The Zone Of Interesting
A couple of days ago a reader asked on Twitter if we thought Reform, who continue to lead in UK opinion polling, might allow a second indyref if they actually got into power, as it would for obvious reasons be hypocritical of them not to. And to be frank we dismissed it out of hand, because Nigel Farage is the ultimate British nationalist, he’d have no obvious political reason to, and since when did hypocrisy bother politicians?
And then last night a longstanding Courier/Press & Journal reporter (who despite that is an all-round decent chap and indy supporter) tweeted this:
And actually, on further thought, that’s not the craziest idea at all.
On Wednesday, after our reader put the suggestion, we’d actually gone and had a look on the Reform Scotland website, and were mildly surprised to find no mention of a policy on the independence question at all where we’d expected a flat-out “You had your referendum in 2014” dismissal. And in the process we’d noticed that a number of Reform candidates had already identified themselves as Yes voters.
We’ve noted several times that Reform’s striking showing in Scottish polls is despite the party having almost no presence north of the border and showing very little interest in Scottish affairs. And in fact it would probably be more accurate to describe Farage as an English nationalist than a British one. So what if he was actually more than happy to see the back of the whinging Jocks and their lefty voting habits for good?
Obviously, it’s hitherto been widely and reasonably assumed that Reform’s polling in Scotland has been cannibalised from the Unionist parties, and suddenly adopting a pro-indyref2 stance would risk torpedoing that support overnight. But we very much doubt Reform are all that fussed about footling around at Holyrood, so that’s probably not much of a gamble for them if it might mean a way to ensure a permanent cut of 40-plus SNP/Labour MPs at Westminster.
When you then remember that more than a third of SNP voters voted Leave in 2016, suddenly Reform could find itself pushing at an open door with a lot of very disgruntled and disillusioned people (their favourite kind) behind it. They might not wholly trust Farage to keep that promise, but the SNP are promising them nothing and they know the SNP deliver nothing, so what do they have to lose?
The move at least makes credible political sense for Farage, which is more than the SNP’s insistence that Westminster will suddenly cave if we give them five more years to whine impotently about it every few months before cashing their expenses cheques again does. He has no very detectable love for Scotland, and the last time he showed up there he got embarrassingly chased out by a mob of shouty student wokies calling him “transphobic”. We doubt he’d shed many tears over it.
We have no idea if Neil Drysdale’s source will turn out to be right, although last night we were told to expect an official announcement next week. And we certainly agree with Neil’s assessment – if it does happen, it’ll set the cat amongst the Scottish political pigeons in a way nobody expected. The SNP’s bowels will run with ice at the prospect.
(They’d have various options for brazening it out, of course, but they currently have all the credibility and integrity of some starving weasels in a butcher-shop’s sewage outlet so who’d be listening to their lines? All Reform would have to say would be “If you vote SNP we’ll have to assume you don’t actually want independence at all, so deal’s off.”)
The Scottish electorate is thoroughly and brutally scunnered with all its political parties and has been for some time. The 50% of them who want independence will suddenly be getting offered a viable, if slightly unpalatable, route to achieving it, something that absolutely no halfway-sane person thinks currently exists.
And heaven knows, even if they turned out to be lying they couldn’t realistically make a bigger pig’s arse of governing at Holyrood than than SNP have for the last 10 years or Scottish Labour would in the currently wildly unlikely event of Anas Sarwar taking over in Bute House.
It’s a real Hail Mary play, and we’ll be honest with you, viewers, we really really really hope it’s true, because not only would it revive hope for independence, at the barest minimum it’d suddenly make Scottish politics interesting again, and that’s something we haven’t even been daring to dream of for the last few years.
vote reform for english independence, eh
definite vote winner
Particularly in England. Truth be told, the English public has come to thoroughly despise the corrupt and rancid SNP, at Holyrood and Westminster alike, and Scotland’s reputation has sunk with it. With potholes everywhere, the Barnett Formula makes people’s blood boil. If you held a referendum on Scottish independence in England, the Indie campaign would win it. That’s a big part of Reform’s appeal: the people of England, and even more, Wales, are as sick of the Yookay Colonial Government as Scots are. This is a great chance for Reform to break the rotten old constraints of establishment politics and pick up serious numbers of extra votes in Scotland, Wales and England at the same time. The Ulster Unionist parties won’t like it, but they’ve only about seven MPs anyway and nobody in Great Britain wants Northern Ireland anyway.
Farage is an inordinate liar and I struggle to believe a word that comes out of his mouth; but..”even if they turned out to be lying they couldn’t realistically make a bigger pig’s arse of governing at Holyrood than than SNP have for the last 10 years or Scottish Labour would”
If reform end up in a coalition with the tories it will be the end of the NHS.
Oh and I wonder if the difference would be noticable or indeed worse?
I’d vote for that! After all, I’ve been a firm supported of Independence for rUK for decades.
Nice to get back into the site without a security download by the way!
For sure there’s a lot of things Farage could offer to woo us here, and our 57 seats.
Imagine, votes in Scotland actually swinging a GE, and then never having to vote in a uk GE ever again.
I need an expanded bingo card.
Well, well, well. I certainly didn’t see “vote Reform for Indyref2” coming. Reform, a great bunch of lads.
Sunak had zero interest in troublesome North Britain either … until he became Chancer and then Prime Minion when he opened the books and so the gaping Black Hole in HM Treasury that would result in a Scotlandless UK.
Why would it be any different if Farage assumed the reigns of office?
Aye Duncanio.
Even if in this hypothetical scenario that the Reform liggers did get a substantial General Election vote and become the largest party, the likelyhood is that they would ‘form a government’ by joining up with the other ultra-right lunatics in the English Tory party.
Whoever was leader would almost certainly then ‘do a Nick Clegg’
and say that their coallition partners were an avowadly unionist party so in the current circumstances it would be impossible to keep that commitment to a Scotch vote (and give up the Golden Goose of massive income from Scottish territorial wealth).
Farage and Reform, pushed and somewhat funded by the US and seemingly Musk, will promise anything to get elected, just like this SNP and Unionist parties.
We could always say that we support Reform, then vote for a party/person that supports Independence?
If Reform offer a firm commitment in their UK General Election manifesto to to indyref2 by, say 2030, they will do well in 2028/29.
If they include that for Scottish Parliament 2026, they will be kingmakers in Scotland.
What is this strange feeling? Hope?
Oh my
It makes no sense if you perceive Reform to be only an English nationalist party – which it is, of course, although it appears to be ‘British’.
Recently, England-as-the-UK has been divesting Scotland of much of that which is left of its industrial base, of its energy sectors, etc. and ensuring that England has all the touch-down points for cables and pipelines.
I have always been of the impression that England-as-the-UK would divest itself of us eventually – well, the husk of us – or else make it impossible for us not to leave the Union in the end. Northern Ireland is in the same position: they don’t actually want it as an albatross round their necks.
On the other hand, its could be a cynical ploy to get the votes of the disaffected, the Unionists and the English diaspora up here, to reinforce the Union. Balancing the brutal regime that would ensue if they are lying, against the utter despair we are all suffering now is a difficult one to call.
I agree Reform do not care about Scotland, but once in power and they see the numbers they will; care very much about the revenue generatd in Scotland and would block a ref.
The thing is, John, just what state will the Scottish books be in, in a short time? Everything is by-passing us, we have no control over our own resources and still wouldn’t have with independence. By the time Reform gets around to looking at the books, we might well be in the red by a large margin. Had we kept control of our renewables, we might have had a chance to regroup, but I think we are systematically being resource and asset stripped quite deliberately.
It might be to ensure that we don’t go: the water’s still ripe for the plucking, after all. Reform are English nationalists. They believe they can go it alone and the mood in some parts of England just now is conducive to that attitude.
What, like they cared about the economic impact of Brexit?
Greece never had any “Brexit” and look at what the EU did to them re destroying them with massive debt etc for daring to try and do things different outside of the EU Globalist Banker “rules.
The EU is the Globalist mafias agenda to create one of their three world Superstates with NO countries as George Orwell was warning about in his 1984 with the three world superstates in that at constant FAKE war to keep the people in fear and loyal to the party/Superstate. Is Trump fighting against all of this or is he a puppet to create the American Superstate part of this with his interest in Greenland, Canada and Mexico with South America in his sights later – who knows!
Every country is going through the same SCAM economic take down just now including those in the EU by these mafia globalists who control all of our countries via THEIR corrupt SCAM banking and financial system and they are destroying our economies via the Global Warming/Climate Change SCAM, DEBT and Cost of Living SCAM etc that EVERY single puppet political party is involved in.
Every single country should be INDEPENDENT with NO need to be part of any EU/Superstate and they would be BOOMING with NO poverty etc if they were doing what they should be doing printing their own debt and interest FREE money and thus NO inflation and until everyone realises this and stops listening to corrupt puppet politicians and mainstream media they will NEVER be independent and things are going to be much worst than the Social Credit System they brought in in China with 15 minute cities NO travelling anywhere except your local area), digital ID, NO cars at all (why do you think that they are destroying the car manufacturers with the EV SCAM) and continual scamdemics with forced many jabs per year (population reduction to under 500 million worldwide and keep it there) etc etc as per UN Agenda 21/UN Agenda 2030.
People keep talking about economics and they are clueless about the SCAM banking and financial and political systems which keep on spouting about “growth” not realizing that when they talk about “growing the economy” it is to keep ahead of the totally FAKE debt that the Private Banks created out of thin air and our corrupt puppet governments “borrowed” plus massive interest and the people just go along with all of this not questioning why a truly independent government would just simply print their own debt and interest and inflation FREE money as per the Greenback Dollar/Bradbury Pound. People used to travel and trade without any passports etc before these globalist mafias brought these in to restrict and rob the people blind with taxes, import/export etc taxes etc that do NOT go to the benefit of the people of the countries but go to these globalist mafias to fund their FAKE terrorism, FAKE Global Warming/Climate Change, wars etc as part of their New World Order, One World Communist Government in the UN agenda.
Anyone arguing about staying part of the EU or the UK or Scottish Parliament/Government is arguing to be part of all of that because they are all working to that agenda.
No. Not this. Not in a million years would Reform ‘give us’ any independence referendum. Are we stupid? And, ‘2028/9’ – sure they will. ‘Good old Nige’.
Political parties promise stuff, all of the time, with zero intention of delivering – that’s precisely what they do. Farage is just another greedy English politician who wants all the revenue and gifts Scotland clearly has an abundance of. To Farage and every single one of them, Scotland is the gift that keeps being plundered. Christ, we have home-grown Scots that aren’t to be trusted – our own people – so why would we opt for another poor, historically thieving and warmongering foreigner to do that to us ad nauseam? What? I mean, does this English politician need votes or something??
Farage? Dear God! As if!
Let’s try Salvo for a change, they’ve earned the chance of the promotion, and projection, of the popular and passionate People to offer what no one else – apart from Salmond – is willing to offer. Go-Salvo!
Totally agree.
There must also be lots of independence supporters who really are nationalists. They value the ancestral uniqueness of their people and land and don’t want it handed over to endless mobs of Diversity. The PSN (Pseudo-Scottish Nationalists) have embraced open-borders immigration as a staple element of their worldview. Indeed, this is now itself the most powerful argument against independence. If independence was achieved, and the borders were opened up to the Third World, Scotland would be overrun in a generation. Look at what is happening in Ireland. There is a market for a genuinely nationalist version of nationalism. Hard to believe.
Open-borders do-gooderism was another of the harms Sturgeon inflicted on Scottish nationalism. The fact that it was the votes of immigrants that prevented independence being achieved in the referendum seemed not to bother her in the least.
Politics in Scotland became far more interesting on Wednesday, when we got the news that Liberation Scotland has taken the first step to gain international recognition of Scotlands status as a colony of England, with the prospect within weeks of registering with the UN for de-colonisation. We now have an international advocate to help represent us at the UN committee level. I find that rather more immediately interesting, even hopeful, than any potential fixed referendum being granted by Reform sometime in the future. And while Farage’s gang are openly english blood and soil nationalists, they would take one look at the books on becoming government, and would hurriedly close them again and refuse any chance for Scotland to regain indy. They would never willingly give up the vast amounts of assets they are stripping from Scotland, and they would speed up the britishisation project even further. Given that this planned extinction of Scotland is so far advanced already, it may well have been declared a success long before any rigged referendum can be launched.
Doubtless you and some others do think this is big news, but what evidence is there that it is in fact significant or has any appreciable support? You can’t have it both ways, pontificating about English blood and soil nationalists then airily regurgitating nativist bullshit about the desperately weak post-colonial theory conspiracy theorising that Scotland is the subject of a britishisation project (sic).
Liberation Scotland and Salvo have neither the required broad popular support from Scottish voters nor the intellectual hinterland to justify their assertion that our self determination should be regarded as a case of decolonisation.
When their project fails, those who have been taken in by the snake oils sales pitch are going to need some other band wagon to jump on.
Five will get you ten that a good number suddenly become ardent Reform supporters.
Of course they have support. Why are you peddling your unionist shite on this site, and why is the reverend allowing it? Away and fuck yourself
I tend to agree, FionaN. Farage is/was a London financial market trader so knows exactly how necessary Scotland’s oil etc are to the UK.
On the other hand, would his colleagues go along with this given their electorate’s views?
“Liberation Scotland has taken the first step to gain international recognition of Scotlands status as a colony of England”
Cool.
And the timeline for the final step is … ?
And the final decision, i.e. are we or are we not a colony, will be handed down when … ?
Or is there an appeals process?
And what will that all mean anyway … ?
Won’t we still need to have a democratic decision, a vote in other words, assuming we are officially a colony, and not as it says on the tin – a unified state, as to whether we Scots wish to undo this colonial arrangement?
And just who will be entitled to a vote? Residents? Scottish taxpayers? World citizens with surnames starting “Mac” or “Mc”?
You’re surely not making the “standard” assumption that the only votes/voters who matter and are Sovereign are the ones you agree with. Or are you?
Seems to me, FionaN, you just want the result, without being in any way prepared to put in the work. Indy for free. With one bound, Scotland escaped forever.
That kind of thing.
“They would never willingly give up the vast amounts of assets they are stripping from Scotland”
Ahhh. I see you have already conceded defeat anyway.
Is this a pipe dream? Well Farage is clear favourite with the bookies to be the next Prime Minister in 2029. Farage has handed control to Reform members and the Public Limited aspect has gone. Membership currently sitting over 200000. So a pro rata membership for Scotland is a reasonable assumption. Polling 15 MSPs for 2026 without any Scottish specific policies or party infrastructure. As I have said on several occasions Holyrood has invited a disruptive influence for a long time by doing their own thing against the mainstream opinion of the Scottish Public eg GRR. Curtice says Reform is taking votes from Scottish Labour as well. In 2026 if Reform promise a Scottish Referendum in 2029. I will vote Reform 1 and 2 in 2026. The end justifies the means. Let’s give Holyrood a good clean in the process.
I wouldn’t pay too much attention to what the bookies say. They set the odds to guarantee themselves a profit whatever the outcome. On the day of the EU referendum they were offering 6-1 on for remain. We all know how that turned out.
The Kilmarnock North council election also bears this out:
?? SNP: 35.8% (-11.8)
? LAB: 27.8% (-0.1)
? IND: 13.2% (+5.1)
?? RFM: 10.1% (New)
? CON: 7.6% (-6.2)
? GRN: 3.6% (New)
? LDM: 1.8% (New)
? IND: 0.1%
It was another low turnout, but it looks like the exSNP voters almost entirely turned to Reform.
People don’t seem to be taking any lessons from the past few weeks do they? If the certainties of the post WW2 rules based international order and transatlantic relationship can by dynamited by The Donald in the course of a few posts on “Truth (sic) Social” then the pound shop fascists in Reform are more than capable of trying to play the disruptor card and dangling the #indyref2 carrot.
As others have observed evidence shows a significant chunk of pro independence voters were also Leave voters. We have pretty clear evidence BTL here that there are some pro independence voters who feel right at home with the populist, anti immigration, anti vax, anti environmental protection platform.
Whether they represent a significant percentage remains to be seen.
With respect to English voters, anyone who has lived there for a significant amount of time will be aware that there is a significant amount of “hop off you jocks” sentiment in some quarters. It’s often couched in faux bonhomie, or “oh, it just bantz!” etc. but anti Scottish prejudice (just like anti Irish and anti Welsh sentiments) are not far below the surface for many little Englanders.
Also, few Scots realise just how disinterested most English folk – especially those in the South and Midlands are about what they regard as the Celtic fringe or indeed even the North of England! A lot have absolutely no connection with other parts of the country and have either never visited or have only superficial knowledge of or interest in the rest of the UK.
Even those who aren’t actively prejudiced or sneering about the rest of the UK are more likely in my experience to have a pretty laissez-faire attitude of: “We’d hate to see Scotland leave the union, but if you really want to go, good luck!”. “Ordinary” English folk – as opposed to the elites and those in power – probably don’t actually care that much, certainly not enough to get animated about it.
Reform could couch it in similar terms to Trump telling his MAGA base that Europeans and Canadians are scrounging off US taxpayers money, so they need to vote either for “full fiscal autonomy” for the regions, or for “English independence”. The economics don’t have to add up or even make any sense, any more than Trump’s arguments have any basis in fact: it’s just something shiny to attract the attention of the hard of thinking.
I’d imagine a few of the usual suspects in here will soon out themselves as ardent supporters of any Reform plan to offer us #indyref2.
“…a significant chunk of pro independence voters were also Leave voters.…”
======
Indeed, I recall one well-received post BTL in The Hootsmon on BREXIT morn:
“Rejoice! One union down, one to go”!
I see a big stumbling block. Money. We all know Scotland is a cash cow for the rUK. If Farage doesn’t know it already about the future projections from wind/tide etc+ our other assets then someone will steer him. Not to mention the US nuclear weapons. It might be politically tempting to get rid of the Jocks, but practically he can keep 5M in their box.
Because he cared so much about the economic impact of Brexit?
Scotland is valuable to the UK, but let’s not kid ourselves about the magnitude. Britain isn’t bust without us. A couple of billion in oil taxation is a big deal to Scotland, but not nearly as much to the UK.
According to GERS the Scottish Government already gets Scotland’s geographical share of oil revenues. What good has that done us?
Whose side are you on?
‘Scotland is valuable to the UK, but let’s not kid ourselves about the magnitude’.
This begs the old question of why is it that the UK is so desperate to hang on to Scotland.
Most interesting political ‘what if’ scenario in ages. Thank you!
Unintended consequences indeed! Just as the last thing Putin envisaged, (or wants), is a unified Europe, suddenly bereft of USA, rushing to its own defence, against Russia!
God, Alex would have loved all of this! I miss his presence and intellect every day.
Never gonna happen. And here’s Farage himself on the subject only last year.
link to scotsman.com
That’s not what that article says.
The observation that more than a third of SNP voters opted Leave in 2016 has increasingly been overtaken by developing circumstances. I was a rabid Remainer in 2016 (and I worked for an Italian company at the time). I accepted the Leave argument that the European Commission was fundamentally undemocratic, but I argued that:
* No one would be stupid enough to break the glass and press the big red button labelled Dictatorship.
* The direction of travel in the EU was against a United States of Europe and the dark days of Jacques Delors were behind us.
That analysis didn’t factor in Ursula von der Yeyen declaring herself Empress of Europe three years ago. I’m a scientist, I accept the evidence in front of me and alter my opinion accordingly.
After a quick google search I can’t find any website or anyone else providing evidence of von der Leyen ‘declaring’ herself Empress of Europe…where and when exactly did she say this or are you speaking figuratively?
We don’t need Farage to say a single word about Scotland, indyref2 etc.
All we need to hear from him is that he wants independence for England.
Valid point Ian.
Farage would surely race into No.10 wi an ‘English Independence’ manifesto offer and a ‘Make England Great Again’ slogan, with a focus on ending mass immigration and ditching woke ideology.
Which implies President Trump would also support this, and the liberation of Scots.
Aye, if would be ‘funny’ if we ended up inadvertently’ becoming independent again.
‘You sweaty socks are on your own now!’
‘Wait! Stop! Don’t leave us!’ (elbowing and winking)
Would save a fortune in campaigning and shoe-leather. Can’t help thinking though, real ‘Brits’ might not like the look of their new flag sans bleu. But by then, with any luck, it’ll be too late.
No he would not race anywhere with that kind of talk. English ‘independence’ would not have widespread appeal in England, let alone make England great again. The problem here is how skewed your understanding of England actually is. Your view of the place is the way you want it to be.
Absolutely this, Ian.
Cue “rev and nige up a tree – k i s s i n g”
from piles of folk who don’t understand what you are saying.
No doubt you remember, Rev, that I have been saying for years that the SNP, then Alba, should stand candidates in England on the policy of independence for England.
We would be free by now if this advice had been taken!
You are joking, right!?
If the only other option is a plebiscite election, which would mean having a party or group of parties whose sole position in an election was independence and who could get the necessary 50% +1, which is as likely to happen now as Scotland winning the World Cup, then going with a Reform independence referendum suddenly seems the better option. Normally the economic benefits of hanging on to Scotland would outweigh any election referendum ‘promise’ but then the same lot thought leaving the EU was a good idea, so maybe not. Take back control mk2?
Ian said
“If the only other option is a plebiscite election,”
But it isn’t. Firstly that is not going to happen, and secondly it is a terrible idea.
The idea that should be compared against is the idea that could happen, and could be effective and advance Scotlands cause.
That better option is for all of the Independence supporting parties to have a unifying common policy that we can all vote for.
That simple objective should be to take back control of our Scottish Parliament.
To take back the powers over OUR constitution, the power for OUR people to decide through empowering OUR parliament.
That idea is simple. But to make it happen our politicians have to have the courage that they will have to confront the powers of the British state.
The SNP are cowards. The Greens are lost to other priorities. Alba seem trapped by internal turmoil.
Lets offer them the solution that has at least the possibility to work.
Take Back Our Parliament.
The policy you’re advocating makes zero though: it’s actually more complicated and would take more time to produce results than just committing to plebiscitary elections. All they require is for all “real” pro independence parties to sign up to the principle that a vote for them is ipso fact a vote for independence.
The parties don’t have to like each other, to agree to campaign together, to agree on any detailed policies. All that is needed is an absolute commitment that they will take winning 50% + 1 of the vote as de facto independence.
Isn’t this what the Manifesto for Independence is saying? If you haven’t read and signed the petition yet then now is the time.
Andy Ellis said
“The policy you’re advocating makes zero though:”
That doesn’t make any sense.
” it’s actually more complicated and would take more time to produce results than just committing to plebiscitary elections.”
Completely untrue. Do stop just throwing out your assertions as if being your currently expressed talking point gives it some weight. You making stuff up is just that.
How about you stop wasting peoples time on here and if start engaging your brain and making cogent replies with an evidential rather than opinionated basis?
” All they require is for all “real” pro independence parties to sign up to the principle that a vote for them is ipso fact a vote for independence.”
What happens when you insist that an Election is a vote on whether Scotland should be come independent ( of England, presumeably? ) without specifying HOW this is to happen?
a) when there is not 50%+ of the vote for it
Would not the obviously predictable outcome be that the British would say “great you’ve had youre vote that you said was for your self determination and you have determined your future is as Part of the United Kingdom” ?
The obviously superior approach is the one-liner to take back our parliament.
When we win a majority OF SEATS NOT VOTES then the populace are already familiar with the practice that the winning side forms the government and passes the policies that were in their manifesto into law.
Just like in the current British system.
If we don’t win that election then we carry on as before. No harm done, but some good still done because we will have publised the idea that Scots in Scotland need to Take Back Control for our Scottish Parliament from the British (bogus English parliamentary sivereignty).
What is it that you don’t want to understand?
Three possibilities: confident of winning, Reform provide Indyref2; unsure of the result, they offer a choice between independence and absorption back into all things Westminster ie an and to devolution; it’s all an illusion, smoke and mirrors…
How long before The Great Sage that is James Kelly reads this and publishes 14,000 words on why you now support Farage/Reform? I give it until 6pm.
@sara 1.18pm
We don’t need the Manifesto for Independence, just victory in plebiscitary elections. It’s over complicated. We don’t need to propose dissolution, or call a National Convention. The mere fact of victory in the election is de facto independence. We just need real nationalist parties and leaders with the political cojones to tell, not ask.
Andy Ellis said
We don’t need the Manifesto for Independence, just victory in “plebiscitary elections.”
YOU have not stated either to us or to the electorate WHAT the process that they would be voting for would be to navigate Scotland from where it currently id to where it wants to be.
” It’s over complicated.”
‘IT’ is quite literally SIMPLER.
” We don’t need to propose dissolution, or call a National Convention. The mere fact of victory in the election is de facto independence.”
Oh is it Aye? Hows that then?
Oh waitn do you mean that if people vote that our parliament should take back control over the constitution then that defacto is our route to independence from England-as-Britain
” We just need real nationalist parties and leaders with the political cojones to tell, not ask.”
If we the people give them that mandate, they will have no (valid) excuses left.
No other process is necessary than securing 50% + 1 in plebiscitary elections (or if it was feasible which it currently isn’t) a referendum. If we’d voted Yes in 2014, there would have been a process of negotiating the details afterwards, but the principle that Scotland had decided to become independent had been accepted.
In the case of plebiscitary elections, a victory signified de facto independence. On “I-day” + 1 the parties can start negotiating the details and folk can busy themselves with calling a Convention, elections, drawing up a constitution, forming new political parties, negotiating the details of the split of assets with rump UK.
Which part of this are you finding difficult?
The notion of some “electoral triangulation” / 4 dimensional chess with reform (spit) to get an indyref sounds like nonsense to me.
Most english are pretty fucking stupid and ignorant of how “britain”, a business enterprise, is run. Half of them read the BBC, the other half the mail, and neither of them get the truth.
– if they knew what a poor, arse skidding on the ground, country that england is, they would not support indy. Anglo narcissism, delusions of empire, is a hard habit to break. They would talk a good fight, then someone at the treasury would take them in a back room and show them the (real) books.
There is this concept of an “egregore” in the occult, a collective thought form; related is the idea of an avatar. So, if you believed in the notion of a national consciousness, you could see e.g. Hitler as being a true avatar of the German people in that period … Hitler WAS Germany, in a genuine spiritual sense.
– in a similar way : Farage IS England.
he is the most english paragon of englishness in all its englandhood, and that is why I hate the cunt.
Most Scots should be, and are – rightly revolted by the man, he creates disgust. In a way, he puts the arguments for Scottish Independence more powerfully than anything else; let’s face it, a barrhead boy podcast does not often move us to man the barricades, and even a good wings article only generates a tingle – but when that cunt just opens his fucking mouth … AAAAAAAAAAHHHH
Another odd thing – the mail had an entertainingly daft article the other day – one of those mental mitford sisters had a wide-on for adolph, there may have been congress and the union blessed. Crazy. How old is Farage? Too young, but who was his dad?
becoming englands fuhrer is farage’s wank fantasy and the key to him making england “great again” is r4ping the arse off my country, but his trouble is : england is already finished
… the SPEED OF THE ISLAMIST ADVANCE has taken us all by surprise, removing the ILLEGITIMATE AND DESPOTIC REGIME
link to archive.ph
– maybe in time we shall see a new synthesis :
farage says “there is no god but allah and mohammed is his prophet”
england went with one heresy, time for a new one.
Grandson of Adolf, eh, maybe with a wee bit of grape thrown in?
Firing on all cylinders today!
Dinnae haud back big man!
TALK OF SCOTLAND to a standard model English person and very soon the eyes glaze over and the yawning begins. Actually talk of anything other than England and that may also happen, although some might become animated at the mention of a certain place in the Levant.
Are Scots purblind? Stupid? Panglossian? On another planet?
Scotland is territory, resources and geo-strategic location, period.
Reform and the Farage coterie see Scotland, check website, as another British i.e English region.
A weak,unfocussed and directionless nationalism requires «fixing», a home matter not in need of yet more desperate delusions.
And referenda are btw strictly for procrastinators and career politicians. That lesson ought to have been well learned.
[Independence for Scotland will leave the UK “diminished globally as a nation”, said Mr Farage, adding: “The message that goes out that you’ve lost a large chunk of your territory and that a 300-year-old union that has achieved astonishing successes for democracy and freedom worldwide (sic), has suddenly broken up, that’s not a good message.”]
Sept. 2014
It’s not a union, we are a colony. If England wanted to leave, they would not seek our permission.
From the point of view of Scotland’s sovereignty, Reform Uk is just another British establishment party.
I still remember in 2016 when everybody was speculating when the useless Sturgeon would pull the trigger on indyref and end the union. Farage was one of the first ones to come out and claim openly and with 100% confidence that Scotland was not going anywhere. Perhaps in the political circles where Farage moved something was already known about the political fraud Sturgeon and her version of SNP which would mean she would never call the referendum.
I am convinced that ANY party of the British state will fall over themselves to offer Scotland a referendum when the alternative is far, far worse. And we know that Salvo/Liberation have already taken a very big step to liberate Scotland through the international route. We also know that the level of disenfranchisement in Scotland is climbing and fast. Labour was endorsed by a meagre 22% of the electorate in Scotland at the last GE.
If I remember correctly, threatening with pursuing the international route is what brought the devolution referendum about.
Let’s bear in mind that, judging by what we saw in 2014, the British state can actually control many aspects of the referendum, starting by the franchise and the question in the ballot, following with control of the narrative by having its propaganda mouthpieces spouting the same shite 24/7, unleashing all those civil servants to temporarily ditch their code of conduct and their alleged “political impartiality” and work “to save the union”, and then of course changing the rules at any point of their choosing if their side is losing or, heaven forbid, ridge the postal votes. We have seen it all already.
In other words, if Farage is offering a referendum it will be only because the alternative is far worse and because it is the only way the British state can retain some form of control.
I would not be fooled by it, to be honest.
I think we should still assume there is no political route for Scotland to end this union for as long as those elected as MPs are determined to glue their arses to the green seats, to swear allegiance to a foreign crown and to continue to cash their salaries for the next 5 years after the election.
The only way to end this union is by stopping sending MPs to Westminster.
the propaganda mouthpieces
When required to view the British state apparatus the English admiral Nelson might be a model. What you do not see or recognize ought not to trouble you unduly in pursuit of your purpose.
If nothing else, even if Reform do not get a majority at Westminster but do get a much increased presence there, as looks likely, can you imagine the popular feeling among the electorate in England towards Scottish, or more appropriately, English independence?
The problem with attaching Scottish Independence to a vote for any bunch of troughing charlatans, is towering risk that the wider population of Scotland will quite rightly lose faith, and never, ever vote for any one of these tosspots ever again.
When a majority of 56 out 59 MPs, elected to represent a mandate for Independence turns out to be wholly impotent and secures the square root of fk all for Scotland, I perhaps may speak for the growing silent majority in Scotland who no longer give a flying fk about voting for any of them, or, perhaps even worse, ever voting at all.
And to what end should I reconsider my position?
However grotesque it is to have perverts and deviants destabilising our political landscape, or witness the unfathomable outrage of the Nation which owns 96% of UK oil losing its only refining capacity, it is Scottish Independence which must come first, and the bonfire of the vanities which comes later.
The key to Scotland’s freedom of action and choice, is Scotland’s freedom through separate and distinct Constitution, where no monarch or government except the ordinary people of Scotland are sovereign.
Sovereignty: supreme or ultimate power.
Voting, whether its an election, council seat, referendum or opinion poll is just more “playing” of the game. It is literally a neverending farce.
I want Scottish Independence. Game Over. The curtain on the farce closed.
How do you propose to achieve it without voting?
No vote, no say. 56 of 59 Westminster MPs was achieved with (just) less than 50% of the vote, and that election was specifically couched by the devolutionists in the SNP as NOT being a vote on independence.
There is no plausible route for an aspirant state like Scotland to independence that does not demonstrate a clear majority in favour, in response to a clear question in a referendum or specifically plebiscitary platform in a General Election.
It is vanishingly unlikely that any international recognition will be accorded to a country like Scotland, Catalonia or Quebec which declares independence unilaterally without clear evidence it reflects majority opinion and/or an absence of good faith negotiations from the larger state.
“No vote, no say”
The last 11 years tell us that we have even less of a say by continuing to play by the rules of a game that is rigged against Scotland by design.
In 2015 over 50% of our votes were for anti-union parties. What did that get us?
Nothing.
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
In 2015 56, allegedly anti-union MPs, were sent to Westminster on behalf of Scotland. What did that get us?
Nothing
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
In 2017, 35 anti-union MPs (more than half), were sent to Westminster on behalf of Scotland. What did that get us?
Nothing
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
In 2016 60% of the votes in Scotland were cast against Brexit. What did that get us?
Nothing
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
In Holyrood 2016 and 2021, pro-independence majorities were elected. What did that get us?
Nothing.
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
Since 2016, the political party with the biggest share of the seats in Holyrood holds a mandate to call an independence referendum. What did that get us?
Nothing.
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
In 2019 we sent 45 anti-union MPs to Westminster. What did that get us?
Nothing.
How much of a say we got in anything?
None
If something has become crystal clear over the last 11 years is that voting in this system gets us absolutely nothing and that we do not have any voice. In fact, by participating in this rigged game with our votes we are legitimising the abuse Scotland keeps being subjected to and we are legitimised our constantly being gagged when it comes to UK and Scotland’s politics.
In light of this, why should we bother and waste our time in continue to play this rigged game, then? We get more of a voice by not voting at all and by progressively pushing those “majorities” down and down. The deep state is selling us these elections as “democratic”. Well, all those labour MPs are backed by only the 22% of the electorate in Scotland. As those “majorities” keep going down because less and less people vote, those majorities become less and less credible. It is all about control. When you have consistently over 50% of the electorate not even bothering to cast a vote, you are losing control of the narrative. At some point, the deep state will have to acknowledge the system is no longer working.
“international recognition”
You insist in packing Scotland, Quebec and Catalonia into the same bag. They are not the same and they will never be the same. Of the three, only Scotland is in a voluntary union that rests on an international treaty subjected to international law. Under international law, that treaty can be legitimately and unilaterally revoked by Scotland at any point.
A different matter is that that treaty has been abused by the English crown to treat and exploit Scotland as if it was its colony. And also a different matter is that every single political party currently holding seats in Westminster and Holyrood is determined to preserve that treaty.
Andy Ellis said
“There is no plausible route for an aspirant state like Scotland to independence that does not demonstrate a clear majority in favour, in response to a clear question in a referendum or specifically plebiscitary platform in a General Election.”
Another of your assertions.
Would you print a retraction if someone posted the unexisting possibilities that contradict your opinions?
Straw man much?
You are the one suggesting your ‘no clear majority in favour’ idea.
and as for
“good faith negotiations from the larger state.”
FFS are you for real?
The whole world knows perfectly well that ‘the larger state’ is NOT
a party who engages in ‘good faith negotiations’
It is Perfideous Albion.
The pirate state who renage on their agreements, unilaterally change the terms after negotiations conclude, and break international law.
We’re through the looking glass here people… black is white and white is black.
There’s a nutter in the Kremlin, a nutter in the White House, the far right making gains in Germany, France and Italy. Rasputin’s pals are already running Hungary and Slovakia, Farage on the rise in Engerland and possibly here too… WTF is going on? The world’s gone mad!
As for IndyRef2…
The franchise would be as 2014, whereby despite a majority of Scots voting Yes the rest swung it to No, plus…
We now lack a mainstream party with a charismatic leadership in favour of Indy – the SNP devolutionists have given up trying to disguise the fact they’d be turkeys voting for Christmas – the dogs in the street know Indy would be the financial if not the political ruin of the SNP.
A decade of Sturgeon and the subsequent incompetents who have so royally screwed up every aspect of governance falling within Holyrood’s remit has undoubtedly cooled the appetite for Indy amongst those undecided voters. Furthermore, in the current geo-political and economic climate, Indy is likely a non-starter via any IndyRef2 and another No vote would be certain to make a Quebec out of Scotland.
Those thinking of voting Reform need to be careful what you wish/vote for.
All Reform have to do is promise lots of marches and flag waving expeditions to Arthur’s seat and the All Under One Umbrella crew will jump.
Love the old flag waving I does.
Until our American friends no longer wish to park their subs in Faslane, or there is clear consensus that an Independent Scotland is ok being used as warehousing and distribution for WMD, we are not going to get independence through standard political processes.
As we’ve seen, it’s sll just theatre and bread and circuses to no productive end.
However, seems that currently the States has been coopted by the Russians, so ironically that might be a significant difference in operational context.
Interesting times.
The SNP had people marching and flag waving for ten years. Reform could get a result by doing it once.
I wouldn’t like to speculate about the division of seats at the next Westminster election. With the Techne poll (field work 19 -20 Feb) showing RefUK with a 1% lead over Labour, Opinium is now the only regular firm not showing RefUK with a settled lead.
The 12 polls conducted entirely in February give RefUK a 1.5% average lead over Labour. With the majority of seats (ie English) at the next GE going the way of a six way split (Con, Lab, LibDem, RefUK, Green, independents), the simple percentage based electoral prediction algorithms increasingly don’t work. It may be better to refer to MRP studies (and these require very large population samples to be anywhere near accurate and are therefore rare).
The Find Out Now, Westminster voting intention, Multilevel Regression Poststratification poll, field work 22 – 29 Jan, sample population 5,743 (in my opinion an unrealistically low sample for an UK wide MRP).
Predicted seat distribution in Wales at: RefUK 23, Labour 4, Plaid Cymru 2, Con 2.
That would put RefUK into absolute majority territory if extrapolated at UK level, but it is likely a factor of the large Plaid Cymru vote.
The most probable outcome from the next Westminster GE is RefUK as the largest party by a substantial margin, but the UK Permanent State in the form of Labour, Tories, and LibDem declaring them to be personal non grata and trying to form a grand coalition. If the 30 to 40 SNP MPs refused to work with an independence referendum promising RefUK, they would expose themselves for the identity politics obsessed, devolutionist, carpetbagging parasites we all ken them to be.
Vivian
Was that Leonardo you worked with? They are doing well post Brexit. It’s the Scottish Greens they are worried about. All good analysis in your latest post with the exception of 30 to 40 SNP MPs in 2029. That won’t happen. A line one Manifesto commiment by Reform to hold a Scottish Referendum will see to that. Some good posts by this provocative article by Stu’s sources. We might as well run the Reform Campaign. Speaking of Italians I quoted Machavelli earlier on. The end justifies the means. Absolutely for me. We can rid of them all after Independence.
That’s the thing. Trust. Can anyone believe any politician or political party any more.
Would they really want to give up their free resource cow? In saying that, Trump is all for shooting his country in the foot with tariffs, so maybe they would..
It’s just so depressing that just when we needed a Rottweiler as FM, we have a Chihauhua.
Aye, and a baldy, easily-confused Chihuahua at that.
“Can anyone believe any politician or political party any more”
No. We have been fooled for the best part of 11 years. At some point we are going to have to stand up to those shysters and say “enough”.
“Would they really want to give up their free resource cow?”
They will when there is nothing left of Scotland but barren land. The take over of assets has accelerated in the last 10 years, despite having absolute majorities of, allegedly, anti-union MPs in Westminster. And we all have seen what is happening with the refinery. The next will be the NHS. One has to wonder until what point the trans and EDI nonsense were deep charges planted to completely destroy the reputation of the NHS and make it easier for the people to accept its privatisation. The EDI nonsense and the pronouns nonsense did not come out of nowhere, did it? This came from the SGov. And who brought it into the SGov? Who is the most interested party in the privatisation of the NHS so it can get a large chunk of it, isn’t it USA?
The referendum is just a carrot. Sturgeon’s SNP dangled it successfully for many years, but the SNP can no longer dangle it credibly. So what is happening here is that another political arm of the British state is simply taking over from the SNP the dangling of the carrot to keep alive the illusion that there will be a referendum. It is a red herring. It is a ruse to get those 500,000+ pro-indy people who no longer vote back to the polls and back into the rigged game. Whilst they think a political party will progress independence, they do not pursue other routes. It is all about control and all about protecting this rigged system and the deep state hiding behind it.
We should not be fooled by it.
Reform will fold and disappear as quickly as it appeared and as quickly as UKIP vanished.
“nothing left of Scotland but barren land”
Oh get a grip.
Scotland does have plenty of lebensraum though, and what with climate change, WW3, and the predicted 2 billion additional human beings due to make an appearance by 2050-60, that empty space, predicted to be still inhabitable and well watered in the middle of this century, will be eagerly coveted by plenty.
Right now, though, it’s not worth that much. And neither are the so-called rich-making Scottish resources plenty like to wang on about.
We know this because if Scotland did have some notable, intrinsic value, The Donald would already be making noises about wanting it.
A few thoughts:
1. If I’d to guess, Reform are ‘flying a kite’, assessing the reaction to their ‘Hail Mary’ play. It can all be safely denied later. Might not make it off the drawing board. But stranger things have happened.
2. Realistically, what is the chance of Reform getting any Scottish seats in 2029 with this strategy? They might end up losing the trust of committed unionists, while failing to gain the trust of committed nationalists. If it ends up undercutting their support among committed unionists in England, it would represent an irreparable misstep on their behalf.
3. Labour would enter the 2029 election with a pretty straightforward pitch – ‘Vote Starmer to Save the Union’ – or something like this. Enough to save a sinking ship? Hard to say.
4. **The Important Bit.** For the Independence Movement, buying in to Reform’s referendum promises is fraught with risk. Will he deliver? Is the referendum winnable? Who controls the timing? And, what are the consequences of a second lost referendum?
5. The SNP have gone from having a pisspoor strategy, to none at all. Grim!
6. Strategically, we need to start making moves whose outcomes we can control or anticipate better. As a few folks have mentioned in the comments, English nationalism is a viewpoint growing in popularity. Why not ally with nationalists from across the UK (this would involve not constantly denigrating English nationalism!) to achieve disunion? This certainly offers the best prospects for a constructive, collaborative breakup that puts key institutions in place for post-union cooperation, as the Scandinavians have done with the Nordic Council. (Alternatively, take seriously the de facto referendum approach, but be prepared to follow it up with action, UDI, and all that follows from that.)
7. Sovereignty is looking to cooperate more closely with the likes of the English Democrats, Propel Wales, even the constitutionally open-minded Alliance for Democracy and Freedom. While, yes! we’re small parties, being aligned on the constitution makes for a sustainable relationship, something to build on.
8. As the ‘unloseable’ Brexit referendum demonstrated, the British Establishment is capable of completely misjudging the people. But, they’re not completely lacking in the ability to learn from that experience. If Reform and Nigel Farage became the instrument by which Scotland regained her independence, then I am here for it 100% . But if we’ve learned anything over the past decade, then it is we are being outthought on the strategic side, and personally, I remain sceptical that Reform is ready to embrace a post-union future for our respective nations. ‘Caveat suffragator!’
It’s worth remembering that Reform aren’t a political party, they’re a company run by Farage and the transfer of power to the members they did yesterday was nonsense. So it’s a money making exercise by Farage, etc. With that in mind anything they do is to gain more paying members and promote their brand of extreme nationalism veering on neo fascism. Farage is increasingly happy to share time and space with genuinely bad people.
With that in mind the idea of voting Reform to get a referendum makes my skin crawl. I’m sure they actually would say that to win votes here but the price paid would be too much.
So I’m sure Reform would win support but the consequences would be terrible and we’d likely not win our independence anyhow.
“money making exercise”
Like the SNP in government? Coming up a quarter of a century for some of them.
“increasingly happy to share time and space with genuinely bad people”
Which prominent and successful political leader has he and his executive team attempted to jail on trumped up sexual misdemeanour charges?
Sorry, but whatever point you’re trying to make, I’m not seeing it.
What feels absolutely tragic is that a vote for independence – while the UK is being shaken up by a Reform govt – might actually make Scotland worse, in the short to medium term, than the UK. We should take that, because if we truly believe in independence, we should believe in it on principle, but it’s a stark place to have reached to be willing to vote for it even though it would be under a govt that may take rUK a couple of steps closer to sanity than most immediate post-indy Scottish parties could take Scotland.
“might actually make Scotland worse,”
A certainty given the calibre of the current Scottish Government. Imagine that bunch of clowns trying to negotiate the indy settlement with the UKG. The lack of promininent statesmen (or women) is a serious worry.
Sarwar is trying to tightrope dance while his members throw mud balls.
@Mia 2.58pm
All that matters is winning a majority of the votes on an explicit platform of independence. It doesn’t matter whether it’s at a General election (Holyrood or Westminster) or in response to a referendum. There is no other plausible route.
Until the pro-independence side in Scottish politics bestirs itself to construct a majority we’re going nowhere.
The number of MPs or MSPs is immaterial unless they reflect a clear majority who are “real” nationalists, not devolusionists who accept that Westminster has a veto over our self determination.
We don’t need additional steps, Conventions of Estates, Assemblies, Salvo or the vanishingly unlikely premise that the UN will re-categorise us as a non self-governing territory: we just need to grow some political balls as tell not ask. No people worth its salt has ever achieved independence by accepting it needs permission.
Andy Ellis said
“All that matters is winning a majority of the votes on an explicit platform of independence. It doesn’t matter whether it’s at a General election (Holyrood or Westminster) or in response to a referendum. There is no other plausible route.”
Oh no other plausible route eh?
But wait, what about the simpler, safer and more easily available route of winning THE MOST SEATS for a manifesto commitment to take back our Parliament, then using that to take back the power (forever) to hold whatever democratic votes we chose to, on whatever subject we wanted, whenever we though it best to?
“Until the pro-independence side in Scottish politics bestirs itself to construct a majority we’re going nowhere.”
With an attitude like yours, you will continue to be going nowhere!
“The number of MPs or MSPs is immaterial unless they reflect a clear majority who are “real” nationalists, not devolusionists who accept that Westminster has a veto over our self determination.”
If we have a majority of MSP who stood on the commitment to take back the power over the constitution to Our Scottish Parliament from the English Parliament where it has be usurped by English Parliamentay sovereignty then any devolutionists would be voting to increase the powers of Our Parliament.
Which is what they are supposed to be doing.
“We don’t need additional steps, Conventions of Estates, Assemblies, Salvo or the vanishingly unlikely premise that the UN will re-categorise us as a non self-governing territory: we just need to grow some political balls as tell not ask. No people worth its salt has ever achieved independence by accepting it needs permission.”
The beauty of the ‘doing the doable bit first’ is that we improve the prospects of the Scottish Nation immediately, even before we move on to our choice of possible subsequent steps.
Those steps will be OUR choices. Not constrained by Westminster rule.
Surely anyone can see that that would be a massive win on its own?
“we just need to grow some political balls as tell not ask. No people worth its salt has ever achieved independence by accepting it needs permission.”
The ancient right of our Scottish sovereignty is still legally (if not currently visibly in practice) extant.
When the Scottish People instruct the Scottish Parliament to act, they will be bound legally, morally an politically to act.
The Scottish Parliament will HAVE BEEBN GIVEN PERMISSION by the only source that exists to authoratitavely give it that permission. The Scottish People.
We won 56 of 59 Westminster MPs on just less than 50% of the vote. It was specifically billed by the useless SNP as NOT a vote on independence anyway. Nobody will recognise a declaration of independence based on seats not votes unless it a) represents a clear majority of Scottish voters, AND b) is explicitly stated as being decided on a plebiscitary platform.
You appear to be the type of person who could start an argument in an empty room. All the additional steps and fripperies you’re advocating are unnecessary. Real nationalists would realise that we only have to win once, and it’s immaterial whether it’s a referendum or general election.
No additional “doing the doable bits first” BS is necessary, just a political backbone.
@Andy Ellis
We have been trying this for years. If the best political advocate for Independence post 2014 couldn’t galvanise a United Independence front then nobody can. It’s not going happen so let’s try an alternative pathway.
Nobody is stopping you or anyone else trying it. Fill your boots. Asserting that Salvo or a Convention of the Estates or having the UN declare us a colony will lead us to the sunny uplands of independence faster than just doing the hard work is one thing, it being true (or it being a faster route than conventional means) is quite another.
The clear and present obstacle to having a united front behind plebiscitary elections today is the SNP. Clearing that obstacle means either removing them altogether or having them change their approach. I’ve seen little evidence that their membership and/or activist base is in any way prepared to do the latter.
Who knows, perhaps the rise of Reform in the UK as a whole and in Scotland in particular will serve as a shock to the existing system. Whether it’s a positive or a negative shock remains to be seen.
With no figure like Alex Salmond on the horizon it’s not as if the pro independence talent pool looks particularly deep. The last ten years of SNP rule isn’t an encouraging foretaste of the immediate post independence Scottish political environment which is why I tend to agree with those who say the SNP has to be destroyed à la IPP in Ireland in 1918 rather than just “persuaded to change” or reformed. I don’t think it’s worth saving even if it showed any signs of recognising the pressing need to change, which it just doesn’t.
It’s defo an interesting article, but it’s disappointing to see all the old battles being re-introduced by all the old campaigners, to be re-fought all over again.
“It’s Scotland’s Oil! England can’t survive without it!”.
Naw, England wants the stuff even less than we do. It is our government, after all, that wants it left in the ground most.
But the really interesting aspect, having read most of the comments until the lunacy of some of them put me off, is the totally unquestioned, cast-iron, assumption that if Our Nige was to offer Scotland a referendum, us Scots would say Yes.
It’s as if the hurricane of change blowing through the western world, not to mention the years of bad-tempered wrangling on here about the dilution of the franchise by the torrents of incomers to Scotland, are/were all a dream.
Indy? So then what happens on Indy Day +1 in the new post rules based order world?
Please don’t say the Indy movement is going to make the same mistake again, and assume that the “just have faith” answer will suffice.
@Hatey McHateface
Indy+1 we have an election and anybody can present their wares. I don’t think so called progressive left will be as popular as they think. And this will disappoint you. We won’t be better off under Independence for the foreseeable future. And it’s a good intellectual position to hold. Ask Brexiteers. Centuries ago dependent on the timeline. the Scottish Pund was worth 1 to 5 or 1 to 8 English Pounds. But at least we can throw stanes at them. There is always pain associated with real revolutionary change. Let’s get on with IndyRef2. It will happen one way or another.
I entirely agree, George. I voted for Brexit on the understanding it would make me financially poorer and based on my calculation of what I could afford to lose.
I don’t assume that others applied the same principle to their vote, nor do I assume that others will apply the same principle to any future Indy vote either.
If there’s going to be an IndyRef 2, it really does have to be prepared for. If anybody truly believes such a vote is coming our way, the time to start preparing for it is now.
Haha, the franchise has to be settled. Ten years of arguing about that and nobody is any closer to a solution!
There can be no symmetry between the jailer and the jailed. Destroy the jail. The union is based on the fallacy of security. It has to end. Nothing else will be possible until that has happened.
Paraphrased slightly from Colum McCann’s, Apeirogon – a damn fine read if anyone is in search of a page-turner.
Here’s Grok’s take on ‘our’ GE next year.
Curiously, RUK doesn’t get a mention…
‘Using currently available information, what is the projected turnout for the Scottish Parliamentary elections in 2026?’
‘As of February 21, 2025, there is no precise, definitive projection for the turnout of the Scottish Parliamentary election scheduled for May 7, 2026, because such forecasts depend on multiple evolving factors—voter sentiment, political climate, campaign dynamics, and unforeseen events—that are not fully predictable this far in advance. However, I can provide an informed estimate based on historical turnout trends, recent electoral data, and current polling context.
The most recent Scottish Parliament election in 2021 saw a record-high turnout of 63.5% for both constituency and regional votes, up from 55.8% (constituency) and 55.9% (regional) in 2016. This increase was notable given the election occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting strong voter engagement despite challenges. Historically, turnout has varied: 49.4% in 1999, 58.2% in 2003, 51.7% in 2007, and 50.4% in 2011, with a clear upward trend in more recent elections. The 2014 Scottish independence referendum, with an 84.6% turnout, also demonstrated Scotland’s capacity for high participation when stakes are perceived as significant.
Current factors could influence 2026 turnout. The 2024 UK general election saw Scotland’s turnout drop to 59.7% (from 67.3% in 2019), reflecting possible voter fatigue or disillusionment after a turbulent political period, including SNP leadership changes and policy debates. Opinion polls for the 2026 Scottish election (e.g., from Election Polling and Ballot Box Scotland) show a competitive race, with Labour and the SNP neck-and-neck, which could drive turnout if voters see the outcome as consequential. Issues like independence, economic recovery, and NHS funding remain salient, potentially mobilizing voters as they did in 2021. However, no specific 2026 turnout projection is explicitly modeled in available data beyond uniform swing assumptions, which don’t directly predict participation rates.
A reasonable baseline projection, assuming no major disruptive events (e.g., a snap election or crisis), might range between 60% and 65%, aligning with the 2021 high and adjusting for recent dips. This assumes sustained engagement from a polarized electorate and effective voter mobilization, tempered by potential apathy if political fatigue persists. Without detailed, poll-specific turnout forecasts—which aren’t yet available for 2026—this remains an educated extrapolation from past patterns and current trends. For a more precise figure, we’d need polling closer to the election date incorporating voter intention data.’
I think it’s 4 weeks since The Donald took over.
Find somebody who accurately predicted what would happen during his first 4 weeks in power and ask them.
The predictions of everybody and everything else, for 4 months and even 4 years into the future, are as meaningless and valueless as the fart I’m releasing right now.
Actually, that fart did have a certain double-syllable construction to it, with a sharp initial report, and a sibilant tailing off at the end – could it have been “Farage”?
Much as I loathe Trump and all he stands for it’s actually quite impressive in a “slow motion train wreck” kinda way to see how quickly he’s trashed 80 years of trans Atlantic cooperation.
I’ve been a proponent of a European defence and security identity for decades, but never really expected to see it realised in my lifetime: it’d be ironic if the Donald proves to be the proximate cause of it happening in a matter of months given the direction of travel of our European friends in the past few days.
The next few years are going to be quite a ride I suspect.
That old Chinese curse “may you live in interesting times” springs to mind.
Certainly, Andy, it’s instructive to see the true relationship between coloniser (the USA) and colonised (Europe, including the UK and Scotland) playing out in real time.
First, we were all paralysed after he won the election and before he took over. We could do nothing until we knew what he would do.
Now, as a result of his first 4 weeks, we’re all scurrying about like headless chickens. Every certainty we thought we could rely on is at some sort of risk:
Our military security.
Our winding down of our resources in pursuit of Nutt Zero.
Our trading relationships, and hence the prognosis for our economy, and the value of our currency.
Our ability to fund social programs, such as health and welfare.
The prospects for peace and stability in the ME and hence Europe, and hence here.
I think the decision to pull the Roman legions from England back to the homeland can’t have been any more disruptive.
And at the back of every HR politician’s mind, just one wrong word said, or policy enacted, and if The Donald notices and takes the hump, then it’s going to be trouble.
Big trouble. Bigly big!
Textbook colonialism in the real world. Beats me how so few people ever noticed its existence up to now!
@aLurker 3.59pm
It’s not an assertion, it’s simple fact. The international community will never recognise Scottish independence that isn’t based on a clear majority voting in favour in response to a clear question in a referendum, or a clear vote in plebiscitary elections.
We don’t qualify as a case of de-colonisation, however hard Alf Baird, Salvo and Liberation Scotland try to insist otherwise, and UDI will only be recognised in exceptional circumstances which also don’t apply to us.
Despite Mia’s claims, the cases of Scotland, Catalonia and Quebec are from the point of view of international law, the precedent of other cases of self determination and political / constitutional reality quite similar. Their individual nuances and historical, political, social, economic and/or linguistic differences are much less important than the underlying principle which is that internal self determination will only succeed as part of a process.
The idea that it can be achieved by novel, extra parliamentary routes, or routes that don’t involve the demonstration of clear majority support is facile.
The right to self determination is indeed a jus cogens in international law. However it is neither automatic or unlimited. To overcome the hurdles of British nationalist opposition we have to demonstrate that we have tried the other available routes. Westminster failing to honour the 2012 Edinburgh Agreement precedent is a clear demonstration of bad faith: it does not however mean that the independence movement can simply declare UDI by default, short circuiting the requirement to demonstrate majority support because there ARE still other available routes we can take: namely plebiscitary elections.
The international community expects those seeking independence (particularly so in cases where we aren’t being violently suppressed or subject to colonial rule, which the UN doesn’t accept applies in our case) to exhaust the available routes before “going nuclear” and declaring UDI. Why do you think UDI is both hard, and rarely used? Kosovo is a case in point.
they don’t accept a collective lack of political balls on the part of the Scottish people as a sufficient rationale for UDI.
Cope harder and do the work.
Andy Ellis began a post with
“@aLurker 3.59pm”
And then proceeded to gish gallop his way through 9 paragraphs which very obviously and deliberately did not address the points that he was being questioned on.
“Cope harder and do the work.”
Perhaps YOU should think harder about your replies, and the questions that it appears that you are deliberately avoiding?
I suspect that most regulars on here see perfectly well what you are and see what you do.
For anyone who takes the time to read the points that I and others make, then evaluates your replies (for they seldom are answers) then it is apparent that you choose to fill this forum with a lot of words, but you do not seem to want to offer insight towards ideas like the ones mooted which CAN immediately improve the condition of the Scottish Nation.
You rudely demand in the imperative.
Not a good look.
Address the the issues!
I have addressed the issues and questions, over and over again. Either you’re new here, or if you’re an actual lurker who has been following the arguments, you must suffer from a short attention span.
Which questions is it you purport that I’m not answering or deliberately avoiding? Let’s hear it and I’ll address them now. Not liking the answers you get, or disagreeing with them, doesn’t mean that you can blithely assert you weren’t furnished with a response.
There are no short cuts, silver bullets or novel approaches to independence that will deliver independence faster than just doing the work on the ground and constructing a pro independence majority which then votes in favour of it in either a plebiscitary election or referendum.
Anyone saying otherwise is a constitutional snake oil salesman. There is no appreciable support in international relations theory, international law, historical or political precedent for the extra parliamentary routes being proposed. If there were, Salvo and Liberation Scotland would be trumpeting them from the rooftops: guess what, so far we’ve seen SFA, zilch, nada.
Feel free to get back to us when the UN adds us to the list of non self governing territories won’t you?
Excellent.
You could start at the top and work your way down through each point that you have not addressed.
That would be the obvious approach.
link to wingsoverscotland.com
link to wingsoverscotland.com
link to wingsoverscotland.com
link to wingsoverscotland.com
link to wingsoverscotland.com
link to wingsoverscotland.com
“Address the issues!”
Hmmm.
Farage may offer IndyRef 2.
Everybody seems to assume we Scots will vote Yes.
I would say that a possibility, being touted for some indeterminate time in the future, against a backdrop of rapid and completely unpredictable change in the European, American, Middle Eastern, and Far Eastern worlds, with an ongoing WW3, and a widely anticipated US-China war pending, are all issues.
Throw into the mix climate change and eye-watering predicted mass movements of populations too.
Is anybody addressing any of this? These are real issues, naw? They all affect Scotland, naw? They all have to be navigated by Scottish politicians whose caliber presently is insufficient to create a local jamjar recycling scheme.
BTW, I think The Donald is as capable of taking the hump against the UN as much as he has already done with other international organisations.
One decision not to his liking and he’ll pull the plug.
@alurker
You are lucky for some reason I have no right of reply to the nonsense he attributed to me at 4:47pm. I have never gone with the pish of Estate of Convention or whatever. I am saying if Reform is the quickest way to get a Scottish Independence Referendum in 2029. I am voting Reform 1 and 2 in 2026.
the reply that I posted to
Andy Ellis 4:55 pm
has not appeared out of moderation.
Rev, it did contain a few links but only to THIS page.
This would unite/confuse the white settler vote quite nicely.
It might ‘rouse’ the ‘disgruntled with the SNP but don’t want to vote for right wing party’ and still want Indy so can’t vote Labour brigade, but then again they are now firmly in the habit of staying at home on vote days.
And it will provide a vote for those who believe in womens’ rights, who believe in Immigration Control and are seriously worried about changing demographics currently ongoing, in its current form, and who want Indy and know fine well the SNP are betrayers on that subject.
If Trump/Musk is behind this, it risks enabling a separate Scottish entity, under their influence, and gaining control/or a say in the running of the biggest oil reserve in Europe.
From a negotiating point of view, why would they not. The very threat of it will be enough for Westminster to come running to the table to give away stuff to them to prevent it.
I can’t wait for Swinney and Wishart’s ‘Make the SNP Great Again’ campaign.
After indyref I always said the easiest means of achieving independence is through English nationalists. If you believe Scotland does not exist as a country then neither does England.
Oh… Gawd !!!
Stop playing primary school games about word definitions!!
Anyone over the age of 10 knows the word “country” has multiple definitions….dependant on context !
When the political landscape becomes stale and stagnant, people always vote for the outsiders and disruptors.
That’s what the SNP votes were in the 2000’s, that’s what the MAGA vote was last year in the US and what Reform support will be in Scotland next year.
Scotland is not immune to that, as we have seen in the shakedown at the last General Election where Scots were so despondent that they scattered back into the fold of the traditional bipolarism.
If Reform offered another independence referendum on its platform for HR26, they’d get substantial support, especially from those that have come to loathe the inadequate pansies that bowed to the satanic woke death cult.
Desperate times call for desperate measures.
Reform is poised to gain substantial support in England: their way to secure power in England would be to make Scotland an independent country that would not affect their majority at Westminster.
Then I can imagine the two countries working in better harmony if there were two separate but like minded governments, with an Alba – Reform coalition at Holyrood in strong defense of similar policies that brought Trump to power in the USA.
Men out of women’s spaces.
Meritocracy instead of thinly veiled DEI racism.
Drill, baby, drill.
Imagine the wealth boom. One can dream.
All my friends down south who are Brexity types have no sentimentality about the Union whatsoever – this article does not surprise me at all. Reform want to change stuff dramatically, they have no respect for institutions, and getting rid of Scotland probably makes what they want to do easier. Also, prior to the Brexit Referendum Farage was on record as saying that if it was close he’d keep pushing. Hold your horses.
Definitely taking on the SNP carrots for votes mantra.
I would trust Farage and Co not very far at all.
I am definitely not convinced ALBA ISp for me in 2026 and 28/29
Here’s Grok again.
(It answered the question in less than half a second.)
Q: ‘Why would it make sense for Nigel Farage of the Reform UK party to offer Scots a second independence referendum?’
A: ‘Nigel Farage, as a prominent figure associated with Reform UK, might see strategic political sense in offering Scots a second independence referendum for several reasons, rooted in both ideology and electoral pragmatism. While Farage and Reform UK are historically unionist—emphasizing British sovereignty and opposing the breakup of the UK—the move could align with their broader goals, particularly if framed as a populist gambit to disrupt the status quo and capitalize on Scotland’s political dynamics.
First, it could appeal to Reform UK’s anti-establishment ethos. The Scottish National Party (SNP) has dominated Scottish politics since 2007, pushing for independence while facing criticism for governance failures (e.g., NHS waiting times, education rankings). By offering a referendum, Farage could position Reform UK as a bold alternative, forcing a decisive resolution to the independence question that the SNP has long demanded but failed to secure from reluctant Westminster governments. This could resonate with Scots frustrated by stalled progress, especially those who voted Yes in 2014 (44.7%) or have since shifted toward independence (polls hover around 45-48% support in 2025), but who distrust the SNP’s delivery.
Second, it’s a tactical play to fracture the Scottish vote. In the 2024 UK general election, Reform UK polled 7% in Scotland (about 170,000 votes), finishing fourth but showing growth potential among right-leaning, pro-Brexit, and disaffected voters. The SNP and Scottish Labour dominate the pro- and anti-independence blocs, respectively, while the Conservatives hold unionist ground. A referendum pledge could peel off pro-independence voters from the SNP who prioritize the vote over party loyalty, especially if Farage frames it as “settling the issue” rather than endorsing independence. Simultaneously, it might unsettle Labour and the Tories, who oppose another referendum, exposing their hesitancy to trust the electorate—a stance Reform UK could exploit as elitist.
Third, it fits Farage’s history of leveraging referendums for political gain. His Brexit success via the 2016 EU referendum (where Scotland voted 62% Remain) showcased his ability to weaponize direct democracy. Offering a second Scottish vote could mirror this, betting that a No result (with unionist sentiment still near 50%) would cripple the SNP’s raison d’être, weakening a key rival in UK politics. Even a Yes outcome might not harm Reform UK long-term—Scotland’s exit could amplify English nationalism, a core Farage constituency, and reshape Westminster politics in Reform’s favor by reducing SNP influence.
The logic hinges on risk and reward.
Reform UK’s limited Scottish seats (zero in 2024) mean it has little to lose there, but much to gain if the referendum disrupts the SNP-Labour duopoly ahead of 2026. Farage could pitch it as respecting democracy while betting on unionist resilience or a post-independence pivot. Critics would argue it contradicts his unionism, but he could counter that it’s about giving Scots a voice — consistent with his populist brand — while banking on a fractured Scotland boosting Reform UK’s UK-wide relevance.’
Or we can speak to people on the street. And their information is more relevant than AI which is a distillation of already given views without the human nuance. Anyway Morton vs Falkirk on just now. A weekend of six Nation action and the Cheltenham Festival to come. What’s not to like about this time of year. Une Sportifs love it.
Sorry for this unrelated point but who is it who keeps attacking the site? Is there some team of genderwoo hackers who became a little upset at Stu’s coverage of the case of Sandie Peggie?
Saville-Smith: Is Scotland A Colony?
The Western Cognitive Empire And The Rhetoric Of Colonialism
link to journal.thenewpolis.com
Sara Salyers talks to Norrie hunter. Skip forward past the first ~30 mins.
Sara explains how England took over Scotland and thus Scotland was colonised.
“20th Feb 2025 Sara Salyers and Chris Lynott”
link to caledonmedia.scot
So, is Scotland a colony or not? I suggest this is an irrelevant
question because it hands power to academics and politicians
who control the definitions and the processes of categorisation.
The language and methods of colonialism are dynamic and
inherently designed to categorise and conquer, to divide and
rule. I suggest a more straightforward approach to the analysis of power. Even after the devolution settlement which was designedto take the oxygen out of Independence back in 1999, Scotland still lacks power over Broadcasting, Constitutional affairs,Immigration policy, Energy Strategy, Equal Opportunities, Trade & Industry, Foreign Policy, Defence & Security, Economic Policy,Borrowing Powers & Monetary Policy, Taxation, Social Security,Pensions and Telecoms, including the Broadband which brings me to you.
In the 21st century we live in an interconnected world where
sovereignty is always limited, or shared (depending on your
perspective) and control can never be ‘taken back’. This was the
slogan of the Brexiteers in England who dragged Scotland out of
the European Union against the will of 62% who voted to
Remain. The last time Scotland returned a majority of votes for a Conservative Government was in 1955, but it is the current
Conservative Government, in 2021, which decides the policies
which shape Scottish futures. It is this disjunct between
democracy and power which legitimises the recourse to the So, is Scotland a colony or not? I suggest this is an irrelevant
question because it hands power to academics and politicians
who control the definitions and the processes of categorisation.
The language and methods of colonialism are dynamic and
inherently designed to categorise and conquer, to divide and
rule. I suggest a more straightforward approach to the analysis of power. Even after the devolution settlement which was designed to take the oxygen out of Independence back in 1999, Scotland still lacks power over Broadcasting, Constitutional affairs, Immigration policy, Energy Strategy, Equal Opportunities, Trade & Industry, Foreign Policy, Defence & Security, Economic Policy, Borrowing Powers & Monetary Policy,Taxation, Social Security, Pensions and Telecoms, including the Broadband which brings me to you.
In the 21st century we live in an interconnected world where
sovereignty is always limited, or shared (depending on your
perspective) and control can never be ‘taken back’. This was the
slogan of the Brexiteers in England who dragged Scotland out of
the European Union against the will of 62% who voted to
Remain. The last time Scotland returned a majority of votes for a Conservative Government was in 1955, but it is the current
Conservative Government, in 2021, which decides the policies
which shape Scottish futures. It is this disjunct between
democracy and power which legitimises the recourse to the rhetoric of colonialism by Scots. This powerlessness is what most Scots now see, this is what most Scots now feel, we sense that we are governed by people who do not have our interests in their hearts. And this result will be reflected in three weeks-time, in the Scottish elections of the 6th of May, where Independence is the primary issue.
News to me Scotland has no control over taxation.
I’ll write to the relevant authorities pointing this out and demand back the uniquely Scottish taxes I get hit with every year.
I’ll keep you posted on how I get on.
Congratulations on shoehorning in your favourite “dragged oot of the EU agin oor will” beef, not once but twice. Beef mince obviously, as Scotland was never in the EU in the first place. It was the UK that joined, so the UK had to leave. Of course, your myopia means that obvious fact will forever lie beyond your ken, just as your persistence in sticking with it will forever weaken any other arguments you do make that may be pertinent.
If you do make any.
I’m moderately confident we don’t have a current
Conservative Government, but what the heck, eh? You stay in your happy zone if that’s your preference.
Just how you can claim that the shower of juvenile fuck-ups investing HR have no influence on Scotland’s futures beats me. They’ve trashed the integrity and reputation of our legal system, they’ve made our institutional grasp of human biology the laughing stock of the world, they’ve spaffed uncounted millions up the wall on disastrous ferries, jamjar recycling, malicious lawfare and doomed legal no-hope campaigns, they’ve run our educational and health systems into the ground.
If that’s what they do when they’ve allegedly no power, let’s all ensure they never get any more.
Yawn……
Gosh, Sam,
I know I’m a dozy old duffer, but have I really missed the run up to Scottish elections on 6th May ?
The Conservatives are still (mis)ruling us and Mr Starmer is just a nightmare from which I can hope to awake ?
Please bro, say it ain’t so.
While I don’t discount the possibility that what the Rev is saying here may well pan out, we need to keep in mind that, when you follow the money (and the hugely disproportionate media coverage, not least Question Time) it’s clear Farage is controlled opposition. Whoever pays the piper, calls the tune… UKIP went from a fringe single-issue party, to genuine voice of dissent, after the BNP gained 50+ councillors in England and were themselves on QT. From then on, Farage has been wheeled out and nauseum to be, in his own words, the “acceptable face of dissent”. He’ll do what he’s told, to bring as many disaffected under his umbrella, be it UKIP, Brexit Party or now Reform, but what he won’t do is go against the establishment. As long as they remain resolute in keeping Scotland (and I see little evidence that will change anytime soon, if ever) then he can’t be seen as a viable alternative.
“Reform UK rule out Scottish independence referendum”
REFORM UK have ruled out supporting a Scottish independence referendum after social media rumours suggested Nigel Farage would consider granting one.
link to thenational.scot
Cui Bono from these constant malware attacks? A great article posted by Stu designed to instigate discussions.
Very interesting.
Another scenario is that the English nationalists in Reform could table a motion for English independence. Ie dump the jocks. Us scrounging impoverished lot who only get by with handouts from merry old England. As they have believed this bullshit for years they’d eascdunobudecchutraj
I guess none of the other major parties would participate in another independence referendum, so the result would be meaningless.
Farage should offer an independence referendum to Englandshire.
There is scope for Farage right enough
His core supporters in scotland want a change and are not likely to pick up on the small print. The soft yes might give it a wing.
For control of westminster its a whizz idea.
Gives him scope for a bigger majority
Pushes the cash that will be saved by dumping scotland.
Undermines Labour
Of course once in power he can disregard or undermine the process, and cut the Scottish budget.
I can hear the silence from the SNP leaders incapable of seeing any pothole.
When I listen the Swinney i could be tempted by Farage if only to see the SNP burn.
@Shug
I am hard Yes. I am going with the prospect of a Reform PM giving us a Referendum. It makes sense for them and us. Line one of their Manifesto will be difficult for the attack SNP lines to say anything. After all aren’t they the Party of Independence?.
I will give vote 1 to SNP but 2 is alba or reform
SNP cause I will be holding my nose
Alba cause I know they will do what they said and reform cause it will piss of Swinney
So lets say Reform didn`t stand in the way of another referendum and the outcome was Yes, would we really want those thick twats in the SNP who have shown they don`t give a friar tuck for Scotland dealing with the logistics of separation with a shark like Farage?
We would be left standing in our underpants,
Certain politicians of a transatlantic nature – no less closer to home – have worked out the age-old strategy of single issue politics to a tee.
They’ll kill Tik-Tok I’ll save it – count ’em.
They hate the high price of Freddos, I’ll lower it – count ’em.
They want Indy I’ll give them a referendum – count’em.
They’ll take that vote, on that promise and give you bugger all.
Who – and excuse the ignorance – the fuck exactly are Reform? Yeah, precisely.
Not wearing it, not falling for it, not interested in it, not propagating it.
Reform, their candidates, their supporters, and their apologists can go and take a flying fuck – they have bugger all interest in anything Scottish – Scotland can give them absolutely nothing they don’t already have.
This is why there has been no foreign investment, interference, agitation or otherwise interest from any nation state, or otherwise anywhere on the planet (or off it) about Scottish Independence – they already own Scotland. Scottish Independence can deliver them nothing they don’t already have.
If Scottish Independence could offer them just a teeny bit of something they don’t already own, then they’d be wanking themselves to death at the prospect and falling over their own dicks to get Scotland Independent.
Reform don’t give a shit about Scotland, because they already own it, they own it the moment they are returned in England and they will be without our supplicant help.
Own London- Own Scotland, easy as that, and so, so many people and nations own London.
What the fuck is wrong with Scotland that it has to look under slabs and down stanks to find some foreign rancid vermin that can deliver us from ourselves – because that’s the state we are at now apparently.
Fuck it, we deserve all we get – you know what kills Scottish Independence “Be Kind”
I spoke with people in Killie after Diageo closed Johnnie Walkers. “Oh it was a tragedy” apparently. I just said nobody in Killie cared that much about it obviously, and was roundly chastised for that.
Yeah, really? Well not a single tanker went on fire and Diageo wagons still transit through Killie. Diageo Headquarters are barely an hour up the road in Edinburgh and not a single glazier has had to pull a weekend shift to this day. You can buy still buy Diageo spirits in every shop in Killie – and they do – that’s Scotland in microcosm.
We’re a failed nation, of weak kneed sycophants who’ll suck at the dry tit of any old beldam who pats us on the head and says “There there, don’t cry for ye will have a wee sweetie fae the manky pocket o’ ma goonie, now go to sleep wee pet”
It simply isn’t healthy for a failed state of a Union to be held together while over 50% of Scots want tf out of it. Even if the figure was to continue lingering at or around the 45% mark, that state of affairs is grossly unhealthy, and not at all tenable.
So the main question where reform and Mr Farage are concerned will revolve around democracy. Will reform respect democracy and accept that Scotland has an absolute right to full autonomy?
That’s what it will boil down to when push comes to shove.