Peter A Bell - #ScottishUDI #EndTheUnion

The sovereignty of Scotland's people is both a constitutional fact and an inviolable principle. #NewScotlandParty #EndTheUnion #NoSection30 #ScottishUDI #ManifestoForIndependence

Drawing fire: The following is my full response to Stan Grodynski’s letter in The National (archive). I am not sure it will be published, and the comment facility on The National site has a character limit, so I’m publishing my full response here. ift.tt/nNVYl0w

To put it simply, if John Swinney adhered to the principle that the people of Scotland are sovereign, then theirs must be the last word on the matter. peterabell.substack.com/p/dr… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

I_am_Scottish 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Thank you for following me!!

Jist sayin’!

Where is the anger?: I know I’ve written about this before, and regular readers may be almost as weary as I of the repetition. Unfortunately, it is necessary. As a long-time blogger, I am cognisant of the easy folly of imagining you are broadcasting your message. Not so, unfortunately. Perhaps if you had a great many subscribers or followers, it could be said that you are b… ift.tt/gfsjpzi

As a long-time blogger, I am cognisant of the easy folly of imagining you are broadcasting your message. peterabell.substack.com/p/wh… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

The following is a letter from the redoubtable Mike Wallace (SNP Newington & Southside) published by The National but buried under a headline about prettyfying Scottish villages. I reprint it here with Mike’s consent. peterabell.substack.com/p/ou… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

Our right to decide must be acted on, not just talked about: The following is a letter from the redoubtable Mike Wallace (SNP Newington & Southside) published by The National but buried under a headline about prettyfying Scottish villages. I reprint it here with Mike’s consent. ift.tt/I92oUv6

I may not be one of Paul Kavanagh's biggest fans, but I must congratulate him for writing the definitive article about the 'currency question'. But he misses one very important point. While it is true to say that the Better Together parties weaponised the 'currency question', this weaponisation could not have been as effective as it was without the help it got from the Yes movement. He is correct to say that currency should be a non-issue. But Mr Kavanagh should ask wo is making it an issue. The ones keeping the currency pot boiling twelve years on are far more likely to be found in the pro-independence camp than on the Unionist side. There's a lesson for the independence movement in this. But I fear it is yet another lesson which will go unlearned. Questions are not always asked for the benign purpose of eliciting information. Sometimes, questions are asked for the malign purpose of planting seeds of doubt. The anti-independence campaign didn't just weaponise the 'currency question'. They weaponised the question. The pro-independence side totally failed to recognise that questions were being asked for the malign purpose of creating doubt and/or aggravating existing doubt. The pro-independence side behaved as if every question was a serious question deserving of a serious answer. The independence industry, led by the SNP, continues to make this same mistake - in effect, continuing the anti-independence campaign. The sensible response to anyone asking what currency independent Scotland would use is to ask what reason the questioner had to suppose independent Scotland would be unable to handle its monetary affairs. When questions are asked for a malign purpose, turn them back on the questioner. thenational.scot/politics/26… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

It’s all in the mindset: If you’re thinking in terms of “grounds” for #ScottishUDI you still haven’t got the mindset right. We do not need “grounds”. We need only the will of Scotland’s people. We don’t need to justify ourselves to anybody. We are the sovereign people of Scotland. We are accountable to nobody. ift.tt/lRO70Ge

"But those same Unionist politicians know that calling a second referendum would lead to independence." This is just wrong! Horribly wrong! The whole article is about how the British state can attach whatever conditions it likes to whatever kind of referendum it might deign to grant us. If they have that degree of control, why would they give us a referendum that "would lead to independence"? Here's one of the hard truths that the independence movement must accept if Scotland's cause is to make any progress. Westminster cannot authorise anything which might place the Union in jeopardy. Therefore, the only sensible conclusion must be that any referendum which the British state might give us would NOT lead to independence. The Section 30 process isn't a 'legal and constitutional' escape route. It is a trap. England-as-Britain didn't build a global empire by affording its seized territories an easy way out. John Swinney concedes to Westminster a veto over the will of Scotland's people. Am I the only one who sees what's wrong with this? The de facto leader of Scotland's independence movement accedes to the alien doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, denying the principle that the people of Scotland are sovereign. Doesn't anybody else consider it wrong that the supposed leader of the fight to restore Scotland's independence meekly accepts the British state's authority to thwart that aspiration at every turn? Does anybody out there understand what a proper constitutional referendum looks like? Does anybody out there understand the difference between a proper constitutional referendum and a referendum held under transferred powers? In a proper constitutional referendum, the people's decision is final. In a Section 30 referendum, Westminster must always have the final say. thenational.scot/news/266757… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

Xander Elliards fails to address the elephant-in-room question raised by all of this. WHY ARE WE LETTING WESTMINSTER DICTATE WHEN AND HOW WE EXERCISE OUR RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION? Like far too many others, Xander Elliards simply accepts without a second thought that the UK government has the rightful authority to either give us a referendum or not. And if the UK government, in all its gracious beneficence, does deign to grant us a referendum, Xander Elliards takes it for granted that the UK government would have the right to attach whatever conditions they see fit. This is the mindset which must be changed if Scotland's cause is to have any hope of bearing fruit. It is the mindset which the SNP shares with the rest of the independence industry. Including, unfortunately, The National. Doesn't it ever occur to Xander Elliards or Laura Webster how odd it is that Scotland's only pro-independence newspaper should be addressing the constitutional issue in precisely the same terms as all the pro-Union media? This mindset has to change if Scotland's cause is to have any hope of making progress. Minds must be decolonised. The colonised mind has internalised an attitude of cultural inferiority - a belief that the values, attitudes and priorities of the coloniser are inherently superior. The colonised mind comes to rationalise its colonisation. To accept that the reality imposed or inculcated by the coloniser is normality. To embrace it as the reality that must be subscribed to. To adopt it as the standard to which everything must conform. The colonised mind is persuaded that, however unsatisfactory its condition may be, that condition is a fact of life with which it must cope – or be deemed to have failed. thenational.scot/news/266757… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

When did demands from the SNP Scottish Government have any effect? Oh! I get it! This is to show everybody how the UK government just ignores them. Because we've never had any instances of this before. Here comes that phrase again! Pointless performative posturing. The party could use that as its strapline. SNP - For all your pointless performative posturing needs! thenational.scot/news/266754… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

If only the constitutional issue could command as much attention as 'currency', perhaps by now we'd have the prospect of a proper constitutional referendum and independence. If only the mechanics of restoring Scotland's independence could be discussed with the same intensity as the quest for the Holy Grail of the universally acceptable answer to every question anyone might care to ask of Scotland's independence movement. There was me thinking Scotland's cause was about the people of independent Scotland having the 'right to decide'. But everywhere I turn, I find people intent on making those decisions long before the phrase "the people of independent Scotland" is meaningful. Just the other day I saw a self-appointed group issuing a very selective invitation to a 'summit' for the purpose of compiling a catalogue of 'day one guarantees' on a variety of matters. They wouldn't be 'guarantees', of course. Only the Scottish Parliament has the authority to decide what will be on day one as an independent nation. As things stand, there is not the remotest possibility of the Scottish Parliament being asked to approve an interim constitution. Even more remote is the prospect of the people of Scotland being asked to ratify that interim constitution as part of the Act of the Parliament of Scotland which dissolves the Union. But nobody wants to talk about these things. They want every matter settled for a post-independence Scotland, except the matter of how we get to be independent. The process by which independence will be restored is a taboo topic. Let's talk about the colour of postage stamps after independence. thenational.scot/politics/26… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

Doing the easy stuff: I could do the vision thing. It’s easy. I could write articles about things I’d like to see happen after Scotland’s independence is restored. I have plenty of ideas. I could write thousands of words about my vision for Scotland. It’s really easy to do. It would just flow from my head onto the page. ift.tt/W0YHNTk

We have created an economy which works by ensuring the vast majority of people are made to feel insecure in some way and to some extent. Security is the ultimate luxury good. peterabell.substack.com/p/do… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

Somebody has to say it. This melting-pot notion of unity is just plain stupid. The idea that you can have everybody agreeing about everything is obviously idiotic. Day in and day out for the last twelve years there have been people in places such as this bemoaning the lack of unity in the independence movement and asking why we can't all just work together for a common cause. The answer is obvious. There is no common cause. There's a plethora of different agendas, many if not most of which are incompatible or contradictory. What this group is attempting is precisely the opposite of what should be done if the aim is unity. You will never get everyone to agree about everything. But it is perfectly possible to get everybody to agree about one clearly defined thing. You achieve unity by stripping away the burden of diverse agendas, not by adding to them. What happens with what this group is attempting is that it ends up with faux unity because dissenting voices are excluded. It's easier to exclude those dissenting voices than remove the cause of dissent because the cause of dissent is somebody's hobbyhorse. thenational.scot/news/266653… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

Somebody has to say it. This melting-pot notion of unity is just plain stupid. The idea that you can have everybody agreeing about everything is obviously idiotic. Day in and day out for the last twelve years there have been people in places such as this bemoaning the lack of unity in the independence movement and asking why we can't all just work together for a common cause. The answer is obvious. There is no common cause. There's a plethora of different agendas, many if not most of which are incompatible or contradictory. What this group is attempting is precisely the opposite of what should be done if the aim is unity. You will never get everyone to agree about everything. But it is perfectly possible to get everybody to agree about one clearly defined thing. You achieve unity by stripping away the burden of diverse agendas, not by adding to them. What happens with what this group is attempting is that it ends up with faux unity because dissenting voices are excluded. It's easier to exclude those dissenting voices than remove the cause of dissent because the cause of dissent is somebody's hobbyhorse. thenational.scot/news/266653… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI

The constitutional issue was lost in a welter of policy issues, primarily to do with the economy. peterabell.substack.com/p/th… #EndTheUnion #ScottishUDI