If you are a supporter of Scotland’s cause and prone to bouts of depression, then you would be well-advised to steer well clear of Robin McAlpine’s column in the Sunday National. Because if his reading of the situation is correct, there is no possibility of Scotland’s independence being restored. At the risk of ruining this and all your subsequent Sundays, I shall quote the relevant parts of Robin’s doom-laden message.
Not only do I have great respect and high regard for Robin, despite never having met him I like him as a person - as opposed to ' political commentator '. I perceive him to be someone of deep moral, intellectual and psychological quality. Nonetheless, he does get on my tits on occasion. This is one of those occasions. It's as if his long status/employment as a " political insider ", which no doubt contributes to his well-informed analyses, also makes him over-cautious and just as prone to " ye cannae dae thatery " as too many in the Pro-Independence demographic
You have superbly highlighted the flaws and contradictions in that article - and his position on Independence in general, so I have nothing to add to that really.
Of course none of us can predict with 100% certainty how, eg the Brit State will act in the future, or what the state-of-play will be re the Constitutional Question within Scotland, but I just can't see under what circumstances the Brits will change their hard recalcitrance voluntarily, ergo, how Independence will be restored without some kind of confrontation with them.
Granted Robin does kind of allude to that, obliquely, but only, in his opinion, after there is demonstrably high support for Independence; such increased support surely contingent on unequivocally strong and concerted action by those charged with achieving that goal - as you correctly state. We're in ' chicken or egg ' territory here.
I'd put the inevitability of confrontation with the Brit State at the core of ( probable ) future scenarios and work from that premise to create the conditions in which that scenario can be fought - and, crucially, won. Otherwise what Robin is stating as an absolute necessity before such confrontation is just another bogus sine-qua-non to add to the already fairly long list of such things; eg a 60/70/80% lead in the polls; in some quarters, the removing/replacing of the SNP as the " main vehicle of/to Independence " and - from the more abstract/ obsessive realm - the total elimination of " Woke " Culture from Scotland; good luck with that given it's international entrenchment and reach: would we really want some kind of Trumpian " Woke " Extermination Gov? That would almost certainly be a ' cure worse than the disease " situation.
The unavoidability of confrontation is one of the 'hard truths' that informs the new thinking on the constitutional issue. The SNP and the rest of the independence industry have a long way to go to catch up.
I really should write an article listing these hard truths. I don't think I've ever done that.
Robin McAlpine has written a lot over a period of time being highly critical of the lack of action on the part of the SNP and stagnation in support for the return of Scotland's independent statehood .
I, therefore, find it surprising that he advocates the very thing that the SNP advocates (as a cop-out from confronting Westminster), which can be characterised as 'building support'.
He must surely be aware that it was the Scottish Independence Referendum campaign is the only mechanism that has caused a genuine and sustained surge in support for restoring Scotland's full self-government. That is, the period when pro-YES support rose from 33% on average in 2012 opinion polls to 45% in the actual vote in September 2014 and onwards/upwards to 50% in surveys by the end of the latter year.
The Scottish Devolution Referendum of 1997 didn't alter underlying support for nation-state status. Neither did the election of the first SNP (minority) government of 2007. Even the SNP parliamentary majority that was returned at the 2011 Scottish election had little effect on sentiment in favour of Scotland's Cause.
The experience of 2012-14 showed that the most effective way to "build a position of strength" and to demonstrate that "independence is the settled will" is to run a time-bound campaign with a specific endpoint at which people indicate their preferred form of government.
Robin, I'm convinced, will never pause his Brit, Labour-style, socialist-internationalism, an ideological, near-cultural position, which, when full-blown, can be violently antithetical to nationalism. Is it at all possible or desirable then to attempt to ride two horses simultaneously i.e. nationalism and internationalism, prior to achieving, first of all, a home-grown, concrete version of socialism in your own country?
As Fanon wrote, about nationalism in the colonial situation:
"National consciousness, which is not nationalism, is the only thing that will give us an international dimension."
As we know, Scottish national consciousness is primarily based on our national culture an oor ain braw Scots langage, withoot whit thar wad be nae naitional consciousness at aw.
Unfortunately we have too many colonially/culturally assimilated and thus conditioned native intellectuals who have yet to figure this out.
Good points, Carmen. For long enough I too was in school of Internationalism-before-Nationalism: it was reading more about people like the Johns MacLean & Maxton that educated me that the two positions, rather than being antagonistic, can be complementary; indeed, mutually productive. It was also the specific experience of England continually voting Tory - Labour's electoral successes under Blair achieved by him merely wearing the costume of that party's former * Socialism *, when in reality being a continuation of Thatcher that dissipated the mirage of, eg " a Working Class Glaswegian & Liverpudlians having more in common than with Middle/Upper Class people in their respective cities ": nice idea, shame about the Brexit/Boris/Bulldozed * Red Wall * reality. Still, at least Robin DOES support Independence, whatever our reservations may be about his other affiliations
On the flipside Argentina's claims to the Malvenas (UN Resolution 2065 1965) is far stronger than Morroco's claims to Cueta / Meliila De facto control Spain since 1668 (Ceuta) / 1497 (Melilla) – >500 years continuous. The Falklands only UK since 1833 (only break: 74 days 1982).
It isn't the US/UK/Israel who get to decide, its the UN & the UN moving forward is going to be more multi-polar than it's been at any time since it's inception. Of course you could receive UN recognition and still not be allowed to leave, so long as there's Oil & Gas it's geopolitically militaristic but right now the world is extremely unpredictable and it is very difficult to assess which way the wind is going to blow, we just have to be prepared to push and push regardless, Independence afterall is a state of mind, win the minds and hearts and from there everything follows it's then only a timeline.
Good point about the UN becoming increasingly multi-polar. The dominance of the superpowers is diminishing, just as did the pre-eminence of European imperial powers in an earlier age. I hate to say it, but this shift is largely driven by the way military power manifests. Not every nation can afford (or want) nuclear weapons. But anybody can have a fleet of drones.
There are other factors, of course. But I feel we are entering one of those periods in history when prevailing power succumbs to countervailing power. I wouldn't like to say whether this is a good thing or not. We might celebrate the demise – or at least the diminishing – of the superpowers, but it is not yet clear what comes next.
As I said, it's difficult to say which way the wind will blow or whether it remains a wind or full-blown maelstrom? Dangerous days indeed.
I do kinda see China in the role of the US in the early 20th Century. They are happy to sit by, play all sides and watch as the US goes the way of the British Empire before it.
Hormuz is Trump's Suez Moment, it's down to the people of the US to end the years of defference to Capital just as the 60's was the end to defference to Class & Aristocracy in Britain!
Superb demolition of Nutcase McAlpine's crackpot theories such as....'oh please please let us be free your great and masterful Blighty.'.sob!...an' ye can keep our resources and ye can still call us turds that won't flush away..P.L.E.E.E.E.E.S.E!'
This to the country that has damaged and stolen from so many others in the process of trying to empire build and sadly in which we at one point helped..and now WE are the recipients of the vicious foreign english attention..... as ma mammy used tae say....'HELL MEND YE'.. So in that respect we are getting all we deserve.......however.... 300 years have gone through..Blighty a wee pathetic country noo wi nae resources while Scotland has been hollowed out and abused by Blighty so I reckon we have paid our dues in full and in fact are still paying them....so its time to say in a very unfriendly and deadly way......'oot ya b*st*rds..... and if ye won't go..we'll mak' ye...'
It would be excellent if we could sit down with our lovely neighbours and work out a deal to suit THEM. Aye right Jimmy....ye don't deal and chat ever so respectfully with Alien aboot tae take you apart .....ye defend yerself an if possible destroy it before it destroys you.
Where do we find these ijits like McAlpine I ask myself. Is it in the water?..
Your excellent takedown of the daftie is awe inspiring as is your intellectual approach to regaining freedom for Scotland but I prefer the direct approach..'get oot oor land or you won't survive an' nae f*ckin' please in it.'
Two diametrically opposed approaches that put together could be unstoppable eg..the Scottish UDI Strategy and if that disnae work we're gonny kill ye. How's that sound Peter?
They had their chance....noo let the patriots in who are waiting ..chomping at the bit tae render JUSTICE for Scotland..at last.
As for the rest of the world...they'll deal with us....whisky,salmon..everybody loves us ....and many of them have suffered at the hands of our vicious parasitic neighbours.
It's so easy..get aff yer knees and be a nation again. Go and see The Bruce's grave..or William's monument...see what they did... be inspired..
For OUR Scotland and her weans and those still tae come.
I wouldn't call Robin a "nutcase", exactly. His views can be a bit idiosyncratic at times. But his writing is always both thoughtful and thought-provoking.
Looked up idiosyncratic in dictionary...temperamental peculiarity...next word in dictionary..idiot...mentally deficient person with an intelligence quotient between 20 and 30....a very stupid person.
Not only do I have great respect and high regard for Robin, despite never having met him I like him as a person - as opposed to ' political commentator '. I perceive him to be someone of deep moral, intellectual and psychological quality. Nonetheless, he does get on my tits on occasion. This is one of those occasions. It's as if his long status/employment as a " political insider ", which no doubt contributes to his well-informed analyses, also makes him over-cautious and just as prone to " ye cannae dae thatery " as too many in the Pro-Independence demographic
You have superbly highlighted the flaws and contradictions in that article - and his position on Independence in general, so I have nothing to add to that really.
Of course none of us can predict with 100% certainty how, eg the Brit State will act in the future, or what the state-of-play will be re the Constitutional Question within Scotland, but I just can't see under what circumstances the Brits will change their hard recalcitrance voluntarily, ergo, how Independence will be restored without some kind of confrontation with them.
Granted Robin does kind of allude to that, obliquely, but only, in his opinion, after there is demonstrably high support for Independence; such increased support surely contingent on unequivocally strong and concerted action by those charged with achieving that goal - as you correctly state. We're in ' chicken or egg ' territory here.
I'd put the inevitability of confrontation with the Brit State at the core of ( probable ) future scenarios and work from that premise to create the conditions in which that scenario can be fought - and, crucially, won. Otherwise what Robin is stating as an absolute necessity before such confrontation is just another bogus sine-qua-non to add to the already fairly long list of such things; eg a 60/70/80% lead in the polls; in some quarters, the removing/replacing of the SNP as the " main vehicle of/to Independence " and - from the more abstract/ obsessive realm - the total elimination of " Woke " Culture from Scotland; good luck with that given it's international entrenchment and reach: would we really want some kind of Trumpian " Woke " Extermination Gov? That would almost certainly be a ' cure worse than the disease " situation.
The unavoidability of confrontation is one of the 'hard truths' that informs the new thinking on the constitutional issue. The SNP and the rest of the independence industry have a long way to go to catch up.
I really should write an article listing these hard truths. I don't think I've ever done that.
Robin McAlpine has written a lot over a period of time being highly critical of the lack of action on the part of the SNP and stagnation in support for the return of Scotland's independent statehood .
I, therefore, find it surprising that he advocates the very thing that the SNP advocates (as a cop-out from confronting Westminster), which can be characterised as 'building support'.
He must surely be aware that it was the Scottish Independence Referendum campaign is the only mechanism that has caused a genuine and sustained surge in support for restoring Scotland's full self-government. That is, the period when pro-YES support rose from 33% on average in 2012 opinion polls to 45% in the actual vote in September 2014 and onwards/upwards to 50% in surveys by the end of the latter year.
The Scottish Devolution Referendum of 1997 didn't alter underlying support for nation-state status. Neither did the election of the first SNP (minority) government of 2007. Even the SNP parliamentary majority that was returned at the 2011 Scottish election had little effect on sentiment in favour of Scotland's Cause.
The experience of 2012-14 showed that the most effective way to "build a position of strength" and to demonstrate that "independence is the settled will" is to run a time-bound campaign with a specific endpoint at which people indicate their preferred form of government.
Robin, I'm convinced, will never pause his Brit, Labour-style, socialist-internationalism, an ideological, near-cultural position, which, when full-blown, can be violently antithetical to nationalism. Is it at all possible or desirable then to attempt to ride two horses simultaneously i.e. nationalism and internationalism, prior to achieving, first of all, a home-grown, concrete version of socialism in your own country?
As Fanon wrote, about nationalism in the colonial situation:
"National consciousness, which is not nationalism, is the only thing that will give us an international dimension."
As we know, Scottish national consciousness is primarily based on our national culture an oor ain braw Scots langage, withoot whit thar wad be nae naitional consciousness at aw.
Unfortunately we have too many colonially/culturally assimilated and thus conditioned native intellectuals who have yet to figure this out.
McDairmid feegured it aw oot mony years ago (see @ 23 mins): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOZocGxL23s
Good points, Carmen. For long enough I too was in school of Internationalism-before-Nationalism: it was reading more about people like the Johns MacLean & Maxton that educated me that the two positions, rather than being antagonistic, can be complementary; indeed, mutually productive. It was also the specific experience of England continually voting Tory - Labour's electoral successes under Blair achieved by him merely wearing the costume of that party's former * Socialism *, when in reality being a continuation of Thatcher that dissipated the mirage of, eg " a Working Class Glaswegian & Liverpudlians having more in common than with Middle/Upper Class people in their respective cities ": nice idea, shame about the Brexit/Boris/Bulldozed * Red Wall * reality. Still, at least Robin DOES support Independence, whatever our reservations may be about his other affiliations
I can think of a lot of people in the independence movement who would fit that description.
On the flipside Argentina's claims to the Malvenas (UN Resolution 2065 1965) is far stronger than Morroco's claims to Cueta / Meliila De facto control Spain since 1668 (Ceuta) / 1497 (Melilla) – >500 years continuous. The Falklands only UK since 1833 (only break: 74 days 1982).
It isn't the US/UK/Israel who get to decide, its the UN & the UN moving forward is going to be more multi-polar than it's been at any time since it's inception. Of course you could receive UN recognition and still not be allowed to leave, so long as there's Oil & Gas it's geopolitically militaristic but right now the world is extremely unpredictable and it is very difficult to assess which way the wind is going to blow, we just have to be prepared to push and push regardless, Independence afterall is a state of mind, win the minds and hearts and from there everything follows it's then only a timeline.
I still hope and pray to see it. 🏴
Good point about the UN becoming increasingly multi-polar. The dominance of the superpowers is diminishing, just as did the pre-eminence of European imperial powers in an earlier age. I hate to say it, but this shift is largely driven by the way military power manifests. Not every nation can afford (or want) nuclear weapons. But anybody can have a fleet of drones.
There are other factors, of course. But I feel we are entering one of those periods in history when prevailing power succumbs to countervailing power. I wouldn't like to say whether this is a good thing or not. We might celebrate the demise – or at least the diminishing – of the superpowers, but it is not yet clear what comes next.
As I said, it's difficult to say which way the wind will blow or whether it remains a wind or full-blown maelstrom? Dangerous days indeed.
I do kinda see China in the role of the US in the early 20th Century. They are happy to sit by, play all sides and watch as the US goes the way of the British Empire before it.
Hormuz is Trump's Suez Moment, it's down to the people of the US to end the years of defference to Capital just as the 60's was the end to defference to Class & Aristocracy in Britain!
McAlpine is to Independence what a sack of tatties is to a beam balance with no weights.
Superb demolition of Nutcase McAlpine's crackpot theories such as....'oh please please let us be free your great and masterful Blighty.'.sob!...an' ye can keep our resources and ye can still call us turds that won't flush away..P.L.E.E.E.E.E.S.E!'
This to the country that has damaged and stolen from so many others in the process of trying to empire build and sadly in which we at one point helped..and now WE are the recipients of the vicious foreign english attention..... as ma mammy used tae say....'HELL MEND YE'.. So in that respect we are getting all we deserve.......however.... 300 years have gone through..Blighty a wee pathetic country noo wi nae resources while Scotland has been hollowed out and abused by Blighty so I reckon we have paid our dues in full and in fact are still paying them....so its time to say in a very unfriendly and deadly way......'oot ya b*st*rds..... and if ye won't go..we'll mak' ye...'
It would be excellent if we could sit down with our lovely neighbours and work out a deal to suit THEM. Aye right Jimmy....ye don't deal and chat ever so respectfully with Alien aboot tae take you apart .....ye defend yerself an if possible destroy it before it destroys you.
Where do we find these ijits like McAlpine I ask myself. Is it in the water?..
Your excellent takedown of the daftie is awe inspiring as is your intellectual approach to regaining freedom for Scotland but I prefer the direct approach..'get oot oor land or you won't survive an' nae f*ckin' please in it.'
Two diametrically opposed approaches that put together could be unstoppable eg..the Scottish UDI Strategy and if that disnae work we're gonny kill ye. How's that sound Peter?
They had their chance....noo let the patriots in who are waiting ..chomping at the bit tae render JUSTICE for Scotland..at last.
As for the rest of the world...they'll deal with us....whisky,salmon..everybody loves us ....and many of them have suffered at the hands of our vicious parasitic neighbours.
It's so easy..get aff yer knees and be a nation again. Go and see The Bruce's grave..or William's monument...see what they did... be inspired..
For OUR Scotland and her weans and those still tae come.
I wouldn't call Robin a "nutcase", exactly. His views can be a bit idiosyncratic at times. But his writing is always both thoughtful and thought-provoking.
Looked up idiosyncratic in dictionary...temperamental peculiarity...next word in dictionary..idiot...mentally deficient person with an intelligence quotient between 20 and 30....a very stupid person.
We agree!
For OUR Scotland and her weans