STAN Grodynski writes frequently to The National and I agree with much of what he writes, but his Monday letter was not one of his best. “Divide and rule,” he tells us, “has been the hallmark of the British Empire” and he is definitely correct about that, indeed not only has it been thus, but it still is.
That being known, what strategy should we follow at elections if our primary objective is to get the maximum number of pro-independence candidates elected at each one?
In Scotland we have two different types of election which we need to deal with, but the UK election will be next, where “first past the post” will apply.
READ MORE: ‘Scotland United’ is likely to set back the campaign for independence
In this election the position is obvious: we should ensure that all of us who support independence, which is around 50% of the electorate, should put up only one candidate and hope that the Unionists put up two or three candidates. If we do that, “divide and rule” will help us and will work against the Unionists. In such circumstances we should take most of the seats as the SNP have done before.
That is the tactic we should employ in the coming election.
I have put that view to the leadership of the Greens ahead of two previous elections but they have ignored it and stood candidates against the SNP, which only served to help Unionists to win some seats which should have gone to the SNP if the Green supporters had voted SNP. So we need to stop playing this foolish game.
This time our position should be that we agree, formally or informally, that where a seat is currently held by an independence-supporting MP or party, we should all get behind that MP or party and not put up a candidate against them. If the seat is currently held by a Unionist, we should support the indy candidate who has the best chance to take the seat based on the figures from the last election. If we do that we will maximise the indy vote.
READ MORE: Watchdog tells SNP to publish analysis on joining EU post-independence
That will mean that the SNP will be our preferred candidate in most seats in Scotland, and it will mean that the SNP, who are not doing well in the polls, will get support from the more popular indy movement.
This will give us the victory we need at the General Election.
The Scottish elections are different, the foolish policy of “both votes SNP” plays into the hands of divide and rule and helps the Unionists, as it has done. Here we need a much more subtle approach based on unity and understanding. So unity and co-operation among indy supporters is the key to constant electoral success, not party bickering.
Andy Anderson
Ardrossan
I COMPLETELY agree with the sentiments in Alan Magnus-Bennett’s letter on July 11. I have read and reread the brilliant book Scotland the Brief by Gordon MacIntyre-Kemp, available from Business for Scotland. The facts and figures provide adequate proof that Scotland could be a successful independent nation.
I have bought several copies of this book and given them to friends to read and pass on if they wish. When they have read the book, the usual comment is “why didn’t I know about these figures before?”
READ MORE: Neale Hanvey: Let's put co-operation at the heart of our movement
I cannot understand why the SNP haven’t made use of this information. It is all very well preaching to the converted, but if more use was made of the financial figures contained in this book it would go a long way in persuading the doubters and undecideds to make a more informed decision on independence.
We need to start blowing our own trumpet and ensure everyone knows it is not the case that we are not “too small” and unable to afford being independent. We have been subservient to Westminster for too long, enough is enough.
Gordon Walker
Paisley
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