re doing a great job of turning the “CyberNat” label into a badge of pride and honour. I was just thrilled to see any Scottish paper point to a Unionist and point out their hypocrisy.
squarego says:
link to dailyrecord.co.uk
Did I really just see this – from the Record? The end is nigh.
Is she ever going to give up the “Do you know I used to be married to a pop star?” line?
Obviously not.
There is also something else happening in Scotland that may be unique in Europe. I’m happy to be corrected with this, but I strongly suspect that the deliberate bias, resulting in a deficient democracy is actually, dare I use the phrase, collectivising the gathering and dissemination of information.
In short hand, the public are becoming both the newspapers and the readership. With Youtube, the same is happening with television. The Scottish public are becoming both the producer and the viewers of visual news. This need not be the case, but the ownership of the Fourth estate has moved; we own it.
This logic applies to the Unionist vote as well. They are being drawn to sites like Wings, because they have something to say and contribute. They are aware that there is comment happening outwith the usual channels and it causes them concern. As there is very little debate available through newspapers and the BBC, the debate is effectively happening elsewhere, outside of the traditional controls. The Unionist politicians run the risk of being side-lined from the debate. The Unionist voter is flying the flag for Westminster, not the Unionist politicians. It’s easy to laugh at the Unionist problem here but, by their absence from Wings, Newsnet etc, they are seriously undermining their own cherished positions. It’s ironic that the very people taking the trouble to defend the Union, however badly they do it, are the people who are the most misinformed; the Unionist voter.
Thanks mutley79. I really dont think we will see the full extent to how much collusion there has been from the msm and the Unionist parties et al until after a YES vote. I think its good that there are sites and blogs that have sprung up pre referendum to fill a huge void and repair a bit of the damage done to democracy to date by a complicit msm. I cant bring myself to mention that song ‘things can only get better’. Ach, i just have arghhh.
This is a blog supported & now paid for by people who have largely rejected the main stream media including the BBC because we do not want to be lied to any longer.
We also reject most print newspapers that offer little more than party political broadcasts by the Unionist parties.
We no longer trust the Westminster Government or indeed the British Parliamentary system because it has been shown to be corrupt, immoral & unrepresentative of the electorate, especially those in Scotland. And the track record of too many MP’s has been demonstrably shocking; lying, stealing, embezzlement etc. And the House of Lords is surely the most undemocratic tier of Government in the Western World.
Many of us believe in restricting our government to managing our own affairs by avoiding foreign conflicts, especially invasions of other sovereign nations. Many of us reject the concept of WMD in our country.
We believe that the current Unionist Parties have abandoned any pretence of representing Scots, instead focusing their efforts upon the electorate of the SE of England.
We know that Scotland subsidises England and has been doing so for decades. And the British Government knows it too. They just hate to admit it.
We also support the idea of returning Scotland to full sovereign independence using the only party that is offering such an opportunity. But we might choose a different party to run our country after. That’s OK with me and no doubt with many others; but that party won’t be picked from a list of tired, old Unionist dogma parties run by ermine chasers in London.
This website/blog/champion of truth then, represents the hopes & aspirations of a people who want a different, better version of Scotland and we the readers are willing to fund it with our own money.
That the Unionist can only respond with virulent abuse is surely one significant sign that we are on the right path and doing the right thing because it means that the future of the broken, ineffective, corrupt British parliamentary system is being threatened by the collective voice & reason of the people.
There’s nothing more threatening & intimidating to a government than the voice of its own people & the truth that they seek.
We are the people & we demand the truth.
This website then provides us with our voice & it is here where the truth is revealed & explained.
This is a good day my friends.
My view is, if they get nasty, abusive and bigoted that is the sign of a good Unionist, let us not stoop to those levels but try our damnedest to drag the poor souls out of the gutter and into the light and if that still doesn’t work, block the buggers.
Congratulations on the increases in your sites numbers Stu.
I saw bits of the stooshie last night and came to the conclusion that they don’t like it up ’em as a certain Corporal Jones would say! 😆
As an aside I don’t know if you have seen this over on the Independent site.
link to independent.co.uk
There are some very classy…..NOT comments. I think the readers of the Daily Mail have taken the day off and visited the Independent instead! 😆
Well done, Facts are cheils that win’a ding. We just have to keep putting the facts before people and doing so in the way you have been doing and the Scottish people will take note. We have a fair way to go yet so we will no doubt see more of their bitterness and vindictiveness.
Craig M,
very interesting and inspiring piece of analysis. Thanks. I think you are definitely identifying a possible future that is presently just a bud.
The relocation of the centre of debate back to a general public forum from the closed professional political classes is a really optimistic feature of our Independence struggle.
It is ironic that this process has been set in train and is now speeding up day after day by the very same ‘feather bedding’ that, before the internet, was essential to sustaining the incompetent and undemocratic Scottish political structures.
I would also like to hope that post YES vote the long term experience of so many activists with varying political beliefs (some quite extremely varying) that have, non the less, spent most of their political life sharing the same party (SNP) and working together, will help lessen the party political spite so apparent in Scots politics up until now.
In essence, should the SNP eventually break up, it seems to me to contain the kernel of the new political movements needed for Scotland’s new politics. This along with the ‘All and None’ party political stance of the (hopefully) victorious YES campaign, will help re politicise the currently abandoned and disconnected 50% of the electorate that refuse to vote.
I am not and have never been a member of the SNP by the way.
It’s all very exciting when the optimistic mood takes you, isn’t it? (starryeyedsmily)
Arbroath, that Independent article is full of so many misconceptions and distortions one doesn’t know where to begin. I note the author ‘broadcasts regularly for the BBC’. He’ll be even more regular with tripe-like contributions such as this..
@Traning Day & Arbroath
The date on that article may be of some significance.
It really was quite a bizarre Twitter exchange last night, even for the likes of Duncan (who seems to use semantic games and sophistry to compensate for the massive cognitive dissonance he must suffer as a Labour supporter). Perhaps the most bizarre point was when Duncan called Stu a misogynist for suggesting women were capable of solving their own problems. Because, according to Dunc, women are actually helpless victims and anyone who says otherwise obviously hates them.
Albert, you’re right. Duly ashamed, I’ll just go and get me diet of murder and fitba from Reporting Scotland! 😉
Doug D – Reading your post earlier about the use of swearing.
I agree that it’s really up to the individual how they want to express themselves and that as a society we have been taught that the use of swear words is not good. I can understand your rejection of this.
Where I have a problem with this is it’s use on the internet. I find it a little difficult at times to actually determine whether or not someone is being ‘funny ha-ha’ or ‘don’t be ridiculous’ or ‘I want to duff you up’ when they use swear words. I’m willing to accept that I’m not the most internet savvy type out there, I don’t use twitter, I don’t do facebook so maybe I’m just an old fart.
But I kinda think that if you are having a discussion and you’re clear on your point of view and you can express it well – then why the need to swear. I had a look at the Rev’s twitter feed last night and I was just appalled at the language and vitriol on display.
It seems to me that this is what the unionists want to do, they have nothing to offer but lies, so they’re trying to drag us down to their level, they don’t want debate so they’re trying to destroy any reasonable discussions. Anyone new to the scene trying to find out a little more info is greeted with a barrage of swear words and thats enough to put anyone off.
The internet is the only public arena that the unionists don’t control and the plan is to create such a toxic online atmosphere that people will just stop visiting. I think most reasonable people are not that impressed with swearing – some might not be bothered, some will.
So why put off say 30% of your potential audience with the use of swearing ?
Well done Stu …………..when you concentrate on what matters you do a damned fine job.
Keep up the good work.
Bill McLean – Thanks for that Bill
@EdinScot
I really don’t think we will see the full extent to how much collusion there has been from the msm and the Unionist parties et al until after a YES vote.
Yes, I wonder if that thought has hit home among some prominent people in Scotland. The Unionists, whether online or the politicians, seem to have been getting more and more abusive since Davidson accused Isabel Fraser of being biased. I suspect they hoped that last year’s events would finish off the Yes campaign. I do wonder whether all this bile is being co-ordinated? I suspect some are just sounding off. Even Alastair Darling is looking angrier in each interview as time goes by. The MSM are always telling us that he is a cool customer. Why does he appear agitated all the time then?
@tartanfever
It seems to me that twitter, in particular, is largely puerile and awash with people who want to ‘shock’. I’m sure, in part, by the limitation on how much you can write per tweet.
I’ve just had another recce and the ‘WOS is run by a raving woman hater, and all the site’s supporters must think the same way’ is still going on and on and on.
And it doesn’t just seem to be from under 20’s who I’d expect to shout loud and try to shock and offend for the sake of it, great fun to be had.
As I said higher up not believing in women only shortlists etc does not a misogynist make, maybe an anti-feminist but that’s a vast subject of academic research.
And the idea that everyone who supports this site, and indeed a YES vote, are agreed on all matters, well what balderdash.
Well, you know, different people have different styles. Some people like WoS. Some people like the Burd. It would be boring if we were all the same. People do and should gravitate to what they find they relate to. Trying to turn yourself into the other guy isn’t necessarily good tactics.
If Stu was foul-mouthed all the time, which is usually an indication of inarticulacy, I’d be giving him the body-swerve. But he isn’t. He’s an excellent example of an articulate person who knows how to use the occasional expletive for effect.
If he overdid it on Twitter (and I don’t know, life’s too short), what the hell, it’s Twitter.
And you know another thing?
Stu treats me like a person. I like that. Women for Independence seem to think the female is a different species, and I find this a little hard to relate to.
“Stu treats me like a person. I like that. Women for Independence seem to think the female is a different species, and I find this a little hard to relate to.”
Aye. I get the rationale behind the “X For Independence” groups, but I’m a little uncomfortable with the idea that being a woman is a choice or a vocation like in, I dunno, Joiners For Independence or whatever the others are. I don’t think like all other men just because we’ve got the same bits in our pants.
And on the complexities of the f word
link to guardian.co.uk
Muttley
I think as things slowly move onwards and upwards A.D sees the distinct possibility of his trough being swiped from under his snout That alone must be a painful thought, enough to make him angry added to that the loss of joining the vermin in ermine and the anger is palpable
He must realise each time he is shown to be wrong(lying) makes his arguments weaker the next time
So over the 50,000 mark. Makes me wonder where will it end. 100,000 achievable by the end of this year or earlier is not inconceivable. And by Sept. 2014?
Keep it up Stu you are doing every one of us (and I include unionists) a great service by shining a light under the stones where the slimy ones live.
When I first heard about the article Albert it was on SKY news last night. Admittedly it was the First of April when they were talking about it but they were reviewing the next day’s papers. The date that I see on it is the 2nd of April. What I was trying to highlight was the “high” level of commentary from the “Daily Mail” readership who had crossed over to the Independent. 😆
TD I think the idea that the author is a regular contributor to the BBC says about everything that needs to be said! 😆
Stu – I was going to send this in a message, perhaps to be used as a Unionist/BritNat of the Day, but it seems relevant to this thread.
The other day something came up on my facebook page (a friend had replied to a link) that was, at first, a bit scary, then baffling and, finally, quite amusing.
The item linked to a quite poisonous blog by K THE UNIONIST (capitals, obviously). The blog entry concerned was titled ‘The Scottish Nationalists Are Anti-English Racists – FACT’ (more capitals!). As I said, quite poisonous, but even worse were some of the comments on the facebook page that linked to the site, ‘Vote NO to Scottish independence and protect the union’.
The usual trying to equate nationalism with Nazism and fascism, obviously, and that from some real knuckledraggers I can tell you, but one comment from one young man from Lichfield caught my eye:-
“I’m noticing more Nazi/facist style imagery associated with nationalistic culture. Check ‘Wings Over Scotland’ & ‘Scotland Rising’- a t shirt company. When did the Eagle become the emblem of Scotland?”
Now, I’ve looked on WoS and Scotland Rising, and neither have an Eagle emblem (although SR do use a phoenix). Your emblem is most definitely the Scottish Lion, and it has never struck me as being a particularly far-right lion (a particular stance I usually associate with the more extreme British nationalists), so the only thing I can think of is that they have exceptionally weird lions in Lichfield. 🙂
@Arbroath1320
The date at the top is today’s date. The date of the article is beside the author’s name i.e MONDAY 01 APRIL 2013. Of course that doesn’t prove it’s an April fool, but it’s all unattributed and just why would “senior management sources inside News International in both London and Glasgow” want to share their thoughts with the Indy anyway.
@ Albalha
Yes, I’ve never really got the twitter thing. Sure it’s handy for linking to other news sites etc, but trying to have a conversation on it ?
This site is very good, there isn’t a huge amount of foul language and wild accusations, which is very different from what I read on twitter last night. I just don’t see the point in all the hassle of the twitter exchanges – I can’t get past it just being a huge waste of time replying to people who are there just to swear, accuse and wind-up.
Anyway, the articles here are good, they are informative and well backed up – much better than anything in the MSM.
More power to you Rev Stu, and keep your chin up.
@Albalha
“And the idea that everyone who supports this site, and indeed a YES vote, are agreed on all matters, well what balderdash”
Totally agree – it’s the diversity of views that makes it successful without being told what or how to think. We’ve all aired different options with Stuart and with each other but we don’t go around calling each other a nazi, a fascist or a misogynist.
Doug Daniel also hit the nail on the head when he said that Stuart (and others) have challenged and blown apart the ‘authority’ that some people think they have for setting the remit of the online independence debate and arguments and they are reacting badly to this loss of perceived power (I include some in the independence camp in this).
Jealousy and bitterness on readership numbers and the money donated to the site are also a big factor, perhaps if people reflected a bit more on their own shortcomings and insecurities rather than name calling and mud slinging then they might be taken a bit more seriously.
I doubt this will happen though.
“While it is interesting to see you compare the unique visitors to your website against daily newspaper sales, wouldn’t a truer reflection be to add the visitors to the various newspaper websites to the fish wrapper count? I appreciate such figures might not be easily available.”
I did point out last month that it was a bit of an unfair comparison. It’s purely illustrative. Figures for newspaper websites are indeed hard to come by, and massively distorted by the large audience for job sections etc.
“We’ve all aired different options with Stuart and with each other but we don’t go around calling each other a nazi, a fascist or a misogynist.”
Actually that’s not quite true. Last week I – an independence supporter who doesn’t support the SNP and disagrees with a number of their independence strategies – was attacked and abused by others on here simply for having the audacity to criticise the SNP and the Yes Campaign and offer constructive advice on how they could approve.
Worst of all – some of the posters attempted to insinuate that I was linked to a revolting holocaust denier who was plaguing the site at the time.
Gladly the Rev and some others came to my defence, but we need to ensure that those who abused and attacked me do not have a loud voice in the independence movement – they are likely to put off potential yes voters.
“Our next post will be our 1,000th”. Make it a good one, Rev. One for the BritNats to remember – death by a thousand cuts!
The unionists are losing control of the information media…….and its hurting.
groan….
@tartanfever
I find it very good for finding information, the crowd works. Also I can engage with people who disagree with me quite freely. For example if I was to post something which was strongly at odds with most people’s feelings here, I’d get hounded out of the thread without proper debate.
On twitter, I can ask no voters questions, get them thinking about what really matters to them, gently point out voting for independence might be their quickest route to getting rid of Alex Salmond if that is what they want. You can’t do that on a forum or news site.
Another common debating technique deployed by Better together and its supporters…
Confusing being abused and attacked with being corrected…
“But it would be difficult to endorse WOS on a Yes leaflet (for example) because of the bad language.”
There is an EXTREMELY small amount of “bad language” here. I think there might have been two or three f-bombs in 999 posts, and actually very little in the comments either. And while I’ve been known to curse like a trooper who’s just hit his thumb with a hammer on my personal Twitter, I doubt I’ve sworn more than half-a-dozen times in 25,000 WingsLand tweets either, almost all of those yesterday.
O/T Certain Rail fares to fall by 41% on 19th May. Thank you Keith Brown.
link to transportscotland.gov.uk
It’s always seemed to me, you know, that if you’re a well-known and reviled unionist troll on other blogs, it’s a bit strange to sign up to a new one with the same name to carry on the same malarkey. I mean, wouldn’t it be better to adopt a new persona and maybe fool people for more than about three seconds?
@Norsewarrior
“We’ve all aired different options with Stuart and with each other but we don’t go around calling each other a nazi, a fascist or a misogynist.”
Actually that’s not quite true. Last week I – an independence supporter who doesn’t support the SNP and disagrees with a number of their independence strategies – was attacked and abused by others on here simply for having the audacity to criticise the SNP and the Yes Campaign and offer constructive advice on how they could approve.
Are you still trying to peddle the line that you are a pro-independence supporter? I’m afraid I do not believe you given your previous statements.
Just for clarity you made several assertions that I countered on one thread – repeated below:
“If that is what this site is about – attacking and abusing and making revolting false insinuations about anyone who doesn’t rabidly follow the SNP party line then I want absolutely no further part in it.”
Nice try pal. This site does not “attack, abuse or making revolting false insinuations about anyone”. But well done for a good attempt to tar the site with that tag.
Your comments thus far have not been posted in an attempt to engage in debate but rather to stimulate discord. As for your reputation as a troll, lets have your own words back that up.
When discussing Student Fees you defended the Union by stating:
“the SNP Government will still be the government even if there’s a no vote – why would they introduce tuition fees?”
Which completely misses one of the main arguments for independence… namely that our funding is being cut from Westminster and forcing these changes upon us.
It also fails to note that saying you can hide behind an SNP government indefinitely is not a very good argument to stay in the UK. Why would we need a shield against Westminster if Westminster was no longer involved?
Not the sort of arguments or thinking of an independence supporter, who would have an idea of both of these things.
You tried to conflate the Edinburgh Trams fiasco with poor governance and noted that:
“The fiasco – with vastly increased costs and time to complete – has occurred under the SNP’s stewardship at both national and local (until 2011) level”
Which misses the point that it was a cynical ploy to kill an SNP budget and prevent them making a difference to the lives of people in Scotland, and that John Swinney said from the very beginning “not a penny more than £500m” and stuck to that commitment. The thrust of your argument was clear… you were conflating our current government with incompetence in an attempt to put people off independence.
When called out on lying on the figures you quoted, you immediately demanded an apology for the ‘slur’ rather than engage or defend the stats you posted.
When another poster pointed out a very pertinent point about cuts to services and funding you chastised them as negative and scaremongering in order to shut down debate on that topic… a topic that is very damaging to the ‘NO’ campaign.
You then tried to put people off visiting this site with a thinly disguised ploy to fool new viewers:
“I really hope those many Scots who are tempted by independence but who don’t support or like the SNP don’t visit this site, given the obnoxious abuse I received earlier for daring to criticise the party.”
In which you refer both to ‘independence supporters’ and ‘the party’ (SNP) as being one and the same… they are not and no independence supporter thinks they are. But that was beautifully followed up with an appeal to non-snp voters (Green, LibDems, SSP, Labour and even conservatives) not to take part in the Yes campaign because its just an SNP front:
“Although the SNP fantics give lip service to the notion that independence is for everyone regardless of the party they support, the reality is revealed whenever anyone dares to criticise their beloved party – they are immediately denounced as a ‘troll’ and a ‘sleekit wee liar’ and not a real independence supporter”
Again, you do not provide evidence for your claim… it is merely an attempt to put off people from a wider audience engaging.
But this was merely the introduction to your next wheeze…
“The history of referendums tells us that the status quo vote always grows the closer they get – so we really need to be leading right now, or at least building up momentum towards a win.”
Which is intended to induce gloom… “oh no… we’re not 10 points ahead 18 months from the referendum… were doomed I tells ya!”
Before adding:
“we really need to be leading right now, or at least building up momentum towards a win. The only way we can do that is if the SNP release the white paper as soon as possible – November will probably be too late”
Which parroted calls from Unionist politicians to bring forward the release of the paper. Scots can read and understand a document in a FULL year…
Then you moved onto the “its not real independence they’re proposing anyway so why bother” routine:
“The reality is that the version of independence I favour is far more full and real than the SNP’s watered down, diluted version”
Loved this addition… surprised you didn’t wet yourself laughing when you typed it though:
“People should just openly argue in favour of their respective camps without any trolling or fakery or abuse or attacks.”
You then spent the rest of that thread trying to sow discord, calling people fanatics, odious or worse while flatly denying you had any ulterior motives (right down to backing up your claim that the SNP were responsible for the Trams because they were elected in 2007…)
That was 1 thread.
If you think it goes un-noticed, you’re wrong.
Now, it is clear your intention is to try and cause disruption and slander the name of this blog.
This comment is intended to inform others of your antics.
I will not respond to you further as you are only intent on causing disruption and putting off new readers.
The louder they scream and shout the more desperate they become Stu!
Well done on the following figures though, you deserve them and we deserve you!
This Norsewarrior (or similar variations of that name) dude has been named as a deliberate trouble-causing troll on other sites. I’ve seen his/her name/moniker being complained about BTL on Guardian CiF, I think it was. I’ll search it out the relevant article to reconfirm. It’s only my opinion for what it’s worth, but he/she gives out troll vibes every time he/she posts.
I guess they realize that “wingsoverscotland” is actually a threat to them, expect much more, there is no low they will not hit, that is until the hit the floor. 2014 KO!
You chose not to name and shame those who spewed forth the bilious torrent of abuse you had to put up with last night, but I think you’re letting a few off rather lightly.
DUNCAN HOTHERSALL should stick to pink pound politics. He’s marginally less weaselly when ranting about fringe politics issues like equal marriage than he is when it comes to discussing majority politics like the ‘Great Debate’.
(I better watch what I’m saying – he may accuse me of being a ‘misandrist’[sic])
Les Wilson,
14 minutes past 8 in the evening, 9th Round, 18th minute (very long bruising round that one, wink). Knockout!
Norseman, you were not attacked ‘simply for disagreeing with the SNP’. As long as you continue to peddle that particular lie you will get no sympathy or respect from me.
Just read some of the twitter comments from last night and I hate to say it Rev but I think Duncan fancies you.
Just to prove how ‘The Rev’ is getting to ‘them’ up pops the Troll ‘Norsewarrior !
I hoped we had seen the back of his pointless, self centred winging on here.
One way you can spot a ‘Troll’ a mile off, is that they fail to see when they are not wanted.
Q. Why does this guy post on Wings when he gets the reaction he does ?
A. to de-rail any thread that is doing harm to Unionism, or to de-rail any thread that is positive or encourages the posters at wings.
He first appeared at the time when it was confirmed that Wings had met it’s fundraising target, and a very encouraging thread was full of congratulations to Rev, now he is on here again when the thread is encouraging and full of congratulations because Wings has now smashed through the 50,000 unique visitors per month.
The guy is a Troll, it’s probably just best if we all just ignore him.
“Just to prove how ‘The Rev’ is getting to ‘them’ up pops the Troll ‘Norsewarrior !”
I’d hoped not to have to say this again, folks. I can decide who the trolls are. If you think someone is one, then ignore them, because that’s the only thing that works with trolls. If not, debate with their comments, not with who they are or you think they are. Leave the rest to me. I’m not going to bemoan ad-hominem attacks on me and then encourage them on others.
I can see the point of the group, especially in the light of the gender disparity of the opinion polls. Arguably, if women see other women supporting independence it may seem more of a comfortable concept to them. I joined the day they launched, out of some sort of solidarity impulse.
I don’t think they’re for me though. Full-time job in a senior professional capacity, unmarried, no family, and absolutely zero interest in clothes, fashion, grooming or the like. Spend entire life in jeans and sweatshirt. No inferiority complex about Y-chromosome deficiency. They seem to be talking to a different group of people I only nominally qualify to belong to.
But we need people working in all sorts of constituencies, so I’m happy to let them get on with it.
Rev, nice to see the support from callum cashly you got last night.
@Morag: There isn’t an Independence for Men Group that I could decline to join. And I should tape record my conversation as I sit down at the Barbers. ” Taper or straight cut at the neck? Don’t know, whatever it is now. On which side do you part your hair on? Eh! As you see it. And jeans are the only practical wear for me. I’m either in the garden or in the garage with my motorcycles.
I missed all the vitriol, but agree with the majority here about staying the course. Just stay on the High Road — all the way to independence. This is the tone the whole debate should be in, but power doesn’t give up power without a fight.
Heh, so £23 well spent.
Am I a nutter for calling you a second wave feminist?
“Am I a nutter for calling you a second wave feminist?”
😀
I just threw that one in for contrast 😉
Fair enough Re calling people Trolls Rev, but I think it only fair as a member of the SNP on a Nationalist / yes campaign site, I would request that Norsewarrior stops his refering to ‘SNP fanatics’ and stops making insulting remarks about SNP / Nationalists.
This wouls make any attempt to cause division (if this is his aim) to become a fruitless task and would stop any newcomers being confused by his anti – SNP retoric.
“Fair enough Re calling people Trolls Rev, but I think it only fair as a member of the SNP on a Nationalist / yes campaign site, I would request that Norsewarrior stops his refering to ‘SNP fanatics’ and stops making insulting remarks about SNP / Nationalists.”
A very fair point. Over to you, NW.
“would stop any newcomers being confused by his anti – SNP retoric.”
You need to realise that independence is NOT all about the SNP, or nationalism for that matter, and that the ONLY way we are going to win the referendum is if we can show that to the people of Scotland.
Most of the people we need to convince to vote yes are not SNP supporters – clearly it is important to persuade them that independence is for everyone, not just SNP supporters, and that is what I am trying to do.
Sadly my attempts are not helped by the likes of you attacking and abusing me for daring to criticise your party.
“Most of the people we need to convince to vote yes are not SNP supporters – clearly it is important to persuade them that independence is for everyone, not just SNP supporters, and that is what I am trying to do.” by repeatedly and persistently calling supporters of independence “fanatics”.
@ Norsewarrior – if indeed you are sincere in your support for independence then the Yes campaign is the organisation to align with. The SNP is a player in the Yes campaign team as are the Greens, Labour of Independence, Women for Independence et al.In team play you don’t criticise your team players so why must you criticise the SNP – if your motives are as you claim?
So lets see if your future performance befits a team player.
“by repeatedly and persistently calling supporters of independence “fanatics”.”
No. The only people I call ‘fanatics’ are those who support the SNP with fanatical unquestioning devotion and attack and abuse anyone, like me, who dares to question or criticise anything that they do – even if its something that is potentially damaging to the chances of getting independence.
That is NOT all independence supporters – quite the opposite in fact – its just unfortunate that such people have a loud voice and tend to dominate online forums.
“if indeed you are sincere in your support for independence then the Yes campaign is the organisation to align with”
The problem with the Yes Campaign is that, while it allows other parties and organisations to join it, it is totally dominated and controlled by the SNP – to the extent that the ONLY independence policies it promotes are SNP policies. Take a look at its website – it is promoting the policies of retaining the monarchy and becoming EU members, despite a number of other independence parties opposing those policies. It doesn’t promote the policies of anyone else.
“In team play you don’t criticise your team players so why must you criticise the SNP – if your motives are as you claim?”
As your appear to like a sports analogy here’s one for you.
Let’s imagine you support a football team that has reached the cup final. Your team’s manager then starts messing up his tactics and strategy and doing things that you think will damage your chances of winning the cup.
Would you continue to back him with unquestioning devotion, or offer him constructive criticism in the hope that he will change his tactics and strategy and give you a better chance of winning?
You’re getting quite good at this, I acknowledge that. Must be all the practice.
Morag dear, you’ve been warned by the Rev several times to desist from your unsubstantiated unproven accusations about people being ‘trolls’.
As he correctly says, he alone will decide who is and is not a ‘troll’ on this site, so you only damage yourself and your own reputation by constantly making up these accusations.
If you think I’m a troll then simply don’t engage with me.
@ Norsewarrior
In team play your obligation is to apply yourself to the task given to you as best you can and support the manager. If you don’t agree with him/her then you should leave at a time and manner least damaging to the team. Not whilst the game, or in this case the campaign, is underway.
“There are none so blind as those who will not see”.
Scott Minto did a detailed analysis of your postings here yet you continue to, lets say, – blindly continue with your negative slant? Why?
“In team play your obligation is to apply yourself to the task given to you as best you can and support the manager. If you don’t agree with him/her then you should leave at a time and manner least damaging to the team. Not whilst the game, or in this case the campaign, is underway.”
So you’re basically saying that any independence supporter who doesn’t agree with the tactics and strategy the SNP and/or the Yes Campaign are taking should simply leave and not offer any constructive criticism or advice on how they think the campaign could be improved?!
That is the worst possible suggestion – it would merely emphasise to people that the SNP completely control and dominate the Yes Campaign and don’t countenance any criticism or any views or opinions other than their own!
If you were on the Titantic and saw that the captain was steering it towards an iceberg would you take a similar stance of not interfering or offering him constructive criticism because the journey was already underway?!
@Norsewarrior-
More of the regulars on this site have ignored you than ‘engaged’ with you. I can’t speak for others, but I’ve been ignoring your posts because I find them boring and repetitive.
If anyone could be bothered to do some analysis of your contributions to this site over, I guess half a dozen threads, I’m sure they’d discern a pretty basic pattern i.e. that you constantly conflate SNP/Yes Scotland, creating the impression that they are joined at the hip. They are not, and your effort to suggest otherwise is offensive, not only to the majority of SNP supporters, but to those of the minority parties who share the platform.
This SNP/Yes Scotland bugbear of yours doesn’t cut the mustard with those of us who’ve been watching politics long enough to know when someone’s sounding-off for the sake of it, and throwing out accusations of ‘fanaticism’ is a bit rich when you seem incapable of commenting on anything else.
“that you constantly conflate SNP/Yes Scotland, creating the impression that they are joined at the hip”
As you yourself admit, you’ve been ignoring most of my posts, so you really aren’t in a position to come to any conclusion about any ‘pattern’ I’ve been following are you?
If you had read my posts properly, you’d see that I’ve actually been calling for the minority parties within Yes Scotland to be given more prominence and to have their policies promoted by the Yes Campaign, rather than it only promoting SNP policies, I’m not sure why on earth such parties would find that argument ‘offensive’?
Or indeed, why any independence supporter would disagree with or attack a strategy that would clearly show the average man in the street that independence is about much more than just the SNP and that it can be supported by anyone, regardless of where they stand in the political spectrum – which would only encourage people to vote yes.
I think there are too many yellow balloons being used. We need all types of balloons, even ones that are overinflated, and make farting noises when let loose.
@NW-
‘Ignoring’ as in ‘not responding to’ – doesn’t mean I haven’t read your contributions with as much care as they deserve.
Minority parties join platforms for a reason, and do so freely. They’re also free to leave if they’re uncomfortable. I’m quite sure the ‘average man in the street’ is quite capable of discerning SNP from SSP, Green etc.
Colin Fox stood on the Yes platform alongside Salmond etc despite glaring differences of opinion re the monarchy, NATO membership etc, and the event was all the richer for the diversity on show – whatever your motives may be (and I’m not getting into all that ‘troll’ shite – couldn’t care less), the effect of your constant harping-on about imagined Trojan-horses is to reify division and distrust.
(BTW, that ‘victim’ card of yours is getting a bit dog-eared.)
@ Norsewarrior – and so we have gone from football management to captaining a ship. Lets see now. Why not give religion a go? A third analogy.
If you disagreed with the sermon from the pulpit would you do a “Jenny Geddes” and throw your stool (stool as in chair lest you misunderstand) at the preacher?
How to catch a monkey:
Weave a basket and form a handhole just wide enough to allow a monkey’s open hand to enter. then place a banana inside. The monkey comes along,puts its hand onto the basket, grabs the banana and hey the poor monkey cannot get its clenched fist out of the basket and it just really must have that banana. Banana, a pear, an apple, 3 different fruits. same theme?
Sometimes its best to let go Norsewarrior. In the term of your nom de plume, leave the battlefield.
“‘Ignoring’ as in ‘not responding to’ – doesn’t mean I haven’t read your contributions with as much care as they deserve.”
Not to be pedantic, but when you say you’re ignoring something because you find it ‘boring and repetitive’ it suggests you’re ignoring it i.e. not reading it. If you’d actually meant ‘not responding to it’ then presumably you’d have said that.
“Minority parties join platforms for a reason, and do so freely”
The reason is because they support independence. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be given more prominence in the campaign, rather than it only promoting SNP policies does it?
Let’s imagine you’re thinking about voting yes, but you’re opposed to the monarchy and the EU – you go to the Yes Scotland website to try and find out what might happen after independence, and see that its only promoting the SNP policies of retaining the monarchy and becoming EU members, and its ignoring the policies of other independence parties opposed to those things.
Don’t you think that might potentially put off such a person from voting yes?
“Sometimes its best to let go Norsewarrior. In the term of your nom de plume, leave the battlefield.”
So let me get this clear, you are saying that any independence who disagrees with the tactics and strategy towards the referendum that the SNP are taking should just shut up and ‘leave the battlefield’?
“Sometimes its best to let go Norsewarrior. In the term of your nom de plume, leave the battlefield.”
So let me get this clear, you are saying that any independence supporter who disagrees with the tactics and strategy towards the referendum that the SNP are taking should just shut up and ‘leave the battlefield’?
@NW-
‘Don’t you think that might potentially put off such a person from voting yes?’
Well, doh, of course. And there are hundreds of other variables which might result in the same person becoming 100% convinced to vote Yes.
Is your glass ever anything but half-empty?
Norsewarrior,
Whilst there may be some commonality of purpose beyond independence, there is no reason whatsoever to get hung up as you appear to do on a post independence future. Those of us that believe that the whole hereditary bit is well past it’s sell by date will have a chance to fight for it’s abandonment after independence.
You do realise that a USIP, the bastard son of UKIP, might arise and have to be flattened? You do realise that staying with the UK means that our decisions are always going to be drowned out?
Independence isn’t an end point. It is a reset.
Norsewarrior …”The problem with the Yes Campaign is that, while it allows other parties and organisations to join it, it is totally dominated and controlled by the SNP”
Thats an opinion not a fact!
@ Norsewarrior, you always have another question, reminds me of Ask Me Another. We’ve had three analogies, three fruits and hey there is a Third Way for you to seek resolution to your views.
The First Way is to simply carp as you have applied here;
The Second Way is to ignore responses and ask another question, again as you have applied here;
The Third Way is to join the Yes campaign local group in your area and express your views, First Way or Second Way as you wish, on SNP dominance and on how the Yes campaign should be run, to the local group. Your views may well be referred to Yes headquarters.
You will be starting at the bottom of the Yes campaign organisation but it will be a start for you. Do let us occasionally know of your progress.
Meant to add,
Our history re-starts with a ‘Yes’ vote. Otherwise, we are completely finished in the same way as Tuva is.
“Well, doh, of course. And there are hundreds of other variables which might result in the same person becoming 100% convinced to vote Yes.”
I’m sure there are, but as you agree, the Yes Campaign only promoting SNP policies could potentially put people off from voting yes.
Personally I don’t want anything the Yes Campaign does to potentially put off anyone from voting yes, particularly something as easily rectifiable as promoting other independence policies too, not just the SNP’s.
Ach, so long as NW manages too keep getting out the message that the “SNP’s” yes campaign is heading for the rocks, that SNP supporters are all mindless fanatics programmed to regurgitate the diktats of central office, and that there are a million and one reasons for someone who might be thinking about a Yes vote to reconsider, he considers it a good day’s work.
“You do realise that a USIP, the bastard son of UKIP, might arise and have to be flattened? You do realise that staying with the UK means that our decisions are always going to be drowned out?”
Yes that’s why I support independence. And I’m aware that independence will effectively give us a blank sheet from which we can start again, but the problem is that such a concept isn’t attractive to undecided voters – they want to know the possibilities of what may happen after independence, not be told that it is basically year zero and anything could happen after it!
That’s why the Yes Campaign needs to promote a number of policies that may happen after independence, but the problem is that the only policies it is currently promoting are SNP ones – which may well put off those voters who don’t like the SNP or the EU or the monarchy.
“so long as NW manages too keep getting out the message that the “SNP’s” yes campaign is heading for the rocks, that SNP supporters are all mindless fanatics programmed to regurgitate the diktats of central office, and that there are a million and one reasons for someone who might be thinking about a Yes vote to reconsider”
1. Where did I suggest the Yes Campaign was ‘heading for the rocks’?! I’m suggesting how it can improve, what on earth is wrong with that?
2. Nowhere have I suggested that ‘all’ SNP supporters are fanatics – its only a small minority
3. Surely it is far more constructive to think about reasons why someone might decide not to vote yes and then come up with a strategy to solve that, than to just ignore it and blindly hope they’ll vote yes anyway?!
@NW-
Hopefully the Yes campaign will be alerted to your acumen, offer you Blair Jenkins’ job, and then you can bring ‘the average man in the street’ the clarity he craves – at least then you’ll be busy doing something positive and won’t have to waste any more of your time here.
Norsewarrior,
Well, if you are aware that that is the reality, perhaps you could do your best to spread that message rather than the one that you do? The ‘Yes Scotland’ campaign is a broad(ish) church and perhaps it is there that you should direct your energies?
I am not at all convinced that your average Scottish elector is demanding the level of detail you think they are. The majority of their concerns appear to be around economic matters and on these issues it is an absolute necessity to spell out our relative strengths and weaknesses.
Some thoughts on Norsewarrior’s arguments.
1. If the the SNP dominates the Yes campaign, it is because it is by far the biggest and most popular pro-independence party.
2. On the basis of recent polls, it is the party most likely to form the first Scottish Government after independence; indeed, it is the only pro-independence party with any realistic prospect of doing so. Therefore, the SNP’s proposed policies are far more relevant to a voter wondering what an independent Scotland will be like than those of the Greens or the SSP.
3. Obviously there are people who support independence but not the SNP, and others who support the SNP but not independence. However, it seems probable to me that the majority of people who support independence also support the SNP, at least to the extent of being prepare to vote for them. Pushing the policies of a party such as the SSP which does not (perhaps regrettably) attract a lot of support from the electorate might well be counterproductive for the Yes campaign.
Personally, I joined the SNP primarily because I consider them to be the most effective voice arguing for independence, and also because I agree with their policies more than with those of any other party which has enough support to be credible.
Since Norsewarrior claims to be for independence but against the SNP, perhaps he/she will clarify his/her position by letting us know which party (or parties) he/she supports.
@Scaraben-
Well said, and as an SSP member I heartily agree.
See, NW? It ain’t that hard.
Scaraben asked you to clarify which, if any party, you support. Care to share that with us?
Scaraben:
You are obviously correct to say that the SNP are the biggest independence party and the only one with a realistic chance of becoming the independent government and enacting their policies.
But if we are to win the referendum we need independence to be attractive to as broad a church of people as we can possibly get – those pro and anti EU, those pro and anti monarchy etc. Therefore we need to suggest to anti-monarchy and anti-EU Scots that independence won’t necessarily result in the SNP enacting their pro-EU, pro-monarchy policies, that there are alternatives in the form of other parties who oppose those policies.
Clearly Yes Scotland only promoting the SNP’s policies isn’t going to help that.
And I’ll gladly clarify my position – I don’t support a party as such, I make a decision at each election based on a number of factors, but at present the party most closely aligned with my views are the Scottish Greens.
That’s why the Yes Campaign needs to promote a number of policies that may happen after independence, but the problem is that the only policies it is currently promoting are SNP ones
Which SNP policies is the Yes campaign promoting and which are the other policies you think it should promote?
“Which SNP policies is the Yes campaign promoting and which are the other policies you think it should promote?”
It is promoting the SNP’s policies of retaining the monarchy, becoming an EU member and forming a currency union.
These are all quotes from either the Yes Scotland website or from Blair Jenkins:
“An independent Scotland will remain an integral part of the European Union”, “Scotland is currently a monarchy and will remain so”, “Retaining the pound in common with our neighbours and biggest trading partners will ensure stability and continuity for businesses and individuals”.
And it should be promoting a selection of policies from all independence parties and organisations – to make clear to those Scots who don’t like the SNP, or the Queen or the EU, that independence won’t necessarily result in the SNP’s policies being enacted.
It is promoting the SNP’s policies of retaining the monarchy, becoming an EU member and forming a currency union.
No, it isn’t. Blair Jenkins has simply stated the facts that Scotland would remain a monarchy (because the referendum isn’t about that and doesn’t change that), would remain part of the EU (because the referendum isn’t about that and doesn’t change that) and would retain the pound (because no one is offering a workable alternative and we’re going to have to use some sort of currency).
Those are facts – and observations of facts – not policies. Not SNP policies, not SSP policies, not Green policies…just facts. Because the referendum isn’t about policies, as much as you and entirely unconnected Unionist trolls might want it to be, it’s about choosing who decides those policies; Scots for Scots, or the English for Scots.
And it should be promoting a selection of policies from all independence parties and organisations
And which are the particular policies that you think it should promote? Perhaps a policy of ducking awkward questions?
“Blair Jenkins has simply stated the facts that Scotland would remain a monarchy”
There is an obvious difference between stating the fact that Scotland will still have the monarchy, still be in the EU, and still be using the pound immediately after independence – and actively supporting those policies.
Jenkins and the Yes Campaign follow the latter course – they actively support the SNP’s policies of keeping the monarchy, becoming EU members and forming a currency union (“Retaining the pound…will ensure stability”, “an independent Scotland will remain an integral part of the European Union”) while failing to offer equal support to the policies of other independence parties who want Scotland to become a republic and get our own currency.
There is nothing wrong with reassuring people that voting yes won’t result in Scotland immediately losing the pound and being thrown out of the EU, but it is also important to make clear that independence can result in alternatives to remaining an “integral part” of the EU, or forming a currency union.
Norsewarrior,
What do you mean enacted? You and I have agreed that independence is a clean sheet of paper.
I see no reason whatsoever to play the unionist game of tying every other issue under the sun into a referendum on Scottish Independence.
It is not a referendum on the EU.
It is not a referendum on the monarchy.
It is not a referendum on anything but us making our own decisions.
After we have independence, we can decide what we want to do about all these things and many more.
@Norsewarrior(?)
Are you, or are you not, someone who used to post on the Scotsman forum using the following monikors:
‘IndependenceNow’, ‘Yeah’, ‘Yeah1’, ‘AM2’, ‘Highland’, ‘Mighty’,’English voice’?
Was it you, using one of our various monikors, who eventually left the Scotsman forum due in part, perhaps, to you being eventually ignored for being deliberately disruptive, attention-seeking and causing animosity on thread after thread?
(With thanks to henbroon)
Andrew Molesley it was (AM2), and he was outed including his home tel number somewhere near Wishaw, if I remember correctly.
He was from Nirelann.
“Are you, or are you not, someone who used to post on the Scotsman forum using the following monikors”
I’ve never used any of those monikers on the Scotsman or anywhere else.
“With thanks to henbroon”
Given the rambling, incoherent off-topic post ‘hen broon’ made earlier today which revealed his rabid homophobia and has been rightly condemned by many on here, and given the fact that he appears to think anyone who disagrees with him is ‘Lord Foulkes’, you’d perhaps be wise not to listen to anything he says.
“It is not a referendum on anything but us making our own decisions”
Yes but as I’ve already pointed out to you that isn’t enough to convince the undecided to vote yes! It isn’t enough to just present them with a blank canvas and tell them independence can mean Scotland making its own decisions, they want to have some idea about what those decisions might be, with regard to the EU, monarchy, currency, the economy etc etc.
Which is why the SNP and other parties are rightly presenting their independence policies, and the Yes Campaign is promoting them. Unfortunately, the fact that the Yes Campaign are only promoting SNP policies means that those voters who don’t like the SNP or one or more of their policies could be put off from voting yes.
I’m with Sneekyboy on this:
link to wingsoverscotland.com
Only place to continue OT topics with discussion is Quarantine:
link to wingsoverscotland.com
Dal Riata, you missed “Tellen1”.
@Norsewarrior
“I’ve never used any of those monikors on the Scotsman or anywhere else.”
Fair enough on AM2 (Thanks Bugger (the Panda)). The rest? Riiight… well we have no option but to believe you… for now.
Anyway, congratulations for deliberately causing animosity and disruption on this thread – job done…again.
There is an obvious difference between stating the fact that Scotland will still have the monarchy, still be in the EU, and still be using the pound immediately after independence – and actively supporting those policies.
Yes. You quoted him stating the facts and seem unable to tell the ‘obvious’ difference. Those still aren’t ‘policies’. They’re facts.
It isn’t enough to just present them with a blank canvas and tell them independence can mean Scotland making its own decisions, they want to have some idea about what those decisions might be, with regard to the EU, monarchy, currency, the economy etc etc.
That’s what election campaigns are for. Feel free to start yours here, by finally telling people what policies you support, or why you think they need to be promoted during the independence referendum.
“Those still aren’t ‘policies’. They’re facts.”
So you’re claiming that when Blair Jenkins promotes the SNP’s currency union policy by claiming that it will “benefit” Scotland to form a monetary union with rUK and that “retaining the pound in common with our neighbours and biggest trading partners will ensure stability and continuity for businesses and individuals” he isn’t promoting the SNP’s currency union policy?!
It isn’t a ‘fact’ that retaining the pound will benefit Scotland – many others, including the Scottish Greens and those banking experts who were quoted in the Herald the other day, think it will be far better to transition to our own currency as soon as possible. And yet the only policy Jenkins is promoting is the SNP’s currency union one.
Only place to continue OT topics with discussion is Quarantine: http://wingsoverscotland.com/quarantine/
@Norsewarrior
Have you ever used the monikor “Tellen1” on any site?
I’m expecting you to say no, of course, ones of your…’type’ never do admit to former ‘creations’, does one?!
How’s the masquerading of care coming along, “us” and “we” and all that? Pretending to be what you’re not 24/7 is tough, is it not?
Oh, and trying to dominate the thread with your ‘I’ll be voting ‘Yes’, but…’ modus operandi…How’s that coming along? ‘Really well’? Oh, that’s good. Well done!
I’m sick and tired of hearing things
From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocrites
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
I’ve had enough of reading things
By neurotic, psychotic, pig-headed politicians
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth
thanks John.
“Have you ever used the monikor “Tellen1? on any site? I’m expecting you to say no, of course, ones of your…’type’ never do admit to former ‘creations’, does one?!”
Look, the Rev has already warned people, several times, that he alone will decide who is and isn’t a troll and he alone will decide who to ban for trolling.
At least twice he has clearly defended me from such accusations and stated that there is a ‘witch hunt’ against me.
As he himself said, if you think I’m a troll then simply ignore me, stop spamming the thread with your unsubstantiated accusations.
Norsewarrior,
Look, transitioning to a different currency might be a tad difficult, unless we see the euro as the option. I’ll stand corrected but I don’t think there is a case of any country within the EU being allowed to create it’s own currency? Anyway all that might be moot if the wider Eurozone collapses. My point about history continuing whether we vote for independence or not, although in the latter case Scotland’s story will only be a footnote…..
Do I take it, as you’ve moved onto the economics of the situation, that you now agree with me that the monarchy and the EU itself are not really much of an issue as far as the referendum itself is concerned?
———————————–
I am willing to take Norsewarrior at face value and I do not think it is particularily useful to accuse someone of being a troll or a sock-puppet unless you have irrefutible evidence.
I think people who try and bring specific party policies into the referendum are usually Unionists. The referendum is where should power lie in Scottish affairs, at Holyrood or at Westminster. It is not about policies.
If i was talking to someone on the phone, and i thought they were having a pleasurable wank at the same time, i would put the phone down.
With regards to policies following independence, and in particular the monarchy, there is one obvious point that I have not seen mentioned yet.
The SNP/Scottish Government have said that one of the first tasks in an independent Scotland will be the creation of a written constitution, following extensive consultation which will presumably give everyone in Scotland the opportunity to express their views. I would expect that major issues where the consultation exercise does not indicate a consensus will be resolved by a multi-question referendum, as was done recently in Iceland.
One essential part of a constitution must deal with who will be Head of State, a monarch or a president. As this is a question on which there is unlikely to be a clear consensus, it is therefore likely that there will be a referendum on the monarchy within perhaps a couple of years of independence.
In my view this is as it should be. The referendum is really only about independence, and our right thereafter to make our own democratic decisions about our country.
Scaraben @ 7:37pm
Perhaps not here, but you’ll find the subject of a codified/written constitution is kept alive and well elsewhere – such as in Newsnet, the MSM, meetings at Holyrood and most recently in Paris – by the Constitutional Commission: see link to constitutionalcommission.org
And agreed, my understanding being the SNP favours the continuity of our present constitutional monarch rather than an elected president as head of state for the foreseeable future. IE restoration of the Kingdom of Scotland for the time being until whenever/if ever there is consensus in favour of becoming a Republic even if thought likely now.
What is important now is that our present royalists and republicans agree that – first and foremost and irrespective of blue or red bloodline – the sovereignty our head of state will symbolise and manifestly represent is that of we, all the people in Scotland rather than our Scottish state.
IE all being well, Elizabeth I would be Queen of Scots – meaning she/the Scottish state would belong to us as citizens owning our own state, not else as Queen of Scotland – meaning we would be (sans sovereignty) mere subjects belonging to her/the Scottish state.
The latter case mirrors the present UK set-up where we are deemed to be citizens, but – without our own sovereignty – are in reality subjects. We are owned rather than owning. Our natural rights and freedoms are rationed to be doled out or reined in by the crown-in-parliament’s sovereignty to divide and rule over us as it sees fit without a by our leave bar that ‘consent’ manufactured by over leveraging support for factional, fractional political minorities into arbitrary majorities using the vagaries of FPTP’s safe and targeted marginal seats. Of late, and in parallel with declining UK party membership, UK government ‘majorities’ have been disproportionately returned by the votes of less than 25% of the total electorate – a state of affairs which led to the present coalition.
This is the democracy of, by and for the few who have to hold, not the many who do not and are held over and back. It is the prime cause of our democratic deficit and the resultant financial deficit and debt.
For far too long, UK governments have sought to impose their turn and turn about view of society and political economy with ruinous consequences. The UK political system was all but broken before the 2010 General Election and – for wont of fostering long-term productive investment and prevention of predatory mal-divestment since 1946 – is all but bankrupt now.
If the greatest debt we will ever owe each other is our society of communities in families with friends and fellow folk, we need to constitute our governance to reflect and uphold the values we as a society hold dear. For starters, that should cost us a lot less in future.
But first there is the by no means small matter of the Referendum. And in many ways this first choice is between YES for our own sovereign state or NO for a sovereign state that own’s us; ie the sovereignty of the people in Scotland v the UKs crown-in-parliament’s sovereignty.
It would be a very odd thing indeed to recognise our own personal and plural sovereignty and then vote NO to remain part of a state that does not recognise nor acknowledge, let alone shown any inclination to enact it.
But do we recognise that sovereignty is our very individual and several being, that we together make and multiply the whole?
If enough of us do and Vote Yes, we will be a part of our own state in our own land as real citizens.
If too many of us don’t and Vote No, we will remain nothing but subjects named, numbered and ranked in file still.
The foregoing should have ended:
” If enough of us do and Vote Yes, we will be a party to our own state in our own land as real citizens.
If too many of us don’t and Vote No, we will remain nothing but subject parts – named, numbered and ranked in file still. “
Norsewarrior: which pro-independence party is againt EU membership?
@Indion-
Cheers for that. Loads to ponder.
For me, the key phrase is ‘for the foreseeable future’.