"SNP strike Budget deal with LibDems despite free pass from Labour"
It's that more collegiate approach which used to give Scots more confidence in the Scottish Government than the UK one. There's a bit of "Conservative" stuff in there and Green stuff, though the Greens are still in a huff because as the tail, they can no longer wag the dog.
I wasn't impressed by Robison to start with but under Swinney she's really come into her own.
"‘everybody knows’ that BLiS is just British Labour"
Most institutions in Scotland are primarily British, or rather English, given that, since at least our annexation in 1707 'British' primarily relates to imposition and assimilation of English values, English laws, English Crown, English culture/language, i.e. English Imperialism and hence English domination of Scots.
Even the SNP has become British/English in most of these terms, comfortable in its neutrality, 'brought under colonialism's wing' as Fanon puts it.
This is where Sarwar's (or Swinney's) claim to prioritise Scotland's interests is a falsehood as we know from postcolonial theory that 'the colonized are always sacrificed' (Cesaire) on the altar of colonialism.
The big problem is the sheer tribalism that exists. "My party is better than yours" is at least a bit positive but "Your party are traitors" is purely divisive and non-productive.
Whatever the motivation Sarwar's "revolt" against Starmer has to be a good thing for Indy, at least a step in the right direction. Yet that tribal hatred of other parties gets whole articles by the usual suspects just using it to continue the attack on Sarwar and Scottish Labour. And deep down Westminster just laughs laughs laughs. "Stupid Scots - divide and keep conquered. Tick. Another 320 years.".
Same happens whenever the Scottish Conservatives showed dissent with BoJo, Truss or Sunak. All the tribalists were interested in was the usual puerile comments about "DRoss".
It would indeed make you despair. Such stupid cupidity in a so-called Nation.
Sarwar is simply a(nother) political careerist. What makes him stand out is that he is more inept than most.
As things stand Labour in Scotland look like they will take a hiding in May and, in so doing, register their worst performance certainly since the advent of Devolution and probably in all the time that they have been active in Scotland.
So Sarwar's effort to push Starmer out was a shot to nothing. Either he was successful and Starmer exists stage left or he failed but Starmer can't get rid of him (as the latter is too weak to do so).
So Sarwar may have calculated on improving the public perception of himself by either helping topple Starmer or trying but failing. Either way he might hope to get a boost in the polls as the election approaches.
Come May either Starmer or Sarwar will be gone. Or possibly both, depending on how the respective elections go (for Labour) in England and Scotland.
The media, particularly the BBC, were bigging up Sarwar in advance of his press conference. Now that it seemingly hasn't had the desired effect the 'story' is all about how his 'call' has backfired.
It is no great significance other than it gives those (tiny amount of self-interested persons) in the protected politico-press bubble something to keep them gossiping about between now and the Holyrood election.
It's also far too early to say he "failed" (at what exactly?) - and some of the Westminster-centric ones even think his purpose was to bring Starmer down for the sake of the UK.
Bearing in mind Mark Diffley ex of Ipsos Mori formed Progress Scotland a few years back with Angus Robertson of the SNP to work on Independence, I'd guess he sees things the same way as me and an increasing number of people. For Scottish Labour to survive, it needs to break free from the apron strings and become its own party, called Labour of Scotland or Your Actual Socialist Scotland or whatever.
And to be blunt Scotland needs it to get away from the prissy puritan cliquey antisocial weird SNP who call everything progressive and inclusive even when it very clearly ain't.
They would of course need to put Scotland first, and as we know, the only way to actually do that is - Independence. Moving on, if Scottish Labour came out for Independence it would be a complete 74.6% cert, AND they could take the credit for it. It would be the SNP's worst nightmare, hence why the SNP hate Scottish Labour and some cliquey SNP members sneer at them by calling them "British Labour in Scotland", instead of treating them as possible allies.
Excellent piece Peter. I sobbed a' day.( wi laughter)
Whit can ye say but ..'it wis a grand day Gromit!'..watching the pretendy real leader o' the UK huv his hopes dashed...awwwww!
More importantly the real turd reared his wee heid an' we a' saw him...turdy alexander.....that's the 'enemy' as Gray o' the scottish /british./traitorous labour likes to describe the SNP.
'Nice bit o' cheese Gromit...caught that wee rat in the trap at last'...ahhhhh!
Does anyone know how the Scottish opposition branches of English political parties are financed by their head officials? Has Anas Sarwar ever considered going independent, and if so, and more importantly, who would finance a purely independent Scottish Labour Party? In s the same question, how is the SNP financed on the domestic level?
OK this is the way to go: https://archive.is/7g4Dc
"SNP strike Budget deal with LibDems despite free pass from Labour"
It's that more collegiate approach which used to give Scots more confidence in the Scottish Government than the UK one. There's a bit of "Conservative" stuff in there and Green stuff, though the Greens are still in a huff because as the tail, they can no longer wag the dog.
I wasn't impressed by Robison to start with but under Swinney she's really come into her own.
"‘everybody knows’ that BLiS is just British Labour"
Most institutions in Scotland are primarily British, or rather English, given that, since at least our annexation in 1707 'British' primarily relates to imposition and assimilation of English values, English laws, English Crown, English culture/language, i.e. English Imperialism and hence English domination of Scots.
Even the SNP has become British/English in most of these terms, comfortable in its neutrality, 'brought under colonialism's wing' as Fanon puts it.
This is where Sarwar's (or Swinney's) claim to prioritise Scotland's interests is a falsehood as we know from postcolonial theory that 'the colonized are always sacrificed' (Cesaire) on the altar of colonialism.
https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2021/08/01/the-determinants-of-independence-institutions/comment-page-1/
The big problem is the sheer tribalism that exists. "My party is better than yours" is at least a bit positive but "Your party are traitors" is purely divisive and non-productive.
Whatever the motivation Sarwar's "revolt" against Starmer has to be a good thing for Indy, at least a step in the right direction. Yet that tribal hatred of other parties gets whole articles by the usual suspects just using it to continue the attack on Sarwar and Scottish Labour. And deep down Westminster just laughs laughs laughs. "Stupid Scots - divide and keep conquered. Tick. Another 320 years.".
Same happens whenever the Scottish Conservatives showed dissent with BoJo, Truss or Sunak. All the tribalists were interested in was the usual puerile comments about "DRoss".
It would indeed make you despair. Such stupid cupidity in a so-called Nation.
Never trust BBC reorting.
Sarwar is simply a(nother) political careerist. What makes him stand out is that he is more inept than most.
As things stand Labour in Scotland look like they will take a hiding in May and, in so doing, register their worst performance certainly since the advent of Devolution and probably in all the time that they have been active in Scotland.
So Sarwar's effort to push Starmer out was a shot to nothing. Either he was successful and Starmer exists stage left or he failed but Starmer can't get rid of him (as the latter is too weak to do so).
So Sarwar may have calculated on improving the public perception of himself by either helping topple Starmer or trying but failing. Either way he might hope to get a boost in the polls as the election approaches.
Come May either Starmer or Sarwar will be gone. Or possibly both, depending on how the respective elections go (for Labour) in England and Scotland.
The media, particularly the BBC, were bigging up Sarwar in advance of his press conference. Now that it seemingly hasn't had the desired effect the 'story' is all about how his 'call' has backfired.
It is no great significance other than it gives those (tiny amount of self-interested persons) in the protected politico-press bubble something to keep them gossiping about between now and the Holyrood election.
It's also far too early to say he "failed" (at what exactly?) - and some of the Westminster-centric ones even think his purpose was to bring Starmer down for the sake of the UK.
It doesn't matter to the politicos and press whether it's a 'success' or a 'failure', it's the 'story' - any story - that's important.
The great thing (for Indy) is it hit the headlines in a big way - and perhaps will make ordinary punters think. Yes, I'm an optimist.
Bearing in mind Mark Diffley ex of Ipsos Mori formed Progress Scotland a few years back with Angus Robertson of the SNP to work on Independence, I'd guess he sees things the same way as me and an increasing number of people. For Scottish Labour to survive, it needs to break free from the apron strings and become its own party, called Labour of Scotland or Your Actual Socialist Scotland or whatever.
And to be blunt Scotland needs it to get away from the prissy puritan cliquey antisocial weird SNP who call everything progressive and inclusive even when it very clearly ain't.
They would of course need to put Scotland first, and as we know, the only way to actually do that is - Independence. Moving on, if Scottish Labour came out for Independence it would be a complete 74.6% cert, AND they could take the credit for it. It would be the SNP's worst nightmare, hence why the SNP hate Scottish Labour and some cliquey SNP members sneer at them by calling them "British Labour in Scotland", instead of treating them as possible allies.
Ooor Kevin on the Stramash - https://archive.is/riT4v
edit: he gets 2 articles, 2nd is: https://archive.is/CDlQE
edit 2: Mmmm, luvly jubbly. He's been lost since Labour lost its way 13 to 15 years ago or more
and a bit of a different perspective from Lesley Riddoch: https://archive.is/Ejz00
Excellent piece Peter. I sobbed a' day.( wi laughter)
Whit can ye say but ..'it wis a grand day Gromit!'..watching the pretendy real leader o' the UK huv his hopes dashed...awwwww!
More importantly the real turd reared his wee heid an' we a' saw him...turdy alexander.....that's the 'enemy' as Gray o' the scottish /british./traitorous labour likes to describe the SNP.
'Nice bit o' cheese Gromit...caught that wee rat in the trap at last'...ahhhhh!
For OUR Scotland and her waens.
Does anyone know how the Scottish opposition branches of English political parties are financed by their head officials? Has Anas Sarwar ever considered going independent, and if so, and more importantly, who would finance a purely independent Scottish Labour Party? In s the same question, how is the SNP financed on the domestic level?