The Wheels Of Industry
Last Friday’s edition of The National ran this guff:
And as we often are, we were put in mind of the greatest politics book ever written.
We’d really need to quote a much longer section to fully convey the point – ideally just read all of the piece linked above – but this passage will suffice for general purposes:
“What is concerned here is not the morale of masses, whose attitude is unimportant so long as they are kept steadily at work, but the morale of the Party itself.
Even the humblest Party member is expected to be competent, industrious, and even intelligent within narrow limits, but it is also necessary that he should be a credulous and ignorant fanatic whose prevailing moods are fear, hatred, adulation, and orgiastic triumph. In other words it is necessary that he should have the mentality appropriate to a state of war.
It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going well or badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist.”
So let’s talk about the independence industry.
Or as Orwell put it, “The war is now within measurable distance of its end”. Kemp’s claim is obvious bollocks. Plaid Cymru are now the party of power in Wales but they don’t have a majority, they’ve pledged NOT to hold a referendum on independence, and if they did there’s essentially no chance they’d win it. Support in Wales usually bobbles around between 25% and 40% with DKs excluded.
Similarly, we can’t even find much in the way of evidence of Sinn Fein even seriously talking about a border poll in Northern Ireland. Much like the SNP in Scotland, they tend to talk it up a bit during elections then immediately kick it back into the long grass.
And of course the UK government has less than no interest in granting any more referendums in the foreseeable future, having been quite terrified by the unexpected closeness of the Scottish one and then losing the Brexit one.
So what of this “strategy for victory”, then? Kemp has a surprise for us.
Apparently the “true” support for independence is actually less than 40%. That’s what Kemp says would be the result of a “de facto referendum” conducted via a general election. He doesn’t cite any evidence for that figure, although it does pretty much correspond with what pro-indy parties got in the Holyrood election in May.
There’s little prospect of support for either the SNP or the Greens rocketing in the near future, and no sign of any new party with any traction, so let’s accept that proposition for the sake of argument. Now what?
This, though, is cobblers of the very lowest grade. For reasons we’ve explored extensively in the past, using a Westminster election rather than a Holyrood one is an epically terrible idea. You’d struggle to even get heard in a media which would be focused on UK issues, and you’d only really have one party to vote for – the Scottish Greens are a total irrelevance at Westminster.
That leaves it all on the SNP, and (as Kemp notes), the SNP are a shambles of a party that even many indy supporters won’t vote for.
In a Holyrood election you have the huge advantage of two votes, and thereby you can campaign on the basis of using the constituency vote as your de-facto indyref and the list vote as your normal election vote, making it much easier for people who don’t support the SNP to vote “for independence” while still backing their preferred party.
Heavens, we’re getting dizzy trying to track all these U-turns. Does he want a de-facto indyref or not? At this point we honestly don’t know. Just a few paragraphs ago he’s told us we’d get less than 40% in such a vote, now he wants to have it in three years anyway, in the most doomed-to-certain-failure manner possible.
What’s your game, Gordon?
“Impulsive”? Christ above. We’ve been demanding Westminster outline a defined route for over a decade now – since at least the Brexit vote of June 2016 – and they’ve swatted it away like a mildly annoying moth on a summer’s evening. The chances of them having a sudden change of heart between now and 2028 are roughly on a par with FIFA agreeing to replay the whole World Cup due the the referee’s refusal to give Scotland a nailed-on penalty against Morocco.
(And about the same as the SNP finally coming up with all the serious work on the case for independence that they’ve so conspicuously failed to do in that decade. What does he think has changed? Has the party suddenly recruited an army of geniuses?)
This drivel is what the SNP has been punting relentlessly at voters since 2015 and all that’s happened as a result is that SNP support has plunged from 60% to the mid-30s. The definition of insanity, they say, is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
But that assumes you WANT different results. And there’s the rub. Because if you did you’d be trying a bit harder than this:
Billboards and petitions. Whoop-de-sodding-doo. (We all know how much attention we pay to political bumf shoved through our letterbox, and 75,000 is a pathetic number – just one for every 34 households in the country – anyway. What are the people who get one going to do, call the whole street round to read it together?)
As for the “Scottish Citizens’ Convention”, Kemp and Believe In Scotland have been trying to flog that ridiculous pig-in-a-poke for years now and it’s an absolute honking embarrassment of a plan.
But as we pointed out yesterday, punting this quack-hooey at the hopelessly gullible is a nice little earner for BiS’s parent company Business For Scotland. Failing to deliver it year after year keeps the (folding, not clinking) money rolling in and Kemp in an undisclosed, but we’re quite certain enviable, salary.
Independence either happening, or definitively failing, would see that gravy train crashing straight into the buffers. The only thing that keeps it rolling along (apologies for the mixed metaphor) is a carrot on a stick, constantly dangling something a couple of years ahead, no matter how implausible, whether it’s an 11-point plan or yet another talking shop, committee, “task force”, “Summer Of Independence” or whatever.
Even as shonky independence strategies go this one’s a duffer, for a truckload of reasons so blindingly obvious that we feel bad about insulting your intelligence by spelling them out, so we’ll just do a few of the biggest ones.
(1) There is NO chance of the SNP willingly surrendering their political ownership of the concept of independence. They wouldn’t even accept votes for other indy parties at this year’s election as being votes for indy, they insisted only SNP ones counted.
(2) Even if they did (they won’t) and the “common national banner” took every seat at Westminster, so what? The SNP got 56 out of 59 in 2015 and they did nothing. They did nothing when they had numerical leverage in 2018-2019 either. If they had any cunning plans, those were the times to whip them out.
(3) You get zero “legitimacy” from a discussion process that Unionists have absolutely no reason to participate in. Why on Earth would they lend any sort of support or credibility to a venture expressly and openly designed to achieve the thing they most oppose? So you’re talking solely to the people who already agree with you, persuading no-one and getting nowhere.
(4) If BiS know the people capable of getting us from where we are now to a position of being ready to win a de-facto indyref, where the heck are they and what have they been doing for the last 10 years, when the circumstances have been so favourable? Washing their hair? Were they just waiting for all the momentum and impetus of Brexit, COVID, May, Truss and Starmer to die down because they didn’t want to make it too easy?
The snake oil they’re selling isn’t even oil, it’s toilet water. The independence industry wants your money to pay its wages, and that’s the end of their interest in you. If they had anything to offer, they’d have done it by now, but then they’d be out of a job and have to do something a little harder than organising a dinner and a march for a few hundred people once a year.
In football, if you produce nothing for a decade you get the sack. But Scottish politics is a gig for life. When you’re cruising, you don’t rock the boat.
GMK doesn’t know what Swinney and the SNP are going to do next.
So he’s just keeping all ‘options’ on the table … so that when Swinney/SNP start flogging another non-starter he can jump on that bandwagon and keep the lolly rolling in.
England and America will drain Scotland dry of all oil and gas while the SNP sit back and look onward and say Westminster bad.
The worst things in the last 12yrs is the people who actively promote the SNP as the party to make Scotland Independent.
The National, Independence live, Scotgoespop, Dug, Kemp, Riddock and the list goes on of of false Independence supporters. I’m pleased these people have made a good living but when disaster hits they’ll all shut down and move on as did our former FM Nicola Sturgeon.
Even today these so called soft Independence supporters are saying look to Westminster and I say for what? What is it we can do at the next Westminster election we can’t do now.
Even worse than that you have others saying we needs to wait until Holyrood 2031 and I say when all the damaged has been done.
There is no one will convince me The National newspaper has been a force for good or Independence live has furthered the cause of Independence. All of these so called Independence body’s have promoted a SNP agenda.
Scotland is dying, its people are losing their jobs and all the SNP is bothered about is more powers for Scotland. I thought the idea was to return all the powers to Scotland.
People on here can go out and buy the national read the article give your comments but next year and the year after what have you achieved?
Both the Greens & SNP will now argue that they need to convince more people to support Independence without actually doing anything about it.
Swinney will write to the PM and when he says NAW, nothing will happen until we have the usual individuals telling us all again to vote for the SNP and only the SNP in the next Westminster election. Yes the SNP will go into the Westminster election on a Indy ticket but whatch out the trap will be in the detail, but here’s the thing not one soft Indy supporter will mention the SNP duplicity other than Wings.
The new PM made it perfectly clear the union is going to survive for the next ten years and he knows perfectly the SNP is on board with that time frame.
I’ve often heard it said that Gordon MK is really an arm of the SNP.
He’s tried to split the marching fraternity by setting up his own rallies. John Swinney spoke at the last one, though the SNP usually try to ignore AUOB, which is the original marching organisation.
Now he’s trying to usurp the idea of a Citizen’s Convention for himself. A genuine Citizen’s Convention could provide a way forward to independence, but Gordon MK is definitely not the person to lead it. It would have to be much more genuinely convened right across civil society.
As you say, Wings, Gordon’s got a nice little earner for himself and will keep the SNP happy. He’s definitely trying to become the independence movement’s leader. Really? Well, as far as I see it, that is neither his true aim nor his true motivation.
A Citizen’s Convention is a con if run by anyone put in charge by the SNP.
I scribbled 6 paragraphs and tossed the lot with the exception the last line…
“The SNP is a parasite”.
All that preceded it was superfluous.
robertkknight
A parasite is a living thing the SNP is dead.
Your reference to the greatest book on politics ever written reminded me of the greatest political speech ever given. I refer of course to the ‘Pussies, dicks and assholes’ speech in Team America. And no, I’m not joking.
Depressingly accurate demolition of BiS.
Next up AUOB? Funds misappropriated? I do hope not. We need a few marches in England.
What grinds my gears is the amount of gullibility surrounding independence supporters, FFS are they blind can they not see that Kemp and his faux progressive entourage are just GRIFTING on Scotland’s independence
Pensioners for indy sup up his and the other fake indy grifters lies and pish despite repeated warnings that they are being taken for a ride, you only have to look at paypal Pauls site to see the effect these troons encourage, it is an insult to REAL independence supporters when you see the slavering acceptance and adulation they heap on these grifters , as long as these scum can manipulate and fleece the willing dummies WM can relax, they don’t even need to do anything, the GRIFTERS will just keep on grifting and the snp will encourage their lies because the TROUGH depends on immobility
“He doesn’t cite any evidence for that figure, although it does pretty much correspond with what pro-indy parties got in the Holyrood election in May.
There’s little prospect of support for either the SNP or the Greens rocketing in the near future, and no sign of any new party with any traction, so let’s accept that proposition for the sake of argument.”
Hmm, many spokes and nipples to maketh wheels… Why accept that at all if it’s guff, and then run with it? And jist completely ignore the pro Scotland self-governance vote isn’t just the SNP and Greens vote share these days, and that Labour also has significant pro Scotland self-governance support.
“…using a Westminster election rather than a Holyrood one is an epically terrible idea.”
Well using Holyrood “elections” hasn’t exactly been a roaring success for numerous reasons. Twats of political Parties putting themselves before country, the voting system virtually nae cunt understands, let’s not forget the non-bigoted ridiculously open enfranchisement that gives us (not you though) Q Trannymanvan.
But sod it, lets jist do the same shit over and over again and not even consider doing anything differently. Aye, jist keep this up and we’ll all be dead soon enough and not give a fuck anyway.
“You’d struggle to even get heard in a media which would be focused on UK issues.”
Great, they’ll be stretched and fighting on two fronts trying to float opposite lies to both KoE and KoS electorates.
“and you’d only really have one party to vote for – the Scottish Greens are a total irrelevance at Westminster.”
And so have pretty much every other Scottish Party politicians ever voted into Westminster due to the democratic deficit of the KoE having a near ten to one advantage over KoS MPs.
Only need 54 decent serious candidates to sign up for and stand on an end the Union mandate, and get busy promoting the prospect to build support, or jist continue rolling along with yon wheel…
“The findings showed:
60% of voters in England say current politics makes them feel angry
55% say it makes them fearful, and
78% say it makes them frustrated
9% reported feeling hopeful
3% said it made them happy.
…Grievance with the union, and how England is governed, continues to suggest that the English feel their voice is not heard, their culture and identity not given the attention it deserves.”
More here
link to theunionsurvey.com
Thank god you told us the nitty gritty. To be honest I’d rather sell my sole to the devil than read 42 pages of English being unhappy.
Has anyone seen the new BBC advert about how honest it is. I didn’t know wither to lol or report them for lying.
I didn’t know the devil bought soles.
@Dan
Your final paragraph is exactly right.
John Swinney leader of the SNP, just been elected on a huge lie, but his top priority is the cost of living. So now we know what we on Wings already knew Independence is dead for another 5yrs.
Seriously, who pays money to read this garbage? Endlessly promising a better future (we just need to be patient & wait for it) but its the here & now that matters to me. I have absolutely no time for anybody in the SNP – all they are interested in since 2015 are looking after themselves.
Professors Henderson and Wyn Jones have done studies on the “Future of England” over a number of yeaars.
The findings from their study in 2025 and the link to their work are below.
It might be that the English people would like to see the end of the Union and perhaps the people of Scotland en masse and not the political parties could give a nudge or two along the road.
link to theunionsurvey.com
“We have identified and examined a number of individual themes across this body of work including, inter alia:
? The very strong relationship between English national identity and
Euroscepticism. On average, the more a given individual prioritises their sense of English identity the more Eurosceptic their views are likely to be;
? The strong sense of identification among the English in particular with some parts of the UK state’s imperial history and with the peoples of some of its former colonies, namely what used to be known as the ‘White Dominions’. There is no escaping the racialised dimensions of what we have termed the ‘English worldview’;
? The very strong relationship between English national identity and what we have termed devo-anxiety, namely a sense that England is unfairly treated within the domestic union with a sense of grievance focused particularly on Scotland, a country regarded as enjoying an undeserved and unfair level of political influence and resources compared to England;
? A striking degree of ambivalence about the continuing territorial integrity of the UK state among English-identifiers, including a tendency to regard the goal of Brexit as being far more important than maintaining the place of either Scotland or Northern Ireland in the United Kingdom; and finally,
? A strong sense of dissatisfaction with the current arrangements for English governance combined with a sense that the proffered alternative, namely ‘English devolution’ – the buttressing of a regional or meso-level of government within England – is also inappropriate and/or insufficient.Again, this is particularly the case among English-identifiers, although it is also worth stressing that in this case even those in England who identify as British and not English also tend to favour treating England as a single entity rather than as a collection of distinct units.”…
“As these references to ‘scepticism’, ‘grievance’, ‘ambivalence’ and ‘dissatisfaction’ make clear, the overriding sense derived from a study of English attitudes is of discontent, of an English nation that is unhappy, even mutinous. We emphasise English rather than British simply because the overwhelming evidence suggests that, within England, it is those who embrace English identity – whether alone or in combination with a sense of Britishness – who are by far the most discontented. By contrast, those who emphasise their British identity tend to feel rather differently. They are, on average, much less sceptical, aggrieved and/or dissatisfied. (While we will not pursue the point further here, it is worth reminding readers that, outside of England, those attitudes that align with Englishness in England tend to align with British identity in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.In other words, the views associated with Britishness not only vary but contrast across the state.)
Everybody had better wheesht about the £150+ billion per annum.
Extraordinary, though, how even two professors together can contrive to ignore the elephants in the fridge – uncontrolled immigration, and the growing power of Islam.
I guess the pots of English, Welsh and Scottish indigenous need a few more years of slowly coming to the boil.
This is the post-apocalyptic political landscape that was anticipated a few years ago, the inevitable consequence of the SNP crime syndicate’s inevitable unraveling. It’s the waste land.
Maybe we need to spend a few years wondering what’s to be done before we work out what’s to be done.
It’s a great reckoning and we need to make sure we get it right; we ought not to distract or burden ourselves with constructive thoughts at a time like this.
“Maybe we need to spend a few years wondering what’s to be done before we work out what’s to be done”
Since the birth of the United Nations, more than 80 former colonies comprising some 750 million people have gained independence.
Scots don’t have to wonder or wait, the global decolonization template is well established. We just need to better understand our colonial oppression and why independence means decolonization:
link to yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com
I suspect that most Scots are blissfully unaware of their “colonial oppression”, Alf.
Not having to worry about the “colonial oppressor” blowing up their house while they sleep, or slaughtering their kids, or other dead giveaways that they live their lives as the targets of “colonial oppression”.
Ever meet any victims of real “colonial oppression”, Alf? Perhaps you should make the effort.
They must have a huge amount of paper clips to be counted and pencils to be sharpened at the UN. Calvin Cheeseburger the third, the individual who has been designated to look at Bonnie Scotland’s situation, has promised to give the matter his full attention once the more important tasks have been completed.
Alf-Do you honestly think that if, by some miracle, the UN decides that Scotland is a colony and instructs the UK Government to set us free then Westminster will act on that instruction? Or would they simply say to the UN, fuck off and mind your own business?
I will ask, yet again, if Independence is achieved, who do you see forming an honest competent Government? You seem very reluctant to even attempt to answer this question. Why is that?
The biggest trick the colonial oppressor ever pulled was to convince the oppressed that their presence was entirely benevolent in nature.
The English State has perfected that particular trait by even going so far as to substitute “Great Britain” for what is in reality Greater England, thereby disguising its true intentions and enabling it to hide in plain sight.
Only when, for example, jurisdictional boundaries in the North Sea are quietly shifted to England’s advantage, or when an agreement between the Scottish and Irish governments regarding fisheries around Rockall is quietly vetoed by the British Foreign Secretary, or when a legitimate and legal request for a Section 30 Order is simply dismissed out of hand, as you would a child asking for sweets before dinner, or when Judges supposedly practicing Scots Law defer to decisions made by English Courts, does the mask slip.
Scotland isn’t part of Great Britain, it’s part of a Greater England, and the Scots are delivered subtle reminders of that fact from time to time; so subtle that most Scots don’t even notice, but they’re there if you chose to look.
Ignorance is bliss, so the saying goes. A few here would appear to be living their most blissful lives.
We know that denial is part of the colonial condition, so no surprise you twa canna, or rather winna see oppression, which comes in many forms.
Over time oppression in a colony becomes institutionalised and normalised, and is also ‘obscured by assimilation’ (Memmi) as well as the tendency for the colonized to ‘crave dependence’, and especially the ‘more pampered’ elements of colonial society.
The development of an independence movement is of course in response to colonial oppression and represents the solidarity of the oppressed ethnic group – in oor case the Scots.
Colonialism remains ‘force’and ‘geographic violence’ and ‘hateful racism’ and as clear as day it puts an entire people and their nation ‘out of the game’, a people ‘made bystanders’ in their own land as their resources are plundered and their culture obliterated.
Various aspects of colonial oppression affecting Scots are explained here:
link to cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com
Sorry, Alf. If you think the UN should prioritise “being out of the game” over being blown to bits in your bed, then I can’t think of a suitable reply right now.
If oppression comes in many forms, as you say, who can blame half the Scots for thinking that compared with some of the more extreme forms, seeing too much of England’s football on the TV isn’t really that bad.
But it’s a day for hope in every postcode. Any ideas for kick starting a new, popular, democratic, Indy movement with serious people this time? You should be able to rely on the support of near 50% of Scots if they see you’re not raving, obsessive nutjobs. So that means you only need to persuade another 10% of Scots and it’ll be a slam dunk for Indy.
Why not start today, Alf?
“You should be able to rely on the support of near 50% of Scots”.
Point of order… 52.7% of Scots voted Yes in 2014.
The non-Scots in Scotland prevented Scottish Independence.
Professor Baird lacks a time machine so we have to deal with Scotland as it is today.
I don’t think it’s feasible or reasonable to disenfranchise the non-Scots in Scotland. Not if they’re working or paying Scottish taxes. A plausible, positive case for Indy will get much the same traction with non-Scots as Scots. To deny that is to assert that people don’t migrate in pursuit of better lives and more money.
Last but not least, even in 2026, No-voting “true” Scots still vastly outnumber the non-Scots. Persuade enough No-voting “true” Scots to vote Yes and it’s irrelevant how the non-Scots vote.
“I don’t think it’s feasible or reasonable to disenfranchise the non-Scots in Scotland”.
The British Government had no problem disenfranchising non-British/Irish EU citizens in 2016. If they hadn’t, we’d still be in the EU.
What’s sauce for the goose…
Too many Scots, even those who profess themselves to be independence supporters, worry about other peoples to the detriment of their own. Now, while it is commendable to care about your fellow humans, to be immersed in the trials and tribulations of others in far-off places and for whom you can do precisely nothing, is rather pointless while you, yourself, cannot seem to to get anywhere nearer to solving your own problems.
The entire ‘woke’ project, with its myriad arms and off-shoots would appear to have derailed, quite successfully, the Scottish independence movement. Perhaps it is better to feel good in virtuous sublimity than it does to feel that you have something to offer the Scottish independence project? Perhaps there is more chance of effecting an outcome thousands of miles away than there is of effecting one here?
Well, of course there isn’t. That’s not the point, though. Virtue-signalling is easy and waving foreign flags and shouting insults at the police is a good day out for many. Blaming colonialism and white oppression that have nothing whatsoever to do with the present generations – even the older ones – is a surefire way to avoid the reality of our own mess.
“Blaming colonialism and white oppression that have nothing whatsoever to do with the present generations – even the older ones – is a surefire way to avoid the reality of our own mess.”
In a nutshell.
(We should not forget, also, that the endless expression of such grievance, and wokeism in general, has provided a few individuals – otherwise unlikely to prosper on their own merits – a damn good grift)
Nice try, CC.
But if the immigrants have their way (for bloody obviously, it’s them who are behind the historical reparations grift), you’ll be on the hook for your own personal share of the billions to be coughed up.
Just like the rest of us.
@Hatey
I entirely agree with you. However, I’m not sure what this has to do with anything I said; our two posts most assuredly aren’t mutually exclusive or even contradictory.
Who funds the National ? as I doubt its sales revenue, hope its not the missing Yes Scotland funds
Kemp is sitting in a crashed car trying to convince the passengers and eye-witnesses that the car is still road worthy.
Just pondering history, with some links to (what would be) Scotland.
Emperor Hadrian (of wall fame) listed his successor as (ultimately) Marcus Aurelius (of Gladiator fame) yet as he wasn’t old or experienced enough Antoninus Pius was given the “as long as you agree to it” interim role till MA was ready.
Meantime;
Back at the farm here in Scotchland Mrs Murrell effs aff and promptly bursts into tears when dull as dishwater Bible John Swinney agreed to stand in as her uber compliant proxy.
First election past who gets the deputy “in waiting” job?
None other than serial failure in ministerial posts the ever petulant Jenny (lesbian) Gilruth..
Hardly Marcus Aurelius material, nor her serial career sponger (Labour vote happy clapper poster girl (?!..) partner “Kez” (job for life) catastrophic failure Dugdale..
Anyone else see a pattern here?
I think Mrs Murrell thinks we are all too thick to see it, or at least her party is..
Is it that you write your best posts between 2 and 3 am?
But what’s that got to do with Mrs Murrell?
Unless … naw. No fucking way!!!
Just on the side, the collected body of Aurelius’ writings which came to be known as “Meditations” reveals a rather exceptional intellect and is a very good read if you happen to be interested in Stoicism. You can’t really imagine a spongebrain like Sturgeon, Swinney or Useless penning something of that calibre, can you?
I maintain a balanced neutrality on that question by being very careful to not read anything written by Sturgeon, Swinney or Useless.
« STOIC philosophy (influenced by semitic thought) had introduced into Greek thought the idea of the natural freedom and equality of all men. The Roman jurists here discovered the enduring principles that lie at the basis of civil law according to its own nature: civil freedom and equality of persons as such. Many profound principles of law so familiar to us today because of modern civil law came to expression here. » (Herman Dooyeweerd, ‘ROOTS OF WESTERN CULTURE: PAGAN, SECULAR AND CHRISTIAN OPTIONS’, Paideia Press, 2012, Reprint 2024)
———
« GEORGE BUCHANAN (1506-1582, Gaelic-speaker from Killearn, Lochlomondside) brooks large in any survey of neo-Latin literature, in a European as well as merely in a Scottish context. »
« […] Such connections also mark Buchanan out as the single Scottish author situated nearest to the cultural and physical centre of Europe’s gathering STOIC revival. » (p 51)
[…] Nowhere was this connection more far-reaching than in ‘De jure regni apud Scotos dialogus’ (‘Art and Science of Government among the Scots’, 1579). »
« […] The disturbing thrust of this text, essentially that tyrannical kings may legitimately be deposed by their subjects, posed an acute local topicality….Such was the immediate context in which ‘De jure regni’ first burst upon the public scene. »
« Yet underlying its theory of resistance was a notion of popular sovereignty, of an elective Scottish monarchy dependent upon the consent of the political community, which, like the near-simultaneous claims of Hotman in France (the ‘Francogallia’ had in fact appeared in 1573), had very specific roots in ancient Roman philosophy. »
« Indeed, in the form that Buchanan himself employed it, this idea was plucked straight from an impeccably learned classical text, Cicero’s ‘De inventione’. (p 49) »
(David Allan, ‘PHILOSOPHY AND POLITICS IN LATER STUART SCOTLAND: NEO-STOICISM, CULTURE AND IDEOLOGY IN AN AGE OF CRISIS, 1540-1690’, Tuckwell Press, East Linton, Scotland, 2000)
PDF of Herman Dooyeweerd’s book:
‘ROOTS OF WESTERN CULTURE’
link to vcho.co.za
“You can’t really imagine a spongebrain like Sturgeon, Swinney or Useless penning something of that calibre, can you?”
Certainly no Scottish politician or intellectual has been able to develop a theoretical framework explaining Scotland’s oppressive (i.e. ‘Doun-Hauden’) colonial reality, aside from me that is. But all it needs is one person to do so:
link to cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com
Aye, Alf, one person is enough!
Like I’ve said before, if you’ve worked out your theoretical framework, then you now need to derive some practical, plausible, pragmatic policies.
Heck, why not integrate these with Scotland’s ancient concepts of the Sovereign Scot, i.e. the idea that we Scots get a say in what happens.
Last, but by no mean least, remember that a Sovereign Scot isn’t simply a Scot who happens to agree with you.
Alf: I have ever been the contrarian, but I have never considered our situation to be ‘colonial’ in the accepted sense, although I do agree with you that the outcome is very like traditional colonialism.
It has always been my contention that a couple of high end constitutional lawyers aided by a couple of high end politicians, with a couple of social intellectuals added to the mix, could create a working model of a Scotland within the Union that has allowed itself to be bullied and pushed around by England-as-the-UK. Within that Union, Scotland has a number of inalienable rights to exist as a nation within the UK, but has never had the courage to actually question everything from 1707 onwards to prove its case.
Liberation has gone some way to doing that, and well done, but, in the end it is not the UN we need to persuade as much as we need to establish the inalienable rights we have through the Treaty. That we have allowed ourselves to be bullied out of them is our fault, no one else’s. We were robbed, is our perennial cry, instead of: we allowed ourselves to be robbed because it was just too much effort and took too much courage to refuse to be bullied out of our rights.
That requires that we go back to the Treaty itself and pinpoint the exact times and places and policies where England-as-the-UK has overstepped its jurisdiction. They are numerous, and their collective result has been our weakening and alienation from the seat of power, leaving all decisions in the hands of Westminster which has long since ceased to represent us in any positive way. Burnham is a regionalist and an advocate for mayors to rule the cities and regions. Firstly, and crucially, Scotland has never, ever had mayors. Secondly, if he gets his way, Scotland will cease to be a nation but will be relegated to regional status comparable to the likes of Yorkshire or city regions like Manchester.
If we don’t stand up and fight this, our demise will be complete. Once independent, we can return to burghs with provosts, and traditional shires, instead of the huge unwieldy city councils and regions that have been less than successful. France still operates along these lines, with democracy close to the people, as do Denmark and Norway. We are too small a country to have huge city administrations and regions with which local people have nothing in common and for which they feel little allegiance. Junking things that don’t work makes sense, but junking things just because you want to concentrate power in one place is a backwards step. Junking the Union would be both a step back and a step forward at one and the same time.
The SNP/Scottish government has no power they even took it to court to prove it to themselves.
So the new English PM has started his new job outlining the whole of the UK for the next ten years, but in The National it states “John Swinney to push Andy Burnham for powers to hold Scottish independence vote” but he’s just outlined the UK for the next ten years.
I was wonder how does JS push the new PM to give a section 30 order when all he’s offering is Manchester to become the new 10 downing street, that would mean his first act as PM he’d lied if he give Swinney a section 30 and he’s not going to do that.
For fuck sake how long is this bullshit going to go on, before people realize where the problem is and who’s causing it.
Why or why is it taken people so long for them to realize the SNP are thieves, crocks and liars. How many times do we need to be lied to or have our money stolen from us before we act.
Surely the death of the SNP is nearing!!!
Is the national and the people who read it so blind to whats going to happen because its so blatantly obvious the SNP is so corrupt that ordinary people will not vote for them no matter what they say because they just don’t believe them.
I knew Swinney conned everyone before the election because he had to lie in order to make certain he would be FM again in order to protect the SNP from its crimes.
The SNP has made Scotland look like a bunch of kilt wearing morons who have IQ lower than amoeba.
Removing John Swinney and replacing him will not change the constitutional situation in Scotland. We need to replace the SNP and to be honest it isn’t this ATLS who I might add doesn’t want an investigation into the SNP Fuck of Roddy I bet you didn’t even donate.
I honestly believe ISP is the only party in Scotland who has any creditably they are decent and hard working.
All the money spinning conventions will move the dial not one iota..but will help the bank balance of a choice few no doubt. The fact that Douglas Alexander was championing such things before he slid back into power says enough about them for me.
The fact is Change needs a Leader. Not a convention, not a leaflet campaign, a Leader. We don’t have one. Alex Salmond WAS the Indy Movement…Nicola was just the understudy who could never cut it and took the easy road.
Unless a Stephen Flynn can get hold of the SNP, and we all know how hard they have made that, then its GroundJock Day forever more until Labour get another chance at Holyrood and then the baws burst for another 30 years.
Swinney Speaking to the Press Association at Bute House, said he wanted Burnham to devolve energy and economic powers to Scotland, so basically he’d except these powers rather than have a section 30 order.
The UK doesn’t need to defeat the SNP or Scottish Independence the SNP is totally capable themselves at doing it for the UK.
The SNP say we want Independence the day before the election and as soon as an election is over they want anything other than Independence and yet why are we fighting amongst ourselves when we should be united against the SNP and their lies?
John Swinney stated quite clearly we do not want Independence give us more powers and we’re happy to stay in the UK, how plain can this man be he doesn’t want Independence.
Nicola Sturgeon in October 2014 stated quite clearly when asked “when will we have another referendum” her reply was we had one we lost it wouldn’t be fair on the other side if we had another, there’s a pattern but why aren’t people getting it.
The SNP doesn’t want Independence John Swinney has made this perfectly clear, so why is the likes of The National, Gingerddug, scotgoespop, Riddock, shuting from the rooftops what about Independence the SNP was election again on delivery a referendum and if a section 30 order isn’t delivered then what? But these same people including KEMP will keep saying nothing but will continue to feed you a lie that the SNP is the only vehicle to achieve Independence when the leadership are being crystal clear Independence is never an option.
Do any of these polls restrict their canvassing to the only people who should be allowed to have a say in Scotland’s sovereignty?
Or do they include English ex-pats and other foreign nationals? ie people who should have absolutely no say in the matter.
Come on Rev Stu. You’re missing the obvious.
Kemp’s “silver bullet” aversion is a veiled smear and attack on SALVO for attempting to change the Constitutional paradigm in Scotland, and subvert Westminster’s usurpation of sovereignty with Scotland’s home grown Claim of Right.
SALVO isn’t promoting a shortcut towards anything, but objectively trying to secure a formal and recognised affirmation that the people are sovereign in Scotland, NOT Westminster. At present, we, the Scottish people, are not in the driving seat, but in constitutional terms, we absolutely should be.
Scotlands ultimate expression of self determination and Independence WILL require to demonstrate a settled democratic majority at some stage, but we may yet see a short, sharp and vicious battle to determine who manages the vote and voters franchise.
Hopefully that will neither be Westminster, nor Kemp and his feckless ilk in the SNP, but instead a constitutional assembly, (the modern equivalent of an emergency Convention of the Estates), that is yet to emerge from a Constitutional Convention that is yet to be held.
BURNHAM became Brit PM by a system that is not directly accountable to the people, it was a internal westminster party shoo in.
As British MPs are not deputies, that is representatives of the people but accountable only to parliament and its notion of sovereignty, there was no need for a general election.
Burnham is supposedly in favour of «people power».
Boulangerie Burnham, fresh in the morning stale by lunchtime?
“As British MPs are not deputies, that is representatives of the people but accountable only to parliament and its notion of sovereignty….
Simply not true.
MPs are elected by the people of a local constituency to represent that constituency in Westminster. That constituency can remove the MP – Parliament cannot. The MP is therefore accountable to his/her etc constituency.
The reason there was/is no need for a general election is that we do not have a system of presidential election. The party/parties that form the Government elect the PM from among their MPs. Currently. that is the Labour Party.
in the UK parliament is sovereign not the people. there is no concept of popular sovereignty within the Anglo-British (unwritten) constitution.
once elected WMPs may do as they please including switch party allegiance without recourse to an election in their constituency.
the people are marginal in this system, except for the occasional box ticking when required.
the upcoming rotten borough farce in Clacton is very much part of this exclusive set up.
Anthony Wedgewood Benn (Lord Standfield) was according to an informant much exercised by the imbalance in the UK system where power is always devolved top down, rarely the reverse. Monarchic priveleges endure to prevent change.
Burnham has a heavy task ahead.
But you said they are accountable only to parliament.
This is not true.
If they break rules seriously enough then it is their constituents who decide if there is a local election, not parliament, and if they decide so, it is the constituents who then vote. If they end up changing sides in the House then it is the constituents who get the chance at the election if they stay as their MP.
It is clear that it is to their constituents who they are accountable to and who have the power to both elect and get rid of them as an MP. That is not remotely ‘marginal’ or tick box.
Your objections to the wider system are ideological, fine, but your statements about the accountability of MPs are wrong.
factchecker hoho.
The business known as BUSINESS FOR SCOTLAND LIMITED submitted documents to Companies House on 28th October 2025.
This company is registered as a Company Limited by Guarantee.
Somehow, it has declared a person with significant control. The same person became a Director on the same day.
A question is, how did the new Director obtain this ‘significant control’ if there are no shares ?
Notification on 28th October 2025
of Graham Livingstone Macqueen as a person with significant control on 23 October 2025
Appointment of Mr Graham Livingstone Macqueen as a director on 23 October 2025
It says that the person is for Company Number: SC430989
MR GRAHAM LIVINGSTONE MACQUEEN
MACQUEEN BROS. LTD
GLENGALLAN ROAD
OBAN
SCOTLAND
PA34 4HG
link to find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk
I remember Gordon, he used to be quite active BTL here at one point in time (2014-16??). Maybe getting himself established, dunno really.
Done well for himself in terms of perpetual sinecure, like many others in Scottish political life.
Is it plausible if asked by the police, I had a whole in my purse and the I lost the 1.5million and I’ve only just notice but thank you for bringing it to my attention. Or I had an old sofa and I used to lose money down the sides all the time but I’ve only just got rid of it because it was starting to smell. Or I had a friend called peter who held all my money he was as reliable and a chocolate fire guard I haven’t seen him lately you don’t happen to know where he is, he did write me I OWE YOU with a posh pen.
“A communist slop of low caliber, low IQ, feckless, unprincipled clowns.” The new Labour administration. Being a government take 2.
If you thought Mr Sausages was bad!
Ach, Mark, you’re sore cos the hope hasn’t reached your postcode yet.
Give it a day or two.
And it never will. The Hope King? I thought Andy Burnham was the Oasis drummer.
If nothing else, Mark, how can you NOT celebrate the return of the Ginger Growler?
Back to the Housing role too.
Count Binface will be bricking it. He promises to build at least one affordable house if elected. Now he has some serious competition. She might build two.
Ach, we all know that you were longing for her to rise to the top of the party and, thus, your disappointment is palpable (but don’t you be palpating anything else, please.) Maybe next time eh? 🙂
“longing for her to rise to the top”
Havers, MH.
Gingers are over-represented in Scotland and generally under-represented everywhere.
I take no more than a casual, passing, collegiate interest in Ms Raynor, (a member of this much maligned minority), and her career, seeing her rise to the top as no more than the long overdue correction of a historic prejudice.
As for her Ginger Growler, it was she herself who first brought it (or perhaps her) to the attention of the public eye.
Ms Raynor is to be commended. In a House of Commons perhaps hoaching (like the wee, pretendy parly) with women who don’t know what a woman is, she must have made the effort to get the books out, study the diagrams, and deduce the identify of her own equipment for herself. Perhaps she got some help – we don’t know – but it doesn’t matter.
However she cracked it, her public statements deserve plaudits, not criticism.
I’m just pleased to see that King Burn (ham) has recognised her efforts and yes, her outspoken courage, too.
And you should be pleased too, MH.
GIRLGUIDING STAFF STILL FEAR VOICING GENDER-CRITICAL VIEWS
Girlguiding staff are still afraid to air gender critical views due to the movement’s overtly pro-trans leadership.
Speaking to The Mail on Sunday, a whistleblower said that opposition to transgender ideology is “simply not welcome” within Guiding due to vocal trans activists.
In 2017, Girlguiding shocked parents when it claimed that it would be unlawful to tell parents if their daughter is being looked after by a male leader identifying as a woman on overnight excursions. Following last year’s Supreme Court ruling on biological sex, it was forced to change its policy.
WHISTLEBLOWERS
One whistleblower, who has now left the organisation, described an incident in which a junior manager told staff critical of Girlguiding’s trans-inclusive stance: “You’ve all got to get on board or get out.”
She said she “didn’t feel psychologically safe in that environment,” adding: “I had never experienced any organisation like it before.”
Another, who is still employed, noted: “It is essentially taken as a given within Girlguiding that trans women are women, so any discussion of biological reality is avoided. You simply wouldn’t test the water, as there would be no coming back from it.”
She explained that adopting a trans-inclusive position, “is what many young people have been taught”. The whistleblower reflected that girls are increasingly identifying as non-binary or trans, “and organisations feel under pressure to reflect that”.
ACTIVIST INFLUENCE
The newspaper highlighted the influence of figures such as ‘Paula’ Southin, a 58-year-old man who identifies as a woman who posts highly sexualised content online.
Southin used to be a Girlguiding leader, but resigned when the organisation announced it would comply with the law on single-sex spaces. He participated in a recent consultation on how Girlguiding could continue to support gender-confused boys and men.
Southin said that Girlguiding’s decision to exclude men and boys who identify as female “sickens me to the core”, and has campaigned against the Supreme Court ruling.
Helen Joyce, from women’s rights charity Sex Matters, commented: “Any honest consideration of whether Paula Southin is fit to be in a position of authority within Girlguiding, given these provocative materials, has to start from the fact Southin is male, not female. Those responsible for girls’ safety must not be hampered by political correctness”.
(The Christian Institute, 20 July 2026)
link to christian.org.uk
They can always be found around children. It’s clear now that Trans is a shield for abusing children. Fully supported by the state.
TRANS ACTIVISTS LAUNCH ‘HOW-TO’ INTIMIDATION GUIDE
A group promoting violence against gender-critical campaigners has produced a guide to intimidation.
Bash Back’s “effective direct action” guide encourages people to launch attacks against the offices of MPs, organisations, or properties of public figures who oppose transgender ideology in an attempt to cow them into silence.
The group, which states it is “focused on total transgender liberation”, has claimed responsibility for a string of recent attacks, including on the former Health Secretary’s office, a women’s rights conference, and the office of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
‘DIRECT HARM’
The militant group’s guide instructs people to cause “direct harm” with “lasting effect”.
Activists are encouraged to select a “target” and “hit them repeatedly until they desist from their activities”. It also gives tips on how to get rid of evidence from the criminal damage.
Its manifesto says: “All of our targets have blood on their hands. We refuse to let them wash it off in peace. Welcome to a new era of trans rage.”
“So what do we do when reason fails and the queer bashing continues unending? We Bash Back.”
BULLY AND HARASS
The Free Speech Union (FSU) is specifically mentioned as a ‘good’ target, and has previously been subject to a cyber attack by the group.
FSU General Secretary Lord Young of Acton said Bash Back’s lawbreaking was an “attempt to bully, harass and intimidate those they disagree with”.
“No one is preventing Bash Back from exercising their right to free speech, but everything they do is intended to deprive their opponents of that right.”
INTIMIDATING MPs
Commenting on the guide, Rosie Duffield MP observed: “Sometimes it gets to you. Not most days, or even most years actually. But just sometimes, you realise that it absolutely shouldn’t ever have become just a ‘normal’ part of going to work and paying the bills.”
She continued: “while I am not allowed to walk to work alone, most Labour MPs think that the ‘rights’ of a few huge angry men who wish to occupy our spaces, and yell ‘punch a terf’ outside my workplace, are more important than women like me.”
Women’s rights group For Women Scotland wrote on X: “In a week that a former MP was murdered, would-be terrorist group, Bash Back, posts a ‘how to’ guide for attacking MPs like Wes Streeting. Surely @TerrorismPolice @ukhomeoffice need to crack down?”
(The Christian Institute, 21 July 2026)
link to christian.org.uk
“Were they just waiting for all the momentum and impetus of Brexit, COVID, May, Truss and Starmer to die down because they didn’t want to make it too easy?”
Perhaps this subtle rephrase more accurately describe the SNP leadership since 2014?
“They were just waiting for all the momentum and impetus of Brexit, COVID, May, Truss and Starmer to die down because they didn’t want to make it.”
CD
It seems depressingly so..
At Westminster they revelled in 3rd place to get airtime and arguably influence matters down there just as the Scotchland Office does here, no focus on the Westminster route to Indy (sorry Rev but I disagree with you on that one) while the Scotch “Parliament” bought votes with goodies ultimately to enable the policies of the deviants they are held in thrall by to be passed under the counter..
God save us!
Not you though Tricky Nicky, seventh level of hell beckons for you!
Meanwhile Pinocchio Sarwar has been elevated to the House of Lords where he will be in charge of dental hygiene and organising school runs.
Much dancing in the streets of Grangemouth.
Handy place, the House of Lords.
If some wrecking cants were to abolish it, somebody else would have to reconstitute it (under some other name) almost immediately.
It didn’t take Barnum long to send in the clowns.
And yet the clowns are winning!!
Clowns spread happiness and laughter to all postcodes.
Perhaps hope as well.
The colonial-UK circus act re-opens with a new ringmaster: Scotland run by clowns at Westminster and its Holyrood department; colonized Scots aye the victims and punchline, yet those who ‘crave dependence’ applaud for mair.
Looks like someone has taken Wings motto
” I will kill you with hammers” to a an all new low. Left wing violence has taken the world to a very dark place. When they stop screaming they start killing. Politics is DEAD.
I’ve been thinking about ‘absent colonisers’.
India, Kenya, Nigeria, Egypt and more are all former colonies of the British Empire and yet are still influenced by their experiences with colonialism.
The legacy of British colonialism has shaped the governance structures, political identities, and cultural identities of these nations.
Even now the legacy of imperialism has influenced the development of international law, with many international laws reflecting the interests and values of former colonial powers.
Could it be that former colonies of the British Empire have been fundamentally changed by their experience and will never fully recover their cultures and identities?
The coloniser of the Scots may or may not one day be evicted from Scotland, but even if it is I think it might take many generations of Scots to fully recover their culture, traditions and identity… if they ever do.
Three hundred years of colonialism in Scotland might take another three hundred years and more to fully eradicate their coloniser’s influence.
And in that context a liberated Scotland returning to ‘full health’ after having the ‘shit kicked out of it’ might take a very, very long time.
My feeling is that Scotland has been fundamentally changed by its imperial subjugation and might never return – intellectually, culturally, and spiritually – to what it once was.
Mibbes aye; mibbes naw.
Wow. That’s a first…………. Northclown has been thinking!
Did it hurt?
If it’s gonna take 300 years to “decolonise”, we’re beyond fortunate to have a thousand year old Pict on our side.
So fortunate that I suggest we wheesht about it. We dare not risk the knowledge that Northy plans posting about colonialism every day for the next 300 years falling into the wrong hands.
A place can never ‘recover’ from colonialism, and situations also vary a lot, as is how it is viewed; there is no blanket understanding
Scotland has been itself a chief coloniser as part of the British Empire and the relationship between England and Scotland is not parallelled by the British Raj, for example. The relationship is more like cultural imperialism as a result of massive population and power imbalances down the years, as well as being made complex by very close geographical and familial ties.
Modern England itself is the result of numerous waves of colonisers, first those that become the original English (Anglo-Saxons) then those that changed the face of that forever (Normans). The Norman invasion caused English medieval writers to bemoan the loss, forever, of the ‘true-born Englishman’. Now, those invaders are as true English as anyone (and the Vikings, Jutes, Hugenots etc).
I don’t have an answer Northcode but history is clear – you cannot expunge a society of people in the way imagine, unless you want to give Nazism a go, and that failed anyway. And the solution to preserving a culture is not to focus on getting rid of another anyway as this seems a backward, negative way of thinking from the start.
I look at it this way: be strong in the culture you love and want to continue – the Pictish roots, the core of Scottishness, however you want to characterise it. Fight (metaphorically) for its continuation if need be, do not be ashamed of it, celebrate and above all, live it with joy and enthusiasm, dumping cringe into the dustbin of history (English people don’t understand the Scottish cringe you know, they mostly admire Scots’ way of being, can even be jealous). I might even add make the culture you love open to others too as that is a way for it to be an embraced living culture, rather than a museum: outsiders change culture for ill and good, but change is inevitable so better to try and ensure those changes are good ones.
There’s a lot of interesting history in your comment, but I think you might be mixing together several different concepts that don’t quite map onto each other.
One effect of your argument is that it shifts the discussion from structural power to cultural feeling.
With that in mind, here are a few clarifications.
Saying a place can “never recover” from colonialism is a very broad claim.
Some societies do recover politically, some culturally, some economically, and some not at all.
It depends on the form of colonialism, the duration, the power imbalance, and the structures that remain afterwards.
So recovery isn’t impossible… it’s just uneven, and it requires some clarity on what is being recovered from.
Comparing Scotland’s situation only to the British Raj sets up a false benchmark.
Colonialism isn’t a single template. It ranges from violent occupation to cultural suppression to political subordination.
Scotland doesn’t need to resemble India to have experienced forms of internal colonialism… the relevant comparison is the specific power relationship, not the severity of the Raj.
The history of England being shaped by earlier migrations (Anglo-Saxons, Normans, Vikings, etc.) isn’t really analogous to modern colonial structures.
Those were pre-modern conquests that produced entirely new polities.
They don’t map neatly onto the constitutional relationship between Scotland and Westminster today, which is a contemporary political arrangement with ongoing legal and cultural consequences.
Scotland’s participation in the British Empire doesn’t erase the internal power dynamics between Scotland and England.
Scotland participated in empire as part of a larger imperial structure, not as an independent sovereign actor.
A nation can be both a participant in external empire and simultaneously subject to internal domination.
Those two things aren’t mutually exclusive.
Invoking Nazism isn’t necessary here.
No one is talking about “expunging” people.
The discussion is about structural power, cultural continuity, and political agency… not ethnic removal.
It’s possible to analyse colonial dynamics without implying that any attempt to address them is extremist.
The fact that Scottish elites benefited from empire doesn’t mean Scottish national institutions, language, or political autonomy weren’t constrained.
Finally, celebrating one’s culture is valuable, but cultural confidence doesn’t substitute for political clarity.
A culture can be joyful, open, and evolving while still recognising when its institutions, language, or autonomy have been historically constrained.
Protecting a culture doesn’t require hostility toward others, but it does require an honest understanding of the structures that shape it.
In short:
It’s possible to acknowledge Scotland’s role in empire, England’s complex history, and the value of cultural openness while still recognising that power imbalances exist and have consequences.
Those things aren’t mutually exclusive.
An interesting view on the intellectual paucity of the colonisation narrative in western liberal democracies from the estimable Simon Sebag Montefiore:
There is great confusion about what Decolonization and indeed Colonization means.
The fact is: it means very little except ‘a culture or mindset you dont like.’ For whatever reason. And that usually means: the West. Since the West decolonized long ago, it really means the Western liberal democracies. It is a smart criticism because it means nothing, and hence it is hard to disagree with nothing and furthermore since the West itself is embroiled in a mix of moral fuddlement, political paralysis and cultural self hatred, you can be sure that Western leaders are very embarrassed by the very use of the word and many in the West will actually agree – even though they are not sure what they are agreeing with.
It is a very useful rhetorical tool because Westerns are always going to be worried to answer in any meaningful way other than guilt and shame; and it is a growing industry – perfect for endless conferences. Like this one.
The reality of empires and colonies is something else entirely.
In early modern times, the Ottoman Turks conquered colonized enslaved exploited murdered and forcefully converted millions and ruled a vast tricontinental empire for four centuries; the Western powers led by Spain Portugal France and Britain later joined by Italy Germany Belgium also conquered colonized enslaved exploited murdered and converted using missionaries huge empires across the continents.
The Iberians lost much of their empires first; the Ottoman sultanate-caliphate started to decolonize with the Greek war of independence in 1820s and totally disintegrated in 1918; the British and French decolonized between 1940s and Sixties.
You could argue the Americans and Soviets comported themselves like anti-imperial imperialists during the Cold War and after – and indeed today’s America toys at times with neo-tsarist expansionism – Greenland etc.
Thats it – noone in the Legacy Powers Britain or France etc seems keen on colonizing anything now; there are almost no colonizations left to decolonize – though many love to denounce their own country’s past which is for some a most enjoyable enriching and virtuous pastime.
But in real life, empire and colonization are happening, often perpetrated by the very proponents of antiWest rhetoric. Russi@ is attempting to retake its limotrophic empire in Ukr@ine right now the old -fashioned way: by conquest and killing; a phalanx of Middle East neo-imperial powers are engaged in tournaments of power in failing states like Somalia, Libya and benighted Sudan; Iran established an informal empire across Iraq Syria Lebanon Yemen in its Six Armies strategy – its final destiny as yet undecided on the battlefield of the Third Gulf War; and Turkish leaders now regularly and openly declare their wish to reassert Ottomanist power in former Ottoman vilayets Syria Lebanon Israel, and former Ottoman cities Damascus Beirut Jerusalem….
So imperialism and colonialism just mean: other people, but never you.
link to x.com
Just needs a ‘like’ really as I cannot disagree with much.
Just one thing, ‘recover’ is a bit of a loaded word really. I would say a place is always changed, permanently, at least a bit, by colonialism, even if the colonial power is long gone.
“No one is talking about expunging people”
Oh yes they are. Just about weekly. You ignore it, Northy, because you believe you and the culprits are of the same tribe.
It’s precisely the same “in group” dispensation that runs through the SNP. The two-tier approach that “permits” the tribe to obey different rules to the rest.
I see it as the fundamental truth about Scotland that explains far more than your “colonialism” ever will. You’ll disagree because I’m not in your tribe.
Turnover in 2024 was £300000. Not bad for a dormant company. ( see Companies House ). And if they want to say it was a ghoat of Business For Scotland they showed just over a grand cash at hand for same accounting period. ( see companies house again ) . Looks like theres been a lot if weaving going on. I wonder if they weave astroturf