The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

You're definitely that.

You're the man so confused about your own support for nationalism, you don't even realise that nationalism is a policy.

And you're the man so confused about your own support for the left, you don't even realise that nationalism can never be about the left.

What are you not getting about Salmond and Farage being on the same page with the same script, LJS? Has indie eaten your brain just as comfy showed yesterday that indie has eaten his brain?

"SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon has said another independence referendum would not form any part of a post-election deal with Labour,"

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-scotland-32124685

[eFestivals]

"SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon has said another independence referendum would not form any part of a post-election deal with Labour,"

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-scotland-32124685

get back to me when the SNP no longer have anything about wanting independence on their website, and an explicit statement that they're against independence.

It's against their very purpose and principle to create good govt at Westminster so that the people of Scotland feel more-content with Westminster and less attracted to indie.

What part of that are you struggling with?

Edited March 31, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

get back to me when the SNP no longer have anything about wanting independence on their website, and an explicit statement that they're against independence.

It's against their very purpose and principle to create good govt at Westminster so that the people of Scotland feel more-content with Westminster and less attracted to indie.

What part of that are you struggling with?

Just, all of it, Neil.

[eFestivals]

Just, all of it, Neil.

Do you remember what you voted for in September?

[DomDom1984]

get back to me when the SNP no longer have anything about wanting independence on their website, and an explicit statement that they're against independence.

Utter childish precious shit like this is why I just sit back and laugh at this thread now rather than actually get involved. What an utter rocket.

[eFestivals]

Utter childish precious shit like this is why I just sit back and laugh at this thread now rather than actually get involved. What an utter rocket.

Do you really believe that the SNP want the UK to have perfect government so the appetite for indy evaporates?

Why do you think they'd work against the reason they exist?

The child is the one who laughs this off as an irrelevance.

[LJS]

get back to me when the SNP no longer have anything about wanting independence on their website, and an explicit statement that they're against independence.

It's against their very purpose and principle to create good govt at Westminster so that the people of Scotland feel more-content with Westminster and less attracted to indie.

What part of that are you struggling with?

Of course the SNP remain in favour of independence but they have made it clear that it is off the Table in the Next Parliament at Westminster* & indeed I'm pretty sure you would be thoroughly outraged if they said anything other than that. You may remember that one of my "red lines" when deciding where my vote goes was precisely that the SNP does not attempt to use its likely influence in Westminster to pursue that during the next Parliament. All minor parties in any sort of arrangement with a larger party have to abandon much of what they campaigned for - its the way these things work.

But is it, as you claim "against their very purpose and principle to create good govt at Westminster" ?

It is in their interests to be seen as responsible & reliable. It is in their interests to be part of a Government that delivers the UK from Austerity. Both in straightforward political terms but also because it will be easier to make the case for an Independent Scotland if we are part of a UK that is paying its bills.

Of course their is a danger in that strategy that people up here fall back in love with the UK & turn their backs on Indy. Personally, I'm happy to take that chance.

As for the wrecking stuff, this stems from your fundamental misunderstanding of what the Scottish independence movement is all about. It has been overwhelmingly positive. It is the no side that has talked of "wrecking" "splitting" "tearing apart" & you have fallen for it. You cannot see any other way.

I can.

* of course unforeseen events may change all this e.g. Tory win in out referendum UK votes out/ Scotland votes in. However despite your mythical rise in Tory support in the polls, I don't reckon they'll win enough seats to form a government.

[LJS]

The 3rd point is only relevant if you have knowledge of what other MPs have or haven't done. You don't, but you manage to claim moral superiority for the SNP anyway.

So I need knowledge of what other MP's have done in order to make a judgement. I seem to remember you "assuming" Sturgeon to be guilty of associating with Murdoch because there was no evidence that she hadn't.

"I do hope you're going to string up Salmond and Sturgeon for their flirtations with the Daily Mail, and The Telegraph, and more, as well as their love-in with Murdoch"

"have her diary meetings been published yet, for us to be able to know if she's been sucking Murdoch's cock just as Salmond did?"

So, i'm merely playing by your rules, Neil.

[LJS]

And you're the man so confused about your own support for the left, you don't even realise that nationalism can never be about the left.

tell that to Ghandi & Mandela

Left-wing nationalism describes a form of nationalism based upon social equality, popular sovereignty, and national self-determination.^[1] It has its origins in the Jacobinism of the French Revolution.^[1] Left-wing nationalism typically espouses anti-imperialism.^[2][3] It stands in contrast toright-wing nationalism, and often rejects racist nationalism and fascism,^[2] although minor forms of left-wing nationalism have included intolerance and racial prejudice.^[2]

Notable left-wing nationalist movements in history have included Mahatma Gandhi's Indian National Congress that promoted independence of India, Labor Zionism which promoted the Jewish national revival, Sinn Féin as the main Irish republican party, the African National Congress ofSouth Africa under Nelson Mandela that successfully ended apartheid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_nationalism

[eFestivals]

Of course the SNP remain in favour of independence but they have made it clear that it is off the Table in the Next Parliament at Westminster

so, what you're saying is that the SNP will do nothing to further support for independence, and will in fact work against their primary aim of independence?

PMSL. :lol:

If you took the slightest moment to consider the "principled policies" you claim the SNP are putting forwards for this GE, you'll see their "principles" with those policies have changed since Sept, which had changed since 2011, which had changed since 2010, which had changed since 2007, which had changed since 2005, which had changed blah blah blah blah ... every time they're up for election. Proving those are not their principles. They only have one principle, which is indy at any price.

The policies they adopt are populist policies, exactly as Farage adopts (different) populist policies. They are designed to win maximum possible support at any moment, and they change as quickly as the public changes its mind.

You don't care about the SNP wanting indie and pursuing indie at Wsstminster (as they absolutely will, it's all they have) , because you see the destruction pof the UK state as a good thing. It might have passed you by, but most people do not - not even in your own region.

If you want indie, that's your choice, one you're allowed. Just as others are allowed to not want the UK broken up to impoverish all of us (tho Scots more than others, as GERS makes clear).

You might wish that everyone had your take and see the SNP as basically harmless, but that would require me to ignore what is transparent. Their policies at Westminster are about creating division within the UK and not good government and a united country.

[eFestivals]

So I need knowledge of what other MP's have done in order to make a judgement. I seem to remember you "assuming" Sturgeon to be guilty of associating with Murdoch because there was no evidence that she hadn't.

"I do hope you're going to string up Salmond and Sturgeon for their flirtations with the Daily Mail, and The Telegraph, and more, as well as their love-in with Murdoch"

"have her diary meetings been published yet, for us to be able to know if she's been sucking Murdoch's cock just as Salmond did?"

So, i'm merely playing by your rules, Neil.

My rules are better than the snippers rules, that say Murphy is evil when he does the exact same thing as the beyond-reproach ever-righteous MacNeil.

Those are comments about the actions of individuals, done individually, and not fior the futtherance of either party.

Unlike Salmond's many many meetings with Murdoch and his lies about his meetings with Murdoch, which were done from his position of SNP leader to further the SNP as part of the SNP's want of indie.

Spot the difference? Or did you forget to put your brain on charge last night?

Back when Salmond was leader you used to claim he only met Murdoch because Murdoch was an important business leader in Scotland - and yet he never met other employers of the same size. Then when Salmond's lies were exposed you went a bit quiet, and now Salmond has been replaced everything that the party yhas uised to champion its cause to here has been replaced too? How feckin' stupid are you? ;lol:

PS: Scottish GDP is down another £1bn, announced today - a downward trend on iScotland's second (after the oil) financial salvation. But that's another unionist lie.

[eFestivals]

tell that to Ghandi & Mandela

So now Scotland is an English colony?

Why hadn't you said that before? If we'd have known we';d have been treating you like one, not as equals.

Now, hand over your children to be the slaves of your colonial masters.

[LJS]

So now Scotland is an English colony?

Why hadn't you said that before? If we'd have known we';d have been treating you like one, not as equals.

Now, hand over your children to be the slaves of your colonial masters.

I presume you're just pretending to be a moron.

[eFestivals]

I presume you're just pretending to be a moron.

In case it had passed you by, those two were freedom fighters from oppression, and not nationalists for the sake of nationalism.

But yeah, Alex's stroll back from the pub after a good night out is a bit like Mandela's long walk to freedom. I can see where you're coming from.

Edited April 1, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

slight correction....

....as equals plus Barnet.

Edited April 1, 2015 by eFestivals

[LJS]

In case it had passed you by, those two were freedom fighters from oppression, and not nationalists for the sake of nationalism.

But yeah, Alex's stroll back from the pub after a good night out is a bit like Mandela's long walk to freedom. I can see where you're coming from.

I was merely disproving your assertion that there was no such thing as left wing nationalism.

I was not equating Ghandi with salmond. Or amdela with sturgeon.

But as usual you divert attention from your inaccuracy by putting words on my mouth.

[eFestivals]

I was merely disproving your assertion that there was no such thing as left wing nationalism.

but it's not about nationalism in those cases, it's about freedom from oppression.

The nation state only comes into things as having already set the boundaries of that oppressive regime. It's about removing the oppressor, and nothing about the state.

But as usual you divert attention from your inaccuracy by putting words on my mouth.

So lets get back to the numb of things, which it was you who diverted from.

The SNP are an independence party, and this is important!

I have no problem with the rationale for their existence, and I have no problem with them pursuing their dream of independence.

I merely keep in mind that independence is their one objective as a political force, and their one and only principle, the thing that over-rides everything else.

That gets to mean that in a UK sense they never have the UK's best interests in mind, and not necessarily even Scotland's. What they want and need is to create divisions as much as possible, and to absolve themseles of as much responsibility for anything 'bad' that might happen.

Again, it's no great surprise, it's how nationalists of all types work. The nasty 'oppressor' is responsible for all bad things that happen, and all of the good things are the crowning glories of them goodselves. It is what it is.

You don't much care about any of this, fair enough, because you're already on-side with their objectives anyway. But you're failing to take into account that to plenty of people this matters to some degree.

[Comfy Bean]

But worse than that, even when you had the whole truth, you didn't say "shit, there's more to this than I thought. Fair play, both are greedy w*nkers" (or similar), you looked for reasons to give the SNP a free pass, just because they were the SNP.

At the time, I agreed with part of your point but ( and there is no need for you to take this personally ) I still do not agree that they are both on a par as " greedy w*nkers " for the reasons I gave yesterday ( the whole truth on both their backgrounds ). One of them has appealed over getting too much from the taxpayer - I won`t bother with the quotes again and the other was apologising for his expenses scam while setting out on Plan B.

I read this afternoon that the SNP guy was the fella who first made the complaint in the cash for honours row. He may also be a twat but he is nowhere near Murphy with his background. I noticed in the article about cash for honours ( attached ) a certain John McTernan was questioned under caution. I mentioned a while back that he is Murphys right hand man nowadays. He used to work for Blair and Murdoch

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4828286.stm

I hadn't brought this up (although I have been aware of the story for a few days) because broadly speaking it is more a story, at worst, about the idiocy of the reformed Westminster expenses system or, at best, an example of the law of unintended consequences.

So sorry Comfy - I usually agree with you but on this issue I do not choose to Fork Jim Murphy (would make a good t shirt though!)

.

Not a problem sir. I agreed with Neil at the time he posted it that being a landlord was not an offence ( or words to that effect ). After me agreeing with him he claimed I was too stupid to understand ( or words to that effect ) and then it went down hill from there

What Neil doesn`t seem to want to admit is that all of us don`t think Murphy (or Mcternan ) is fit to be near the Labour Party. Never mind it`s leader up here. Apologies Neil if you do think they are the men take Labour forward ? It`s all about opinions

[LJS]

but it's not about nationalism in those cases, it's about freedom from oppression.

The nation state only comes into things as having already set the boundaries of that oppressive regime. It's about removing the oppressor, and nothing about the state.

So lets get back to the numb of things, which it was you who diverted from.

The SNP are an independence party, and this is important!

I have no problem with the rationale for their existence, and I have no problem with them pursuing their dream of independence.

I merely keep in mind that independence is their one objective as a political force, and their one and only principle, the thing that over-rides everything else.

That gets to mean that in a UK sense they never have the UK's best interests in mind, and not necessarily even Scotland's. What they want and need is to create divisions as much as possible, and to absolve themseles of as much responsibility for anything 'bad' that might happen.

Again, it's no great surprise, it's how nationalists of all types work. The nasty 'oppressor' is responsible for all bad things that happen, and all of the good things are the crowning glories of them goodselves. It is what it is.

You don't much care about any of this, fair enough, because you're already on-side with their objectives anyway. But you're failing to take into account that to plenty of people this matters to some degree.

I think you fundamentally misunderstand both the SNP & the way politics functions when no single party has an overall majority - this second point really surprises me what with you being a massive PR supporter.

You say " independence is their one objective as a political force, and their one and only principle, the thing that over-rides everything else." This would have been fair comment twenty or thirty years ago but Holyrood has forced them to be a party with objectives in every policy area. Go to their website - Independence is not the predominant theme. Of course it does remain their underpinning policy but in order to gain independence, they have to persuade ordinary sensible voters that it is a good idea. Playing the role of wreckers at Westminster will not achieve this - indeed quite the contrary - they would lose my vote for starters. Equally, the better economic shape the UK is in, the better economic shape Scotland is likely to be in.

Common sense would indicate anyway that a second referendum is not likely or desirable (from an SNP viewpoint) in the lifetime of the next Westminster Parliament. Playing the long game whilst extracting as much in the way of additional powers for Holyrood as possible along the way absolutely makes sense.

As for my second PR related point - the world is full of countries where co-operation between parties with very different policies is the norm - and it will become the norm in this country too if we ever get PR. People in this country still see it as a little odd & are threatened by it. You & others have talked about the SNP having no real influence over a minority Labour Government whilst the Tories talk as if the SNP would be in complete control. The truth of course lies somewhere in between but one thing is absolutely certain, the Labour Party cannot & will not make any significant concession that would pave the way for independence.

​I don't expect you to accept a word of this as you seem unable to accept there is any other nationalism than a right wing xenophobic negative destructive nationalism.

I just don't agree with that view.

Edited April 1, 2015 by LJS

[LJS]

Neil talks about the SNP undermining stable government to get Indy - I don't approve or think it likely.

However there is someone who only a few weeks ago seemed to think a coalition between his preferred party & his mortal enemies was worthwhile if it delivers your political ends

While the first thought of a Tory/Lab coalition terrifies me, with more thought I actually think it might turn out to be a good thing - because if things are so politically fragmented that Tory/Lab was the only realistic option from a FPTP vote, the shouts from the public for PR might well be too much for that coalition to ignore.

If if the result in May is a fragmented one, the best thing that can come out of it is a reform of the voting system - and things ultimately don't get much better than that for the future of British politics.

so the ends justify the means when the ends are Neil's ends

http://www.efestivals.co.uk/forums/topic/172984-general-news-discussion/page-355

[LJS]

Neil, I have a little challenge, I'd like to set you.

I do hope you'll accept.

Imagine you are Neil McSturgeon, Leader of the SNP. You have to pinch yourself every morning when you wake up to find your party is still on course to virtually eradicate the Scottish Labour Party who have dominated Scottish politics since you were a wee lassie (long before the operation) All your life you have dreamt of leading Scotland to Freedom. After the crushing disappointment of September you find yourself surfing a seemingly unstoppable SNP wave . What are your tactics in this campaign and after May 7th? You want independence but you also need a great showing in next year's Holyrood elections.

[eFestivals]

I agreed with Neil at the time he posted it that being a landlord was not an offence

utter bullshit.

You condemned Murphy for doing exactly the same as the SNP who you gave a free pass to.

You can keep trying to rinse that with bullshit, but you can't wash away what you did.

What Neil doesn`t seem to want to admit is that all of us don`t think Murphy (or Mcternan ) is fit to be near the Labour Party. Never mind it`s leader up here. Apologies Neil if you do think they are the men take Labour forward ? It`s all about opinions

Oh, I understand that's your view perfectly well.

But as you've just proven over your condemnation of Murphy while giving the SNP a free pass, it's not a judgement you're making on any fair an reasonable basis, it's an opinion you hold via spite and unthinking biased-ness and not via anything sensible.

[eFestivals]

I think you fundamentally misunderstand both the SNP

what have I misunderstood about them being a party whose only principle is to get Scotland independence?

Don't try to wash that fact about them away, face up to it and what it means beyond their supporters and beyond the boundardies of the Scottish region of the UK.

Get back to me when your opinion is formed from a bigger view than just "what i want".

[eFestivals]

Holyrood has forced them to be a party with objectives in every policy area.

where spending millions on a referendum but not the poor is cheered?

where spending more on a dead language than the poor is cheered?

where centralisation and not devolution is cheered?

Etc, etc, etc. It's all about their primary purpose.

Independence is not the predominant theme.

so you don't get what spin is, which probably explains a lot.

Of course it does remain their underpinning policy but in order to gain independence, they have to persuade ordinary sensible voters that it is a good idea.

and that's best achieved via creating divisions with rUK, as a way of demonstrating that rUK can't offer what the SNP can.

Which is exactly what the SNP have been doing for 30 years, with a huge step-up in that mode of operation since 2011.

Playing the role of wreckers at Westminster will not achieve this

it'll achieve it when perfect govt from Westminster definitely won't.

As soon as you wise up to the fact that perfect Westminster govt works against the SNP's aims, you have to accept that perfect govt at Westminster is never something they'll be trying to achieve.

For a start, when the SNP say (as they have) that they have to approve Labour's plans - so the tail is wagging the dog - it's clear that perfect govt is not what they're about. Why do YOU think a party with 3.5% of the vote should have a veto over the nation's govt?

The SNP's stance is stance they know Labour cannot accept, and that the population of the UK will not accept. The SNP has that stance for that very purpose - to hammer home the divisions, and make them greater.

None of this is any concern to you, I get it. But nperhaps you should be smart enough to realise that not everyone is part of the new beyond-all-criticism SNP religion which gets a free pass comfy-style from its often brain-dead comfy-style supporters.

[eFestivals]

Neil, I have a little challenge, I'd like to set you.

I do hope you'll accept.

Imagine you are Neil McSturgeon, Leader of the SNP. You have to pinch yourself every morning when you wake up to find your party is still on course to virtually eradicate the Scottish Labour Party who have dominated Scottish politics since you were a wee lassie (long before the operation) All your life you have dreamt of leading Scotland to Freedom. After the crushing disappointment of September you find yourself surfing a seemingly unstoppable SNP wave . What are your tactics in this campaign and after May 7th? You want independence but you also need a great showing in next year's Holyrood elections.

'I' pursue 'my' heart-felt objectives to the max, no compromise. 'I've' got them on the run, and 'I' want to keep them running.

Which is all so blindingly obvious. It's a no-brainer for the SNP, I've never suggested it isn't.

I've merely pointed out that for those not who are not the indy-faithful, or who are not in Scotland, it's all something very different, that's not wanted and not acceptable.