THE one thing we should all have in common is our support for independence. Unfortunately, that isn’t enough for many of our leading lights, who have no interest in taking on board views from the wider Yes movement if those views differ from their own.
A number of people close to the leadership in Scotland, along with a number of SNP MPs in Westminster, spend far too much time on Twitter berating independence supporters who believe in a more direct route to independence. If their intended targets happen to oppose gender self-ID or the Hate Crime Bill, they are perceived to be fair game for the type of abuse that should never be tolerated by anyone in or around our leadership.
READ MORE: Indyref2 could be held before Christmas, Michael Russell suggests
Ruth Wishart recently put it succinctly: “I’m for no more prevarication, no royal commissions, no unnecessary delays, and for the wider Yes movement to be treated as allies and partners. And for respect to replace sneering where there is honest tactical disagreement.”
I would not be surprised if she was referring to the expressive words that have been used towards those with an alternative viewpoint such as cranks, abusers, vicious, poison, cowards, weird, creepy and vile and Jeremy Hunts (in relation to those who disagree with self-ID). We could include a recent tweet from Alyn Smith – “let us avoid giving credence to blowhards, chancers and cranks, especially if they’re our own.”
As for the behaviour and foul language targeted towards Joanna Cherry MP, well, that hits the ball out the park. “Wheesht for Indy” is a non-starter if you have to turn and look the other way when others are being subjected to maltreatment. I would say those who obviously enjoy using insulting language towards other members only make it clear that we have a way to go before sweetness and light sees the light of day unless the leadership in Scotland and Westminster stop ignoring those reprehensible attacks on freedom of opinion. It is as if the leadership is happy to stand squarely behind the young Praetorian Guards who obviously have their ear.
READ MORE: 'Scottish independence is coming': Primal Scream switch from No to Yes
However, some of those MPs indulging in this behaviour express themselves well in Parliament only to willingly descend into an acrimonious world on Twitter and treat fellow independence supporters with the same contempt that they themselves are subjected to in Westminster. Many members now believe that it has become more about centralising power to a small cabal within the SNP leadership where dissent is frowned upon. It is more than just an unseemly row. It is a hatred that should never have been allowed to fester.
Whatever your views are on the road we should take towards independence, you could never find fault with the total commitment to the independence cause expressed by Angus MacNeil MP and Chris McEleny. Both have had to deal with pompous flack when the very least they deserved was a debate and respect from those who it would appear are quite content holding on to what they have.
Bill Clark
Fort William
CONGRATULATIONS to George Kerevan for rectifying the somewhat pedantic view of Tom Arthur, MSP for Renfrew South, that Scotland cannot be termed a colony (Here is a primary reason we need independence – and need it now, February 1). The dictionary definition of colony is “a country or area under the full or partial political control of another country”, a perfectly apposite description of Scotland in the 21st century.
Mr Arthur may argue that Queen Elizabeth House does not constitute a colonial outpost, but following the UK’s exit from the EU and the passing of the Internal Market Act, it is difficult to regard it as anything else. As Mr Kerevan notes, the establishment of the new Scotland Office is an overt and provocative attempt to bypass the Scottish Parliament at every opportunity and to reinforce a message of colonial dependency on to the Scottish electorate. It is a non-belligerent equivalent of the Cold War Soviet state’s reaction to the Prague Spring, to remind the population who is in command and the consequences of disobeying the controlling power.
READ MORE: George Kerevan: Here is a primary reason we need independence – and need it now
Tom Arthur fails to accept that the sole purpose of Queen Elizabeth House is to buttress the misconception amongst some Scots that an independent Scotland would be “too wee and too poor” and that the power centralised in Westminster always knows what is best for us. The new Scotland Office is not designed with crushing rebellious Scots in mind but to quash the independence movement through their ostensible largesse, propaganda and by way of media salvos. Whether our country has been historically designated or dubbed an English colony is all but irrelevant at this juncture.
All Under One Banner had every constitutional and moral right to protest about a blatant attempt to thwart Scottish democracy by offering an alternative colonial authority in Edinburgh to buy back fealty to Westminster. It’s a disingenuous and desperate strategy practised by a failing colonial power. We have to ensure that it fails.
Owen Kelly
Stirling
DOUGIE Ross has stated: “It is the duty of all politicians to come together and focus on the national interest in a time of crisis. The public expects 100% focus on the vaccine rollout and our recovery.”
If (though I doubt it) he accepts that we (Scotland) are a “nation” then that’s exactly what our politicians (well... MOST of them) are doing. Unfortunately we can’t include Dougie and his Wastemonster colleagues in that description, as issuing multimillion-pound contracts to pals who are unlikely to fulfil them cannot be described as being in the best interests of any of the “family of nations”.
We happen to believe (know?) that self-government is in our best interest and therefore the SNP and Greens are coming together and focusing on the national interest. What’s his problem??
Barry Stewart
Blantyre
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel