THE IDEA BEHIND THIS.

Posted byiainlawson27Posted inUncategorizedTags:,

YOURS FOR SCOTLAND INTRODUCTION
I think many of us share a deep frustration at the lack of progress in delivering Independence for Scotland. We often display a lack of trust in the current Scottish Government and question it’s commitment to our cause.

We see no sense in being constrained and dictated to by Westminster, being reliant on their approval to progress our undeniable right to the self determination of our nation. Worse the timidity of our Government and the First Minister in particular means that huge problems, which became apparent in the 2014 Referendum remain unsolved, none more so than the deeply flawed franchise, a loose voting arrangement that cost us a win in 2014 and which has got markedly worse since, so many English voters have chosen to move North of the Border since the last referendum. Another referendum with the same flawed franchise would be a trap.

We need to look at alternative routes other than a flawed referendum. I have no doubt we will end up with a plebiscite election but before then we must face the task of establishing that the sovereignty of the Scottish people is the paramount authority in Scotland rather than England’s belief in the sovereignty of Westminster.

Scotland’s claim is lodged in the Claim of Right  1689 that established conclusively the Scotland’s People were sovereign. Like Scotland’s ancient constitution It has never been repealed nor does Westminster hold any power or authority to either repeal or annul its contents.

It therefore provides a legal way to end English interference in our future constitutional arrangements and it is crucial that as many people know and understand it’s contents and significance. We need to put the Unionists on the back foot. It also provides a clear way to pressurise the leadership of the Yes Movement. Did they know about this? Did they know there could be no Union without the Claim of Right being included as a pre condition and that Westminster holds no power to ignore it, or amend it, or annul it?. if the answer is yes then we have to question why they have never sought to enforce it. Why even today ” Gold Standard Sturgeon” seeks Westminster approval for her neverendum? Let’s be fair, if the answer is Yes but they have never thought we could challenge in this way, we need to know the reasons. Why? Because we are the people and it is our power they are choosing not to use.

This week, daily, Yours for Scotland will publish a section of the excellent paper prepared by Sara Salyers setting out the content and why it matters. Sara would also like to thank David Younger and Laurie Flynn for their valuable contributions to the project.

I detail below Sara’s Bio and I wish to congratulate her on her excellent and very valuable work. If folk want they can copy each day the daily article to their own file and by the end of the week shall have the entire document for future use and referral.

The challenge is always how to spread valuable information on Independence strategy in the face of a hostile media. This method through my site will get it out to thousands of YES supporters in every corner of Scotland and also abroad. It can then be used to educate others on a concrete method of advancing our cause. Other bloggers and sites are welcome to copy and share any of the content on their own sites. All I ask is that they acknowledge that the original articles were published on Yours for Scotland.

To a better, fairer, Independent Scotland

I am, as always

Yours for Scotland.

Sara Salyers
I am a mother, a grandmother, a writer, activist, former tv writer/producer and college teacher.
As a writer/producer, I worked for three of the major broadcast companies in the UK and a number of high profile, corporate clients including Scottish Power, the Health Education Board for Scotland and, not least!, the Scottish National Party, (party election and party political broadcasts), as well as the European Free Alliance. I managed two independent production companies, hiring and managing staff, designing budgets, overseeing accounts and was the investigator and producer for two short-listed documentaries (Channel 4 and BBC), and one award winning documentary for the BBC.
I taught in the USA from 2009 to 2014, creating my own syllabus for classrooms of ‘non traditional’ college students, then taught communications in Fife College from 2015 to 2017. I won a national teaching award in 2011 and published an academic paper which examined the way in which formal English is taught as ‘proper’ English and the effect of this approach on students.
I joined the SNP in 1985 campaigning, leafleting and standing for Council election and rejoined the party on my return from the USA to Scotland in 2014. I joined Alba as a founder member and am presently working, with other writers and researchers, on a project to restore the sovereignty of the Scottish people, (unlawfully replaced by UK parliamentary sovereignty), under the ratified provisions of the Claim of Right.

BEAT THE CENSORS
Sadly some sites had given up on being pro Indy sites and have decided to become merely pro SNP sites where any criticism of the Party Leader or opposition to the latest policy extremes, results in censorship being applied. This, in the rather over optimistic belief that this will suppress public discussion on such topics. My regular readers have expertly worked out that by regularly sharing articles on this site defeats that censorship and makes it all rather pointless. I really do appreciate such support and free speech in Scotland is remaining unaffected by their juvenile censorship. Indeed it is has become a symptom of weakness and guilt. Quite encouraging really.

FREE SUBSCRIPTIONS
Are available easily by clicking on the links in the Home and Blog sections of this website. by doing so you will be joining thousands of other readers who enjoy being notified by email when new articles are published. You will be most welcome.

44 thoughts on “THE IDEA BEHIND THIS.”

  1. In the run-up to the 2014 referendum, we had a newspaper, just a few sheets, nothing too heavy, simple messaging and delivered free around the doors, I know I delivered hundreds of them. Speaking to people in the street they said (unlike the junk mail political parties push through our letterboxes) people told me yes, they had read it. I have no idea who published it, but clearly, it worked, maybe this would be a way to spread the word about independence and get a bandwagon rolling again.

    Liked by 19 people

  4. Recent comments from Ian Blackford MP led me to think that the chances of a referendum in late 2023 had considerably reduced. The very next day the First Minister seemed to be sticking to the late 2023 timetable. With war raging in the Ukraine I would not like to predict which one of them is closer to the truth.

    If you had asked me six months ago if I wanted a referendum in 2023 I would have said yes – bring it on. Today I am not so sure. The YES / NO polls seem stubbornly stuck at somewhere near to 50/50. Despite the antic of Boris and the UK government, half our population are yet to be convinced of the need or even the potential advantages of independence. We have so far failed to inspire them. We have not fully answered the questions of currency, pensions and the like which led to our defeat in 2014.

    It is now mid March 2022. The next two months of the Scottish political calendar will be occupied by the local election campaign. Hundreds of candidates, delivering thousands of leaflets and knocking on doors promising better schools, less potholes on local roads and that they will attend to all the numerous local issues which voters say they are interested in.

    By polling day in early May only around half of the electorate will have bothered to vote but a new set of councillors will be elected. Councils will have their first meetings. Political deals will be done, coalitions will be formed and by late May local political life will get back to what passes for normal. Weary activists will take a week or two to recover their strength and then hopefully look to the next battle. June will be on the horizon with thoughts of holidays (Covid permitting) taking up the attention of the Scottish electorate. July and August could be over in a flash of holidays accompanied by recesses of both UK and Scottish Parliaments.

    Who knows at what stage the war in the Ukraine will be by then? If NATO has decided to enforce a no fly zone we could be in the middle of a much wider conflict.In any case, before you know it, September 2022 will be upon us and it will be only a year to a possible referendum polling day. I have no idea how long it will take to pass the necessary legislation and possibly defend it in various courts of law.

    Given the lack of leadership from the SNP over the past eight years, there will be a lot of catching up to do. The big question is can we get to perhaps 55/45 in favour of YES in a year, possibly a lot less? War and political uncertainty will not act in our favour. Food and fuel prices may well be at levels which many will find unaffordable. Will that help or hinder our cause? I suspect it will probably do both.

    As time rushes on the starting point of a real independence campaign seems to be moving further and further into the future leaving the time for the actual campaign getting shorter and shorter by the day.

    We cannot afford to lose for a second time. Indiref3 would be a long, long way into the future.

    Liked by 7 people

    1. If Sturgeon had her way UK and US fighter jets would be goin* head to head with Russian jets.

      Slavishly behind Boris Johnson and Liz Truss in pouring armaments and weaponry into the conflict Sturgeon sees herself as a latter day Margaret Thatcher. The behaviours are uncannily so similar it’s frightening.

      Sturgeon, Thatchers daughter!. Nicola Thatcher would be a joke if it wasn’t so grim.

      Liked by 14 people

      1. Aye Willie, Sturgeon and her motley crew have clearly de-prioritised and replaced Scottish Nationalism with Western Liberalism which prioritises US Imperialism/colonialism.

        Liked by 21 people

    2. There are a number of routes other than a Section 30 approved referendum to restoring Scotland’s rightful status as an Independent nation-state. In fact the S30 route is a means that I would dismiss, for reasons outlined in some detail in both this blog and others. (In summary, the British would run it so already it is gerrymandered. In any fair referendum the British would have to be excluded from the process with things like the question asked, voting franchise and timing all set by the Scotland’s representatives in the Holyrood and Westminster parliaments).

      Scotland could rescind the Treaty of Union due to many breaches since 1707, most recently Brexit. (Much more details on this I’m sure are on the way from Sara Salyers this week on this blog). We could simply assert the supremacy of Scotland’s political representatives (of the Scottish sovereign people) in a National Convention of MPs, MSPs and Councilors. There is also the option of a plebiscite election at Holyrood and/or Westminster with pro-Indy candidates standing on the single issue of statehood for Scotland. We could even approach the United Nations claiming that dominance from our English neighbours effectively makes Scotland a colony and that we wish to decolonise.

      It is important how we take back our self-government. If we are ‘given’ it, this can be taken away. (See devolution and the Scotland Act 1998). We need to feel that we own self-determination. Look at the Irish – the fought and died for their freedom. They are a peaceful people if left alone but just try referring to any Irish citizen as ‘British’ and check out the reaction. (I’d advise ducking as a first response). No way am I advocating violence – it was a last resort for the Irish after hundreds of years of occupation and bullying – but we need to take some pride in who we are and why we are.

      A Section 30 as request and process is therefore ruled out as far as I’m concerned.

      Liked by 21 people

      1. It is a very good question, Alf, to which the only response is tumbleweed blowing down the glens and mountains.. One would think that the members of a party devoted to a single cause – independence – would be knee deep in detail and preparations for the campaign and the result. They would be working night and day on the future constitutional arrangements, questions over resources, land, jobs, the economy. There would an air of excitement as the details are thrashed out and agreed by a broad coalition of people across the political spectrum. Debates would numerous, vigorous and energising.

        That is what you would expect. Instead, they will go to great lengths to avoid such detailed plans and discussions. Vague references to it are all that is permitted, and only to keep the voters and members happy that the illusionary event is coming – but just not yet. The latest attempt to label 2023 as the year is another exercise in the carrot for us donkeys. In the meantime, slogans and posturing about all manner of things, mostly out of the competence of the Scots Gov, are all the rage. Having an opinion and withering criticism of the obvious targets is the substitute for any critical thinking or action. And of course the serious assault on any competition on the issue of independence. The SNP don’t just want to be the sole representative for indy, they want to own it, and in particular own the means and method – so that no other party or individual can speak for it. The penalty for doing so is legal action and jail time for some.Owning it means their sole custody ensures it can be perpetually put off and never seriously discussed, no strategy is implemented and no coalitions are possible.

        For Sturgeon, if you saw the last SNP prospectus, you would have realised independence is Brigadoon – a cartoon fantasy of a wish list of ‘progessive’ poliicies, with absolutely no indication of any means or pathways to achieving them. All she has to do is keep the misty dream replenished occasionally, while promising a referendum she already knows Westminster, by her own admission, will turn down. What a cosy life, like the fortune tellers with a crystal ball and a nice line of patter in telling you what you want to hear.

        Liked by 7 people

    3. “We cannot afford to lose for a second time”

      “We” did not lose in 2014. We only lost if you believe the official narrative. I most don’t.

      With the franchise used yes was set to lose. There are sufficient unionist articles published that boasted of how the non-natives counteracted the yes vote of the natives. You have to wonder what kind of “self determination” of a people is one where you have your neighbour country “self-determining” on your behalf.

      Besides a flawed franchise, we had political parties and political entities with HQ down in England and pouring cash into the campaign working to frustrate independence. Some of that cash was collected outwith Scotland. For instance, who funds the Labour, Tory and LibDem parties? Most of their funds do not come from Scotland, but from outwith Scotland. How the interference of those parties and other entities was ever considered acceptable and not seen as a direct and blatant interference by another country is beyond me.

      To be fair, for a future Scottish referendum to be a real exercise in self-determination, every single one of the parties sitting in Holyrood with HQ outwith Scotland and leaders from outwith Scotland should be banned from taking part because .they are protecting the interest of another country, not Scotland’s.

      How many EU parties did we see in the EU referendum, pouring cash in the anti brexit campaign and actively campaigning in the Uk against brexit? How many EU party leaders signed an unlawful vow to deliberately mislead the voters in the UK with false promises? How many EU old political hadbeens did we see coming to the UK to pace up and down spouting hyperbole after hyperbole against brexit, like Brown did against independence in Scotland? How many othe than UK EU royals do we remember coming to the UK in the middle of the EU ref campaign and menacely tell us to think well what we were going to vote for during the EU referendum?

      I remember none. It would be considered totally unacceptable by the ERG and the brexiteers, so how is it that we in Scotland have to consider all this interference acceptable?

      If that was not enough, we had civil servants from the treasury actively bypassing their code of conduct to actively work against independence “to save the union”. Work for which they received recognition and praise. It is therefore not surprising that, fast forward 3 years, and we had UK civil servants in the so called “Scottish” government enthusiastically jumping on the bandwagon of wasting our public money to rush and enact an embarrassingly unlawful and tainted with bias complaints procedure for the sake of pushing Mr Salmond out of the SNP and politics.

      Then of course we have the joke of the postal votes and the fact that some unionists appeared to know the result even before the counting had been done.

      If another referendum was in two months, the English establishment only would have to get a few hundred of thousands of activists from down south or NI to register to vote by post here and voila, the yes vote frustrated again. I am sure I am not the only one who wonders at this point how long it is going to take for the British establishment to exploit the situation and the ordeal of the Ukranian refugees coming to Scotland to its advantage by getting them to vote no in a future referendum or for Sturgeon in the upcoming council elections so Alba’s presence can be frustrated again. Wasn’t Gove recently asking the people of the UK to invite the refugees to their own homes?

      A referendum in the present circumstances is pointless. It will not settle anything, because it would not be an exercise in self determination, but yet another attempt to frustrate that self determination, as every move this “leader” has been making for the last 7 years has been. She is a leader alright, but one that sits right at the back, heaven forbid the vacuum behind her PR persona could ever be exposed, and one who leads Scotland backwards never forward.

      She has been deliberately pushing it back for the best part of 6 years. So far, in 6 years, she has not even given us a date. She could have put to better use all those years she has wasted doing selfies and hunting for acceptable excuses to delay that referendum by ensuring the referendum was fair, with a fair franchise, closing every single door to external interference and CAMPAIGING for independence. She did the opposite.

      If this woman announces a referendum now my first thought will be, right what is she hiding? Where is the catch? What extra door has she opened now to UK government interference to ensure our yes vote is frustrated again?

      But from where I am standing, all what she appears to be doing is dangling a carrot. Only this time she has the Greens doing shifts to dangle the stick while Blackford let us down “gently” or attempts to distract us by claiming without having the authority to do so, just like Brown did with the vow, that an independent Scotland will retain the monarchy and to hell with democracy and what the people of Scotland wants.

      From where I am standing, it appears more likely that Sturgeon might take over from Keir Starmer the leadership of labour than the chances of her ever bring forward a FAIR referendum.

      The ware in Ukranie is an excuse. The livelihood costs brought up by a brexit we never voted for and could have avoided if we only had that referendum in 2016/17 or if she ended the union in 2015 as one would expect she would have done, are an excuse, just like waiting for the resolution of the brexit negotiations in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019 was her excuse to force brexit on us and get Westminster’s pretend sovereignty into law with the Withdrawal Bill before the risk of a plebiscite election became too high.

      Covid was also used as an excuse, just like before that her infamous demand for an unnecessary S30 was. The COP26, the sudden concern for the environment and to stop Scotland profiting from our massive oil reserves AGAIN were another excuse. Years wasted in the aftermath of an unlawful complaints procedure that ended up in a bogus and overinflated criminal case and a parliamentary inquiry were also a excuse to stall independence. Her pandering to the GRA nonsense and distracting by creating a new problem by unnecessarily upsetting females is also an excuse.

      If there is something Nicola Sturgeon will never disappoint us at is in bringing a brand new excuse each time to frustrate Scotland’s democracy and right to self determine.

      Do we want independence?

      If the answer to that is yes then we should forget about a flawed referendum which the only thing it is going to do is either frustrate our right to self determine or giving Sturgeon and her handlers the chance to push back our self determination by a rebranded S30 or some other by-product of the pretend, self-awarded and enthusiastically embraced by Nicola Sturgeon Westminster’s sovereignty.

      If we want independence the way to get it is by demanding that each and every parliamentary election Scotland takes part in becomes a plebiscite on independence, and by using the same path to end the union as it was started in the first place: with a vote from our parliamentarians.

      What we need is to find a way to ensure those parliamentary elections are fair to Scotland because at present, with the ability of the Uk establishment to have hundreds of thousands of union activists.refugees/military personnel/civil servants from elsewhere registering to vote in Scotland, getting over 50% of a yes vote is, in my view, impossible. They will make sure of that. A majority of pro-indy MPs willing to end the union is the best we can aim for and rest assured that the UK establishment will throw all its weight to frustrate that too.

      We need to find a way to ensure the ballot boxes are not moved anywhere and they are counted in situ and right away after the polls are closed, The counting should be done in the presence of sufficient pro indy observers in situ to check every step of the way, witness the counting and the matching of the number of votes to the number of electors in that particular table. No dodgy votes. No room for tampering.

      Scotland has been sending a majority of what we thought were pro independence parliamentarians to both Holyrood and Westminster for since before 2015. So why is the union still standing?

      Because they are not real pro independence parliamentarians.

      The first step for independence is to chuck out from the seats all the fraudsters that have been pretending to be pro independence when all what they have been doing is to preserve the union instead, so brexit could be forced on Scotland.

      How do we do that? By voting for a political party that has a majority of pro-indy MPs as a mandate to end the union, and by making the current amoebas in government lock all the doors to potential tampering with our votes and voting intention.

      Liked by 18 people

      1. It would be nice just once to hear a response to Mia’s excellent and detailed analysis above from our elected SNP MP’s and MSP’s. Where is their reply to such a detailed critique of their ongoing deceit of the Scottish people and to the many previous critiques here and elsewhere? What do Scotland’s elected MPs and MSPs as our national representatives who claim to support independence have to say on the matter of their continued inertia and claims of deceit on independence?

        SNP MPs and MSPs clearly have nothing to say and that tells us and the entire independence movement all it needs to know about the SNP.

        Liked by 18 people

    5. A referendum will be suicide. With the help of the SNP and the unionists they allowed into the parliament any referendum will be deliberately lost. Would England ask Scotland for permission for a referendum. Aye right.
      Being independent is normal asking for permission is not.

      Liked by 16 people

  5. Another interesting blog from an individual who previously was committed SNP but who now sees Alba and alternative approaches to the frankly now establishment anti independence SNP.

    There are so many folk like Sarah Salyer.

    2014 Rab the establishment close. They know that. But through individuals like Sarah, of whom there are many the length a bd breadth of our country, independence will be in our grasp. The SNP May be hollowed out with an anti independence leadership clique and many a comfortable elected tougher quietly taking their sinecure, But the commitment to independence has not declined.

    Liked by 13 people

    1. I certainly hope that it is correct that support for Independence has not declined, despite the inevitable lethargy caused by no real campaigning and the effects of austerity making folk more concerned about just surviving the onslaught.
      I have more hope for an Independence majority at Westminster, rather than in Holyrood, with a voting system allowing so many useless Unionists who clutter the seats and spout venom against Scotland. While the FPTP system is certainly flawed, it works to our advantage in this case as the majority of people coming to live, work or study from south of the border, tend to be in specific areas as shown on any maps of seats gained by Unionist parties.
      As UK elections are won on seats, not votes, the SNP do well, though how to we force them to declare that a majority of seats is enough for us to leave the union?

      Liked by 2 people

  6. So, you’re going to have an election in which foreign-born people aren’t allowed to vote? Yeah, this is definitely a genius plan.

    Like

    4. Hi Mark,

      I invite you to take a look at the rules in any other European Country, or even the UK union itself. Generally speaking, people born elsewhere can vote as long as:

      a) they are the direct descendants of natives/citizens of the country and therefore get automatic citizenship or
      b) gain citizenship for which it is usually required, among other things:

      1. having lived without long interruptions in the country for an established period of time. The length of this time varies depending on the country.

      2. Having sworn allegiance to the country.

      I have just done a quick search in google and this is what I found:

      To vote in the EU referendum, the UK government demanded EU citizens to gain UK citizenship, which would only happen if you lived in the UK for 5 years. The same applies for general elections. If you have lived over 15 years out of the UK, you lose your right to vote.

      To vote in Spanish general elections/referendums, you have to be a citizen for which you require to have lived 10 years in Spain, 5 of those as a permanent resident.

      For Germany you require to have lived in Germany for 8 years

      For Sweden it is 5 years

      For Austria is 10 years, with a minimum of 5 as a permanent resident

      For France it is 5 years

      For Switzerland it is 10 years, and this was reduced from 12

      For Greece, it is 7 years

      For Italy, it is 5 years

      For Denmark 9 years.

      For Portugal it is 5 years

      For Monaco it is 10 years

      and here are two absolute whoppers:

      For Andorra it is TWENTY years and for St Marino THIRTY.

      It seems the smaller the country, the longer the time that it is needed and this make sense. For some of those countries, to gain citizenship you must renounce to your other country citizenship.

      So it is not outrageous at all to demand for those who were not born in Scotland that before they cast the vote in any referendum or election they gain “citizenship”, even if one that is symbolic, by swearing allegiance to Scotland and the Scottish people, and by demonstrating they have been living in Scotland for a period of for example 8 or 10 years. It would not be out of sync at all with what is demanded in any other European country

      Following from the rules of the UK, you could also stipulate that anybody living outwith Scotland for over a certain period of time loses the right to vote. It would not be out of sync at all with what is demanded in the UK itself.

      Liked by 21 people

      1. Make your minds up. In the second paragraph you say we can’t win with the current franchise which lets “foreigners” vote in a referendum. Then in the third paragraph we have to bypass a referendum with a plebiscite election… which WOULD let those same people vote. Which is it? Are you going to forbid “non-indigenous” Scots from voting in Holyrood elections as well as referendums? How can you have missed such a basic glaring hole in your argument?

        Like

      2. Er because it’s not there. The franchise for general elections and the very loose arrangement that was used in the 2014 referendum was very different. Also we are proposing a residency qualification in line with other countries. Why can’t you understand we want to follow the practice of all the other democratic countries in Europe. It is you who is supporting the anomaly.

        Liked by 7 people

      3. Mark,

        A quick search in google tells us that:

        “Psychologists use the term “gaslighting” to refer to a specific type of manipulation where the manipulator is trying to get someone else (or a group of people) to question their own reality, memory or perceptions”

        Well, albeit in a very unskilled way, I think this is what you are trying to do here, so how about you tune down the gaslighting a notch or two?

        You see, for decades the Scottish people have being constantly insulted, dumbed down and gaslighted by colonialists desperate to make the Scottish people doubt their sound judgement so they could get them to act against their interests. Because getting the Scottish people to continuously act against their own interests and by England using Scotland’s sovereignty as if it was its own, is the only way this toxic union can survive and England can continue sponging off Scotland’s assets, Scotland’s market and Scotland’s territory as an extension of its own.

        More recently there are some fronts where the level of gaslighting is so, so off the scale that it is impossible to not notice. Some of those fronts are the pro GRA machine, Scotland’s sovereignty, Scotland’s wealth, Scotland’s culture and heritage and now of course the referendum franchise.

        The problem with using such an aggressive approach, and in so many fronts simultaneously, is that sooner or later it will cause fatigue on the target population. Well, my gaslighting fatigue started in 2014. As you can imagine, that fatigue has now reached the status of allergy.

        Let me ask you a few questions. You don’t need to answer here, just answer to yourself.

        Did it ever cross your mind to question the “mind” or the judgement of those down south who established the UK franchise? If not, why not?

        Did you ever question them on why they do not allow “foreigners”, as you call it, take part in general elections or referendums? If not, why not?

        Have you ever questioned their judgement in removing the vote from UK natives who spent more than 15 years living out of the UK? Why do you think they have done that?

        My opinion is because the risk that those who have lived continuously for more than 15 years abroad “go native” in their country of residence is far too high, and therefore it is very likely they do no longer bear allegiance to the UK. And what is worse, the gaslighting, patriotic, warmongering, UJ flag waving imperialistic propaganda spouted by the UK broadcasters and MSM will no longer be effective. Why? Because those people would have been exposed for long enough to other sources of information, and potentially alternative propaganda sources, to see the UK propaganda mouthpieces for what they are.

        What is your opinion?

        In fact, no many European countries are as restrictive as the UK in this point. But the UK has a hell of a lot of historical experience in what happens to UK people who had spent far too long in a colony – they went native, embraced the culture of the host country and developed allegiance to it. Why? because after sufficient years, if their residence was fixed in the colony, they and their children would start to be affected by the same problems the native population was, so it became in their best interests to act to protect the interests of the host country rather than the one where they were born. Unless, of course, they were continuously bribed with wealth and imperialistic baubles to keep them thinking that it was in their best interests to maintain allegiance to the UK.

        Who are you to question the judgement of Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Portugal, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Austria, Andorra, St Marino and pretty much every other country in the world? Because by demanding a wide open franchise for Scotland that is what you appear to be doing. All of those countries have stringent franchises to protect the native population so “foreigners”, as you call them, can only take part in constitutional decisions if they prove their allegiance to the country first. They do this by fulfilling both, swearing allegiance to the host country and proof of continuous residence.

        To become a UK citizen, in addition to those two conditions you have to pass an English exam at a certain level and also to pass an exam on “life in the UK”. What does that tell you? That tells you that the UK authorities fully acknowledge the fact that simply living in a country does not mean you immediately develop allegiance to it and to the elements of its establishment, in the UK case, its monarchy. To become a citizen in the UK you have to embrace its culture and language, or at least prove you have sufficient knowledge of it. But more importantly, you have to swear allegiance to the monarch and their descendants.

        In other words, the wide open franchise that was used in 2014 was an aberration compared to the rest of the world.
        It was not the norm but rather the exception. The only other place I remember similar franchise being used was in Quebec, where the arguments were exactly the same as here, the old carrot of “civic” vs “ethnic” nationalism, faux outrage and of course going to enormous lengths to remove the sovereignty and right to self determination of the French speaking native population. You almost feel that the arguments used in Quebec to defeat the french-speaking native population were simply transported to Scotland’s context to achieve the exact same outcome.

        By the way, would you ever question the judgement of the Falklands or Gibraltar on their selection of franchise with regards to people without UK citizenship? If not, why not?

        You could argue that Scotland is being treated as a colony just like Falklands and Gibraltar are, and it is exactly in the same geographic situation as Scotland and Quebec is: surrounded by a much bigger foreign entity that, should the borders be fully open would render the native population, their language and culture a minority very quickly.

        Scotland’s native population is not the minority yet, but it is on course to become that pretty soon. You only have to compare the proportion of population born in England that reside in Scotland with the proportion of population born in Scotland living in England. The latter is an order of magnitude less. In other words, the influence of England born residents in Scotland is having a much, much higher impact on the political decisions of Scotland than the influence than those born in Scotland but living in England can ever have on England’s politics.
        in other words, the influence is not symmetrical an never will be. By giving the vote to everybody and their dog without stipulations, we are simply accelerating the process of rendering the Scottish native population silent.

        Gibraltar and the Falklands are much smaller than Scotland, but their franchise is protecting the voting rights of the UK descendants and natives in those entities from the potential dilution by a large influx of people coming from Spain or Argentina respectively. If it is good and perfectly acceptable for Gibraltar and Falklands to have a restrictive franchise that stops their immediate country neighbours diluting the native population voice, language and culture, where exactly is your justification for Scotland not having the same?

        It seems to me that you are seeking to delegitimise what is common practice in pretty much every single country in the world and even in the UK union and colonies. You are pushing for Scotland’s franchise to become an exception in the world rather than the norm. The only beneficiary of such an aberration is the English establishment that wishes to retain control of Scotland’s territory, assets and strategic geographic position.

        You ask us to make our minds up. Well, rest assure that my mind is most certainly made up. A while back I spent a whole afternoon with a calculator, the census figures, the figures available that tell you how many people of voting age from NI, England, Wales and from out of the UK migrate into Scotland each year. I compared those values with the increase of natives every 5 years and it was glaringly obvious that the figure of those who come from elsewhere surpasses by an order of magnitude at least the increase in natives, meaning that the native population of Scotland is being displaced bit by bit year after year. I have also had a quick look at the number of voters registered for elections. I am currently working on this. So far, for what I can see, but I am still working on it and needs confirmation, when you take into account the deaths, the number of new voters registered appears to surpass the number of natives that would have achieved voting age. I let you extract your own conclusions on what that means for the result of an election/referendum and more importantly, in the long term.

        On top of that, and I know this because I have direct experience myself, the majority of children of non natives do not bear allegiance to the country where they were born or the country where they temporarily live, but to the country where their parents come from or have allegiance to and where their family lives. It takes an awful long time for that to change, far more than 5 years.

        P.S.: my argument does not have holes, Mark. It is your unskilled attempts at gaslighting what does.

        Liked by 7 people

      4. Are there generally language requirements for gaining citizenship? For example, do potential citizens need to demonstrate some proficiency in one or more of a country’s languages?

        Liked by 3 people

    5. If you are born and live in Scotland you can vote. If not, then like every other country you should not be allowed to interfere in an election

      Liked by 3 people

      2. I absolutely agree. I am English and moved here in December 2013. Faced with a referendum, knowing little of Scottish politics, I joined the SNP and attended conference. I was overjoyed by what I found in the SNP, having lived 45 years in John Redwood’s constituency. After the sad and we now know very misguided resignation of Alex Salmond, like everyone else I strongly supported Nicola, badly wanted her to succeed, and relished her successes. But from early on I had concerns at what seemed to me to be a naive level of openness to incomer inclusiveness. I already knew many English people who were buying into Scottish housing and opportunity and social support, it was a very good deal for them to move here with all the benefits no longer available at home, and with no requirement to rethink their emotional commitment or even to take an interest in political decisions at all. Many English voted Tory because their dad did, read Tory papers or believed the bbc. It was a glaring and seemingly innocent omission not to see the wolf of English self interest gathering strength, but Scotland was making herself very vulnerable to what I knew and recognised as a concerted and relentless attack by stealth on the basic premis of independence. Most English buyers saw Scotland as theirs by right and not much was being done to rectify that idea. Not all of course, lots like me were old disenchanted socialists who found Scotland a refuge if not Utopia.

        It wasn’t long before my doubts about these welcoming gestures from the top began to seem less like naivety and more like omens. Actually I think we and Alba are missing a trick here. People in Scotland are like people anywhere concerned with what happens in their daily life, and what is happening in the daily lives of most if us is a disastrous reduction in our quality of life under Sturgeon. Roads, healthcare availability, for example. Centralisation has had a really bad effect on people’s budgets as Nicola with sweet smile and concern in every glance has stystematically reduced our standard of living and put the burden of the expense of her policies firmly onto the shoulders of those who can least afford them. To attend hospital appointments now from the far north means days off work for the driver and a six hour round trip for the patient all the costs borne by them. You get good hospital treatment costing thousands but as soon as you are out the door you could be wheeled away in a wheelbarrow and all that good work jeopardised by stress and lack of facilities. Sturgeon’s governance is really poor. And it is easily recognisable and available to be analysed, spotlighted and to be ridiculed. Let’s hope the local elections give opportunities for Alba to point these deficiencies out.

        Maybe the contours could be set by this. Perhaps all people living in Scotland should vote in local elections where their daily life is affected, but only the Scots vote in national elections where the culture, philosophy and political significance of Scotland is set. What say you?

        Liked by 10 people

      4. So much for my ” stepping back from blah blah ” 🙂 , well , at least I’ve binned Facebook !

        I was motivated to comment after reading Roscurwood’s enlightened comment .

        I don’t think many ( any ) of us here do , but it’s worth being reminded not to overlook the presence of English residents who have come to Scotland with the attitude of openness and appreciation displayed by Ros , who , unlike far too many Scots , see’s the dilemma and danger of repeating the same fatal error of the 2014 free-for-all franchise as well as the damage wrought by the Sturgeon regime : would that more residents of our country had similar honesty and clarity of perception .

        Thank you for reminding us Ros

        Liked by 6 people

    6. You mean like the 216 EU referendum in which EU Nationals living and working in the UK and UK Nationals living and working in the EU were denied the right to cast a vote? You mean like that genius plan ya half wit?

      Liked by 6 people

    1. I very much like the idea but this presentation find extremely hadr to read with text written accross a busy and confusing background.
      I’m not sure how anyone with dyslexia or similar problems would find it but, to me, it seemed to make the letters dance about which is very disconcerting!

      Like

  9. I enjoyed the taster – looking forward to it.

    The genderwoowoo are seriously on the back foot. And I predict, the cowards who are the SNP MPs will be trying to distance themselves from the fallout before the 2024 westmonster elections. I, for one, wont forget or forgive.

    Regarding Markmiwurdz – Even England has requirements before you can vote. So the very few Scots who have holiday homes in England don’t (unlike the 2014 Scottish referendum) get to vote there.

    It is always darkest before the dawn – thanks for the chink of light.

    Liked by 8 people

  12. Wonderful to be able to look forward to promising steps towards the return of Scottish independence.

    And I agree totally with Duncanio’s comment – we must keep that wildcat! A Beautiful WILD Scottish creature sending an important message to WM.

    Liked by 11 people

  13. Been pointing out the Scottish constitution and Scotland’s rights for years. The sad fact is many Scots seem completely thrown by the fact Scotland has a constitution and that it is still intact and our ancient rights and laws are enshrined in perpetuity. These rights predate the formation of Scotland itself and is where Scots sovereignty and its independence comes from. Most are only aware of the Claim of Right 1689 and Declaration of 1320. Another thing that I and others have consistently pointed out is that Scotland has been adhering to mere English parliamentary conventions which have NO LEGAL STANDING. Even ex Labour representative Carwyn Jones pointed out what we had been saying for years with regard to English parliamentary sovereignty and conventions. But being just ordinary folk what we say is ignored. It is why so much irks me. Why nothing gets done. Folk do not accept the facts unless they are typically given by a foreign country’s representatives. Will they listen now? I have my doubts and I do question why not one of Scotland’s representatives have pointed out the blatantly obvious regarding Scotland’s rights which are held in perpetuity.

    Liked by 16 people

  14. I’ve just seen a headline in the Telegraph. “Nicola Sturgeon’s childish attention seeking proves Scotland is not ready for independence.” As if Sturgeon’s personality had anything to do with Scotland’s right to be a free and independent country.

    They must be worried when they are coming out with nonsense like that.

    Liked by 5 people

  15. I was gutted when Alba only achieved 2% in the Scottish elections. A Million wasted SNP second votes allowing Unionist gains. My sadness was that the Indy supporting voters were either still sleeping or Sturgeon worshiping.
    The Council elections are coming up fast and it will be another test to see if Queen Sturgeon still has the public hypnotised.

    Liked by 7 people

  16. I am glad the message is getting out there regarding the rigged voting franchise. I think this will become more evident when the census is published shortly and people see the effect English migration is are having on the Scottish demographic, soon we will be like Wales a minority race in our own country. Just remember the Welsh didn’t vote for Brexit the English settlers living there did. I have always thought that a referendum was the reset button to save the Union. The SNP and Sturgeon know this but they project a open to all voting franchise, an inclusiveness that no other country does. The voting franchise should only be for the indigenous population, as recognised by the UN.
    1 million English settlers, 35k English students ,30k English off shore oil works,14k English forces, and coming up for a referendum this number will be increased to gerrymander the vote once again, and last but not least, 50k additional English settlers arrive to make Scotland their home every year. All these people currently qualify to vote in a rigged referendum.
    Remember English votes for English laws ,and the Brexit a constitution referendum that banned EU citizens from voting. I am perplexed when I raise this with the SNP who are quick to accuse me of racism why would we want to give the colonizers a chance to influence our democracy. We all know English people who will vote for independence but it is foolish to think 1 million plus will .There alliance is to there mother country, England. Any English settlers can be offered citizenship in our new independent Scotland after a successful yes vote. A pebiste is a better way to seek independence being less open to interference and gerrymandering by the Unionist.

    Liked by 7 people

Comments are closed.