The second vote is where supporters of independence can maximise pro-independence representation by voting for parties that won few or no constituency seats.
Whether you think, as I do, that the SNP support for devolution was a mistake from the outset or that the mistake came later, the situation today remains the same. Devolved politicians will not end devolution. It's like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.
One day, perhaps one day soon, people will realise that independence requires two organisations. Firstly, the strategists with a mass membership and one objective, independence. Secondly, we require a secondary political wing, featuring MPs, MSPs and councillors, etc.
Do you know why Joe? Because the Bruce thought he would annexe Ireland..bad move Jimmy. Didnae work but unfortunately they left 'ulster Scots' behind to make that region a total mess. So you have the proddie Scots and the catholic Irish and boy what a mix.However as you no doubt have seen the northern Irish are now contemplating reunion with the south..who might not want them....I think Eire should be very careful about taking on the UK mess.It will be very interesting to see what happens there...however my focus is OUR Scotland and getting rid of the hostile foreign english who infect OUR land..and wish the best to all of Ireland.
This is a complete distortion of Scottish and Irish history, so much it's not even worth trying to correct any of it, let alone all of it. Dr Who would laugh laugh laugh.
Might be a distortion in your eyes....as you know history is bunk. My concern is Scotland's freedom and independence...at critical point now that the foreign english have handed our land to another foreign nation to use as a military base to attack other nations without telling the SG. That's no laughing matter...
Your ideas won't help Scotland's fight for freedom and independence. Because Scotland is already a colony where our next door hostile foreign english are handing out our land to another foreign nation so they can bring in their troops to attack another nation..WITHOUT TELLING THE SG...(while they steal our resources to keep the lights on in foreign england.)
The only answer is the Irish way. Are the Irish independent and have they kicked the foreign english out of their country.?...yes......but they did it with a steely backbone...with no recourse to a 'democratic electoral system...' this is the only way we will find our freedom again..Chatting about this system or that won't cut it.....time to stiffen our backbone ..like our cousins.
On this occasion I do not feel that you are being entirely fair to Project Arbroath.
I am not criticising you for what you have said, since that is what it is.
You have interpreted, and that is fair comment.
The unfairness is the unfairness of omission.
Project Arbroath are explicit that they are not telling anyone how to vote, and furthermore are explicit in that it will be the exercising of our sovereignty by the people of Scotland that will lead to our self-determination and Liberation.
What they said was this:
"Which means that if you want to maximise the number of pro-independence MSPs (and reduce the number of Unionist MSPs at the same time) you might want to reconsider which party gets your second vote."
Explicitly that does state that if one desires to minimise the number of Unionist MSPs then consider how to cast your List vote.
That bit is not complicated.
I do not regard that as idiocy.
Educating people as to how the system works is part of our route forward.
Getting people to think WHY they should vote or NOT vote for particular parties and their policy proposals is a also an essential part of our route to progress.
PA are achieving that here.
If you look at the situation that confronts us - as we do here on your blog Peter, then I think it is fair to say that providing people with the reason and tools [1] to consider the arithmetic possibilities of the possible permutations of outcomes should be a good thing.
And another thing.
Since Project Arbroath have explicitly recognised, elsewhere, that they view the current SNP leadership cabal as being Devolutionist in outlook and action they most certainly are under no illusion that advocating voting SNP is voting for Independence.
They have recognised that disconnect.
Similarly with the Green party, who they have previously recognised are clearly not primarily an 'Independence' party.
So it would be unfair to interpret this particular mail shot as if that were not the case.
People can make a donation or buy some of their booklets to help distribute them here. [2]
The Project Arbroath reference you provided focuses on why people should support the return of Scotland's independent statehood. There are plenty of (example) reasons provided.
However, on how this might happen the text merely states "Read the booklet to discover how we can restore Scotland's independence without asking for permission" under the section "Getting our independence back".
In order to reveal the mechanism the booklet must be published and/or a donation made.
I realise that the minimum sum is nominal and will be used to print more booklets. But ...
Surely any plan or process to restore Scotland's full self-government should be front, foremost and published widely for an assessment to be made before anyone can reasonably be expected to commit to support it?
As far as I am aware Project Arbroath have been advocating for the only currently publicly known process that leads to Independence and will advocate for others, if and when they might be made public.
I've found plenty on the history of the period leading up to Union and what Scotland might look like after Independence but nothing on the mechanism. Educational stuff on Claim of Right, written constitution, decentralisation of power, direct democracy etc largely akin to what Salvo do.
That is all laudable in its own right but I can find nothing on how that is achieved or the Manifesto For Independence.
Do you have the wording that is used in the Project Arbroath booklet regarding this process?
Chances of Liberate Scotland getting a seat are absolute zero - not even all activists have heard of them let alone the voting public. Chances of Alba winning a seat with their problems are about 2 Kelvin, and that's being generous.
People like to be heard saying 'it isn't all about the SNP'. But in fact, it IS all about the SNP. That is the nub of the problem. No 'solution' works unless the SNP is on board. Even if an electoral miracle occurs and Alba etc. win a handful of seats, any 'solution' would still require the SNP to be on board.
That is just one of the many questions Alba etc. strenuously avoid answering - how do you propose the persuade the SNP to go along with whatever it is you are proposing? Another question being what the fuck is it you are proposing?
It was always the case that the most vital task facing the independence movement over the past couple of years was to get the SNP back to being the party of independence. The independence movement as whole was not interested in even trying to do the only thing that could possibly have made the 2026 election the trigger for a process leading to a proper constitutional referendum.
I will never tire of reminding pro-independence activists that they shot both their feet clean off by ignoring the likes of Mike Wallace and myself.
Here's the problem Peter..apart from our traitorous politicians.... not enough Scots read your substack or even 'the National'...that's the sticking point..they don't understand anything. They don't seem to understand that the American military have doubled flights at Prestwick.( just thought I'd throw that in..while the SG are voting to stop american flights/ troops landing here.) They don't understand the voting 1 and 2. So I want the FPTP brought back. The cesspit use it..why can't we. Yes I know SD says the other system is best but ah dinna care.I want a system that the Scots can identify with...ie..the ane wi' aw' the votes wins. Simples!( SD will greet no doot)
And while on the subject of american military using our country like a base..what do we do if we vote to stop them and they keep doing it? Shoot the b*st*rds?This is what happens when you have a foreign hostile nation o' turds running yer country. We could shoot them as well.
In fact declare UDI and anyone not doing as we say..we shoot them. I reckon that would focus foreign english and foreign american minds...fairly quickly...Wid ye think?
Catherine, you reply seems to indicate that you consider that there are only 2 possible options for how an electoral system is to be implemented.
Just because you do not like the outcome from the current Holyrood FPTP + Party List system does not in fact mean that the preferable alternative would be to go back to the unrepresentative and anti-democratic British winner-takes-all system.
There are in fact a wide array of alternative systems implemented elsewhere in the world beyond the British horizons.
The major problem with the existing FPTP+ 'make up' system is that the Political Parties have a complete stranglehold of the patronage over the 'Additional Member' part of the system
Constituency plus some proportionality is not inherently a 'bad' idea of itself.
There has been extensive study of how 'proper' proportionality could be implemented and how an electoral system could be made 'more' democratic.
See for example the consideration of multi-member constituencies by Professor Denis Mollinson. [1] and Single Transferrable Vote [2]/
Well said. The present additional member system (AMS) works well in terms of it's true purpose. It is fairly good at achieving proportionality. The problem is not the voting system, but the fact that the parties benefiting from the system are not all Scottish.
What none of the would-be magicians mention is that conning your way to achieving a 'pro-Independence' majority representation in the Scottish Parliament on the back of a minority of the popular votes cast does not provide legitimacy to take any action on realising Scotland's Cause.
Which is just as well since none of them have a plan, process or prospectus for achieving nation-state status for Scotland.
I am not some mindless happy-clappy drone who applauds and cheers on cue. If I am negative it is because I am honest. There is no reason to be other than negative. I note that you didn't provide even one such reason.
Whether you think, as I do, that the SNP support for devolution was a mistake from the outset or that the mistake came later, the situation today remains the same. Devolved politicians will not end devolution. It's like asking turkeys to vote for Christmas.
One day, perhaps one day soon, people will realise that independence requires two organisations. Firstly, the strategists with a mass membership and one objective, independence. Secondly, we require a secondary political wing, featuring MPs, MSPs and councillors, etc.
Independence will only be restored by an Act of a repossessed Scottish Parliament.
Do you know why Joe? Because the Bruce thought he would annexe Ireland..bad move Jimmy. Didnae work but unfortunately they left 'ulster Scots' behind to make that region a total mess. So you have the proddie Scots and the catholic Irish and boy what a mix.However as you no doubt have seen the northern Irish are now contemplating reunion with the south..who might not want them....I think Eire should be very careful about taking on the UK mess.It will be very interesting to see what happens there...however my focus is OUR Scotland and getting rid of the hostile foreign english who infect OUR land..and wish the best to all of Ireland.
For OUR Scotland and her weans
This is a complete distortion of Scottish and Irish history, so much it's not even worth trying to correct any of it, let alone all of it. Dr Who would laugh laugh laugh.
Might be a distortion in your eyes....as you know history is bunk. My concern is Scotland's freedom and independence...at critical point now that the foreign english have handed our land to another foreign nation to use as a military base to attack other nations without telling the SG. That's no laughing matter...
For OUR Scotland and her weans.
Thank you for your comment n4m3.
Your ideas won't help Scotland's fight for freedom and independence. Because Scotland is already a colony where our next door hostile foreign english are handing out our land to another foreign nation so they can bring in their troops to attack another nation..WITHOUT TELLING THE SG...(while they steal our resources to keep the lights on in foreign england.)
The only answer is the Irish way. Are the Irish independent and have they kicked the foreign english out of their country.?...yes......but they did it with a steely backbone...with no recourse to a 'democratic electoral system...' this is the only way we will find our freedom again..Chatting about this system or that won't cut it.....time to stiffen our backbone ..like our cousins.
For OUR Scotland and her colonised weans.
Northern Ireland remains.
So back tae my idea SD ..UDI an shoot a' the b*sta*rds that don't agree wi us.
The Bruce would have approved..unfortunately it's no' the medieval era...born too late...
However if we do resort to schiltrons again ..you're in the front line jimmy...wi'. me.....we'll let you do the counting....
For OUR Scotland and her weans
On this occasion I do not feel that you are being entirely fair to Project Arbroath.
I am not criticising you for what you have said, since that is what it is.
You have interpreted, and that is fair comment.
The unfairness is the unfairness of omission.
Project Arbroath are explicit that they are not telling anyone how to vote, and furthermore are explicit in that it will be the exercising of our sovereignty by the people of Scotland that will lead to our self-determination and Liberation.
What they said was this:
"Which means that if you want to maximise the number of pro-independence MSPs (and reduce the number of Unionist MSPs at the same time) you might want to reconsider which party gets your second vote."
Explicitly that does state that if one desires to minimise the number of Unionist MSPs then consider how to cast your List vote.
That bit is not complicated.
I do not regard that as idiocy.
Educating people as to how the system works is part of our route forward.
Getting people to think WHY they should vote or NOT vote for particular parties and their policy proposals is a also an essential part of our route to progress.
PA are achieving that here.
If you look at the situation that confronts us - as we do here on your blog Peter, then I think it is fair to say that providing people with the reason and tools [1] to consider the arithmetic possibilities of the possible permutations of outcomes should be a good thing.
And another thing.
Since Project Arbroath have explicitly recognised, elsewhere, that they view the current SNP leadership cabal as being Devolutionist in outlook and action they most certainly are under no illusion that advocating voting SNP is voting for Independence.
They have recognised that disconnect.
Similarly with the Green party, who they have previously recognised are clearly not primarily an 'Independence' party.
So it would be unfair to interpret this particular mail shot as if that were not the case.
People can make a donation or buy some of their booklets to help distribute them here. [2]
;-)
[1] https://projectarbroath.scot/electoral-calculator.html
[2] https://projectarbroath.scot/#booklet-info
The Project Arbroath reference you provided focuses on why people should support the return of Scotland's independent statehood. There are plenty of (example) reasons provided.
However, on how this might happen the text merely states "Read the booklet to discover how we can restore Scotland's independence without asking for permission" under the section "Getting our independence back".
In order to reveal the mechanism the booklet must be published and/or a donation made.
I realise that the minimum sum is nominal and will be used to print more booklets. But ...
Surely any plan or process to restore Scotland's full self-government should be front, foremost and published widely for an assessment to be made before anyone can reasonably be expected to commit to support it?
As far as I am aware Project Arbroath have been advocating for the only currently publicly known process that leads to Independence and will advocate for others, if and when they might be made public.
That is the Manifesto for Independence.
I've found plenty on the history of the period leading up to Union and what Scotland might look like after Independence but nothing on the mechanism. Educational stuff on Claim of Right, written constitution, decentralisation of power, direct democracy etc largely akin to what Salvo do.
That is all laudable in its own right but I can find nothing on how that is achieved or the Manifesto For Independence.
Do you have the wording that is used in the Project Arbroath booklet regarding this process?
Chances of Liberate Scotland getting a seat are absolute zero - not even all activists have heard of them let alone the voting public. Chances of Alba winning a seat with their problems are about 2 Kelvin, and that's being generous.
People like to be heard saying 'it isn't all about the SNP'. But in fact, it IS all about the SNP. That is the nub of the problem. No 'solution' works unless the SNP is on board. Even if an electoral miracle occurs and Alba etc. win a handful of seats, any 'solution' would still require the SNP to be on board.
That is just one of the many questions Alba etc. strenuously avoid answering - how do you propose the persuade the SNP to go along with whatever it is you are proposing? Another question being what the fuck is it you are proposing?
It was always the case that the most vital task facing the independence movement over the past couple of years was to get the SNP back to being the party of independence. The independence movement as whole was not interested in even trying to do the only thing that could possibly have made the 2026 election the trigger for a process leading to a proper constitutional referendum.
I will never tire of reminding pro-independence activists that they shot both their feet clean off by ignoring the likes of Mike Wallace and myself.
Here's the problem Peter..apart from our traitorous politicians.... not enough Scots read your substack or even 'the National'...that's the sticking point..they don't understand anything. They don't seem to understand that the American military have doubled flights at Prestwick.( just thought I'd throw that in..while the SG are voting to stop american flights/ troops landing here.) They don't understand the voting 1 and 2. So I want the FPTP brought back. The cesspit use it..why can't we. Yes I know SD says the other system is best but ah dinna care.I want a system that the Scots can identify with...ie..the ane wi' aw' the votes wins. Simples!( SD will greet no doot)
And while on the subject of american military using our country like a base..what do we do if we vote to stop them and they keep doing it? Shoot the b*st*rds?This is what happens when you have a foreign hostile nation o' turds running yer country. We could shoot them as well.
In fact declare UDI and anyone not doing as we say..we shoot them. I reckon that would focus foreign english and foreign american minds...fairly quickly...Wid ye think?
For OUR Scotland and her dozy weans.
Catherine, you reply seems to indicate that you consider that there are only 2 possible options for how an electoral system is to be implemented.
Just because you do not like the outcome from the current Holyrood FPTP + Party List system does not in fact mean that the preferable alternative would be to go back to the unrepresentative and anti-democratic British winner-takes-all system.
There are in fact a wide array of alternative systems implemented elsewhere in the world beyond the British horizons.
The major problem with the existing FPTP+ 'make up' system is that the Political Parties have a complete stranglehold of the patronage over the 'Additional Member' part of the system
Constituency plus some proportionality is not inherently a 'bad' idea of itself.
There has been extensive study of how 'proper' proportionality could be implemented and how an electoral system could be made 'more' democratic.
See for example the consideration of multi-member constituencies by Professor Denis Mollinson. [1] and Single Transferrable Vote [2]/
[1] https://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~denis/
[2] https://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~denis/STV2023.pdf
;-)
Well said. The present additional member system (AMS) works well in terms of it's true purpose. It is fairly good at achieving proportionality. The problem is not the voting system, but the fact that the parties benefiting from the system are not all Scottish.
There are different variants of proportional representation systems available. But ...
it hardly matters unless
a) There is an implementable plan to achieve the goal of Scotland's Cause
and
b) A majority of the people endorse it by voting for parties advocating it.
Neither a) nor b) are in play at the moment.
What none of the would-be magicians mention is that conning your way to achieving a 'pro-Independence' majority representation in the Scottish Parliament on the back of a minority of the popular votes cast does not provide legitimacy to take any action on realising Scotland's Cause.
Which is just as well since none of them have a plan, process or prospectus for achieving nation-state status for Scotland.
Blazing negativity
I am not some mindless happy-clappy drone who applauds and cheers on cue. If I am negative it is because I am honest. There is no reason to be other than negative. I note that you didn't provide even one such reason.