Scottish Referendum
- This topic has 160 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I think our combined efforts on Hail Caledonia website has confounded them ! Simply a dearth of reasoned responses. Where possible we should be commenting on similar sites but now the editors of Hail Caledonia conceded they made an error of judgement by letting us have our say !
Independence solves unemployment…cut corporation taxes, give business money, cherry-pick immigrants. get single parents into work, …and encourage unions to collaborate with employershttp://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28741265
A response to our statement on the Scottish Republican Communist Network website by prominent left nationalist Allan Armstronghttp://republicancommunist.org/blog/2014/04/01/yes-the-radical-case-for-independence-glasgow-book-launch/comment-page-1/#comment-1476325
This doesn't seem to be a direct response to the EC statement but a response to another statement of the party position on the issue.I did notice one sleight of hand by Armstrong. The statement he criticises says that:
Quote:“We have all the constitutional laws available for our use to change our necessary social institutions to work for us, so we can live in a peaceful and prosperous society.”In other words, that the political institutions that exist are sufficient to enable a socialist majority to get its way.Armstrong twists this into a statement that existing political institutions are perfect:
Quote:It accepts that the ‘British state’ (blind to its Northern Irish component) provides us with “all the constitutional laws” we need – a very paragon of democracy! Here, the SPGB agrees not only with the Labour Party and other social democrats, but with liberals too!Obviously he doesn't understand the difference between "sufficient" and "perfect". Or perhaps he does.This article from the October 1925 Socialist Standard, aptly entitled "Confusion in Scotland", deals with "Scottish Republicanism".http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/1920s/1925/no-254-october-1925/confusion-scotlandOur position then is the same at it is now:
Quote:The object of the Party, founded by the late John Maclean, is a Workers' Republic for Scotland.The Manifesto sets out the slave position of the working class, and urges that the workers must carry through the Social Revolution.The chief fallacy of their position is their insistence upon a Scottish Workers' Republic. This demand is both reactionary and Utopian. The struggle of the workers of the United Kingdom must be a united one. The workers are under the domination of a class who rule by the use of a political machine which is the chief governing instrument for England, Scotland, Wales, etc. To appeal to the workers of Scotland for a Scottish Workers' Republic is to arouse and foster the narrow spirit of Nationalism, so well used by our masters. Economically the demand is Utopian, as the development of capitalism has made countries more and more dependent on each other, both through the specialisation of industry or agriculture, and also by the force controlled by the Great Powers to suppress or control the smaller nations.Ozymandias wrote:If I send money can you send me one of those stickers to my home in Glasgow?The stickers have now arrived at Head Office and some 500 have already been sent on to Scotland. Can you email Head Office with your address and the number you want? Thanks.Anyone else who wants some is welcome to do the same.
Never noticed that. Here is the article the reference is to, one of my blog post on Socialist Courier to read the quote in context.http://socialist-courier.blogspot.com/2014/08/soap-box-to-ballot-box.html
Quote:To accomplish that revolution, we must organise on the political field. We will accomplish nothing but our own suicide by attempts at armed insurrection. Politically, we must use every forum open to us, from the soap-box to the ballot-box, to spread the idea of revolution. We must be conscious of what we are doing and where we're going, conscious to a degree never before seen in a revolution. Isn't it about time we let democracy work for us ? To do that, we have to stop watching and letting the politicians and the corporations do our thinking. Democracy is not a spectator sport. We have to do our own thing to live in the kind of society we desire. We have all the constitutional laws available for our use to change our necessary social institutions to work for us.so we can live in a peaceful and prosperous society. Let's learn how to use them. Let's for once give democracy a chance! We always told what has been done and what will be done, and the voting process is packaged in keeping with the party bosses plans. Fact is, as a majority…, we, the people, don’t need to be screwed. When it comes to having any measure of democracy in any real decision making, we have the real say in what goes on.yet we never really get things done in our best interests. The point is that we have to take control of our own lives. Our revolution will be the first in history of, by and for the working class, with no elite "Party" leading us by the nose into a bureaucratic "Worker's State" so it can climb on our backs like any ruling class.Being from Shetland descent on my mother's side and with relatives living there, i always have that sympathy for the island peoples (when flying off on holiday it cost them more to get to Aberdeen airport than it did from there to the beaches of Benidorm)Socialist Courier blog was perhaps one of the earliest back in Jan 2012 to point out that Scotland after independence could face its own nationalist movements springing up and claiming the lion share of the oil revenues. Our posts can be read here.http://socialist-courier.blogspot.com/search?q=shetlandThe Guardian report offers some insight into the background of how the Yes and No are courting the Islanders. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/20/scottish-independence-debate-orkney-shetland
I see that 'The Conversation' website has decided to collect and publish regular contributions from now on in for those wanting more to read on this topic:"In four weeks, Scotland goes to the polls in the vote that could end its 307-year-old union with England. The Conversation enters the home straight today with a full text of historian Tom Devine's declaration that he intends to vote in favour of independence for Scotland.The revelation by one of Scotland's most celebrated intellectuals sent shockwaves through the campaign when first reported by The Observer at the weekend. Now Devine's detailed explanation of why he has shifted from intending to vote No, to Yes is published – and it provides a rich journey through the country's cultural and economic history.We will carry alternative interpretations by leading experts of where Scotland, and Britain, stand in coming days. Today also sees the launch of our Scotland Decides section, which brings together all of our referendum coverage. It is the go-to destination for expert reaction and analysis of all the twists and turns leading up to September 18, plus an archive of the informed content we have published so far. Hold on to your hats, it promises to be a lively ending."2 links: http://theconversationuk.cmail2.com/t/r-l-mthddtl-tytrddtydk-t/http://theconversationuk.cmail2.com/t/r-l-mthddtl-tytrddtydk-i/
Why, if Scotland breaks away, should we want to split our party into two any more than the GB-based trade unions will or should? That, both in fact, would be a step backward.
I found this article on the Edinburgh AF blog very interesting and informative. Very much reflective of our own position on the referendum . It is well worth a read. http://scotlandaf.wordpress.com/2014/08/20/beyond-the-scottish-referendum/Not so sure Paul Mattick Snr would say to being used by AF though but it is a good quote…it will be cropping up on our own blogs in due course.
This one is good too and should be read as wellhttp://www.leftcom.org/en/articles/2014-08-18/the-scottish-independence-referendum-the-great-diversion
The AF one is not that good. It revealss that some anarchists up there are being tempted to vote YES:
Quote:I’m not going to tell you to vote or not vote. Some anarchists will abstain and focus on organising where they are, others will vote Yes in the hope of at least a few reforms.So, no anarchists are being tempted to vote NO (which I would have thought the better option if someone held a gun to your head and said you had to choose).It seems that some Scottish anarchists have been affected by the nationalist virus. If not, why the need to publish an anti-YES article?The one from the CWO is much better (as to be expected).
You highlighted the point i made on the Edinburgh AF blog …why be reluctant to castigate those anarchists who will vote for what the article decribes as class enemies.
I've been searching for anarchist arguments for voting YES but can't find any other than the other comment on the AF article (that a more local capitalism is better than more centralised one). Do you know of any other? Whatever arguments they use can't be the same as Tariq McAli's (that it will help democratise the British state). But then anarchists are a confused lot.
Bill Knox, ex-Edinburgh branch member and now prominent historian, has a new book outScottish History for DummiesChapter One is available online http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/57/11186761/1118676157-8.pdfSome extracts from it http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/57/11186761/1118676157-8.pdf
Quote:‘…we are, in a famous Scottish saying, ‘aw Jock Tamson’s bairns’. There is no such thing as a genetically pure native Scots: we are a hybrid people, and the better for it… …Identity is never fixed; it’s fluid and always in a state of forming and reforming itself. In that respect, Scotland is no different to any other country…. …as long as the British Empire stuffed the mouths of the middle class in Scotland with gold, the moaning was confined to a minority. Along came war in 1914, and the moaning became even quieter as the Scots respondedmore enthusiastically than any other part of Britain to fight for king and country…The cause of Nationalism didn’t really get going again until the late 1960s, in spite of the formation of the Scottish National Party (SNP) in 1934. Scots were content with their dual identity – after all, they had fought another world war to defend it!… …The support for Nationalism declined, but it didn’t disappear. All it needed was another spark to ignite it. Step forward the best recruiting sergeant Nationalism ever had – Prime Minister Margaret Hilda Thatcher! … …Salmond did the unthinkable at the last general election and won a majority. Immediately, another referendum was on the cards. This time,the stakes were higher – independence would mean the breakup of Britain and an end to a union that had stood the test of time for 300 years.Whether it will come to pass, who knows? It’s still not clear whether the vote for the SNP is a protest vote against the failings of New Labour and the present coalition government, or whether it’s representative of a genuine wish of the Scottish people to regain their independence. Only time will tell.’
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.