DR John O’Dowd’s letter (Jan 8) slamming the SNP merited a reply; my problem was knowing where to start.
Firstly, to his repetition of what has become a political mantra regarding independence, “the SNP has received multiple mandates” prompts the question: mandates as to what exactly?
To proclaim UDI based on 45% for Yes in 2014? Sorry but I don’t think so.
READ MORE: Kate Forbes: MSPs have a duty to protect 'strained' devolution
However, let’s move on to the next election, at which the correspondent assured us he will not vote SNP and would rather “spoil” his ballot than do so.
To me this statement suggests the writer believes the possible election of a red or blue Tory in his constituency will do the independence cause no harm.
Frankly I find that belief bizarre, to put it politely.
Regarding the reference to the SNP MPs being withdrawn from Westminster, I will respond in the same way as I did the first time I heard that suggestion: then what?
Finally, to the correspondent’s closing paragraph; “the cause of Scottish independence – with or without the SNP – will never die.”
All very Braveheart-ish, Declaration of Arbroath even, with shades of “for as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule.”
READ MORE: Call for Stone of Destiny to be ‘reunited’ in Perth Museum
Stirring stuff, but 100 of us are not going to cut it I’m afraid.
If the British state succeeds with what it has – and let there be no doubt – been working on since the Great Scare of 2014, and the SNP can be derailed for even a decade by a combination of British state propaganda, dubious legal trickery and the work of plants and fifth columnists, Scots can forget independence for a generation – which would, I believe, mean forever.
That said: a happy new year to one and all!
Malcolm Cordell
Broughty Ferry, Dundee
MOST opinion polls seem to indicate that support for independence remains around 50% while support for the SNP has fallen quite a bit. Some of this discrepancy is no doubt due to those who have switched to supporting/voting for the Alba party.
While I fully understand the disillusionment felt towards the SNP (I was one of those who, just over a year ago, let my membership lapse), I feel it is vital for those intending to vote Alba to understand that doing so will only delay any chance of independence for many years.
READ MORE: Pro-indy parties will be judged harshly if they help Unionists win
While it is very possible that Alba could indeed fully replace the SNP in every way (MPs, MSPs and public support), this will not happen overnight or in one fell swoop. In the years between now and then, the independence vote will be split and that will lead to the opposition parties taking most, if not all, of the SNP’s Westminster seats and the SNP losing control at Holyrood. Given its recent performance it would be fair to say that the SNP fully deserve such an outcome – but the people of Scotland need independence.
In order to avoid such a negative and damaging outcome I suggest the following: Alba do not contest any elections (Westminster or Holyrood) but instead concentrate on promoting increased support for independence. If the SNP are unwilling, for whatever reason, to work with other independence groups then that does not prevent those other groups from working with each other to win the goal the SNP seems to have forgotten about.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf's speech showed SNP's economic contradictions
Alba not standing in Rutherglen last year might suggest that Salmond fully understands the danger of splitting the independence vote – and I can think of no-one better than Salmond to spearhead a campaign to increase support for the cause. I’d further suggest that it would make electoral sense for all Alba members and supporters to vote SNP – no matter how much it might pain them to do so. The simple truth of the matter is that only the SNP can win independence sooner rather than later, and splitting the independence vote at this stage will only see the end of that dream for possibly many, many years. Even a combined independence vote of more than 50% will not help, as Westminster will almost certainly just ignore this unless there are the MPs and MSPs to back it up.
In the meantime we will have to put up with the SNP’s blunders and missteps while hoping it can change direction and stop pursuing vote-losing policies. I believe that Humza Yousaf has made a start on correcting such errors, but further progress needs to be made if the SNP’s falling level of support is to be arrested and then reversed.
Keep in mind that it really does not matter at this stage who leads the SNP or what its individual policies are: what matters is achieving independence and everything else can be sorted out after that. That last piece of understanding also needs to be shared with independence supporters now planning, or considering, voting Labour, which is the same as voting for Groundhog Day.
Dave McCartney
Benderloch
AS a new subscriber, I was stunned to see the lefty Labour Party apologist Owen Jones amongst your contributors! But I was not surprised at his praise of Clement Attlee and the post-war Labour government and its questionable achievements (This one sentence summed up appeal of Starmer to his tiny fringe of true fans. Jan 6).
Questionable, because while refraining from styling it obscenely as “socialist” as some of his ilk do, and nationalists too, you have to don the darkened blinkers of racism to not see that 1945 Labour government as the enthusiastic mentor of a vicious and brutal colonial empire. The people of India, Kenya, Malaya and Palestine and other countries were not included in that welfare state, although they paid for it. And paid for it in blood!
What a start to the year. Fight racism! Fight imperialism!’
Michael MacGregor
via email
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