Succession, Death and Scotland
If Logan Roy is dead, so too is the era of SNP dominance. The question is what and who comes next? If Roy, as played by Brian Cox has dominated Waystar Royco for so long, his passing is the perfect allegory for the death of the Old SNP. In this story the competing successors are: Liberal Nationalism (Kendall Roy); the Scottish Left (Roman Roy); Scottish Labour (Siobhan Roy); and ALBA (Connor Roy). To unpack this, the desperate to be on-trend Kendall raps and spouts whatever the latest jargon and buzz-words he can muster from beneath his baseball-cap, but is ultimately doomed by his tragic character flaws and his deep shallowness. Roman Roy is by far the smartest, most brutal and likeable of the offspring, but his daddy-issues (Marx not Karl Muller) will prevent him succeeding. Siobhan feigns being Waystar’s progressive choice but she is consumed by opportunism, hides a nasty streak and is terminally unfaithful, she too will not succeed. As we will see later ALBA remains Scotland’s Connor Roy. As Logan Roy/the SNP dies the glee with which the inheritors of this kingdom are dancing is misplaced.
Shambolic Collapse
The shambolic collapse and exposure of the SNP continues to unspool daily before us. There’s a long way down still to go but it’s difficult not to believe that the party’s electoral fallout will be massive, and the consequences for the independence movement disastrous. There is no emergent strategy that doesn’t have the SNP as the vehicle to propel the movement forward.
The roots of this debacle have been well documented.
In figuring out where we are and how we got here it’s hard to disagree at all with Pete Ramand and James Foley’s assessment here (A Second Scottish Independence Referendum Isn’t Going to Happen) : “Scotland experienced an authentically fascinating and, in global terms, underappreciated moment of social movement mobilization in 2014. It left a long, indelible imprint on popular consciousness. However, at some stage it will be necessary to accept that this moment will end without a firm political conclusion. In truth, it probably ended some time ago. That fact may be tragic. But failure to accept defeat will only postpone a long overdue reckoning with the contradictions of sovereignty and independence in crisis-ridden twenty-first-century capitalism.”
Nor is it difficult to disagree with Jonathon Shafi’s assessment of the corporate capture of the SNP when he writes (A fork in the road, Misplaced loyalty is coming back to bite the independence movement): “Key policy areas were farmed out to the corporate sector and outsourced to private consultancy firms. Hundreds of meetings between Scottish ministers and multinationals, wealthy individuals and other influential organisations were left off the lobbying register. The “Economic Recovery Group” set up during the pandemic, was led by the former CEO of Tesco bank, Benny Higgins, who is now Chairman of the estate of Scotland’s largest feudal landowner, the Duke of Buccleuch. The council to advise on a ten-year plan for Scotland to “unleash entrepreneurial potential and grow Scotland’s competitive business base,” included Sir Nick Macpherson, a former Treasury permanent secretary who advised George Osborne to reject a currency union during the 2014 referendum campaign. Known as “Scotland’s National Strategy for Economic Transformation” this body has so far produced a couple of events which the media were excluded from.”
But if the pall-bearers of the SNP are doing a decent job, the fanfare of any credible alterative emerging from the pyre is oddly silent. Instead we are to engage in some magical thinking. The Labour Party under Sir Keir Starmer is engaged in an endless round of self-harm missing open-goal after open-goal while establishing a ring of steel surrounding his Heir to Blair milquetoast manifesto. The idea that the Labour Party – this Labour Party – is standing by as anything other than a side-show to the grotesque Conservatism regime is laughable and desperate.
Unconventional Thinking
Meanwhile as all hell breaks loose in Scotland, a consensus appears to be forming that ‘a convention’ will be a salve, a solution, or something. The National helpfully explains that “The project would bring together all pro-independence parties and pressure groups, and was backed by both Kate Forbes and Ash Regan during the SNP leadership contest” and that “Alba have welcomed the results with the party’s Westminster leader Neale Hanvey saying an independence convention can “help the movement achieve its ultimate objective of securing Scotland’s independence”.
Quite HOW this would be so is never explained. What possible impact would having a convention have? Nobody knows. Equally mysterious is the assumed resurrection of ALBA’s leader. Writing in the National, George Kerevan writes: “ONE unexpected fallout from the SNP implosion is the political rehabilitation of Alex Salmond.” There is no evidence either why this would be, that this is happening, or, importantly, what such a rehabilitation might achieve.
But back to the convention. The Great and the Good have jostled into place – and now the line-up is in place. And what a lineup. SSRG will be there, plus Hector Macleod! SUWN will be there, AND Collette Walker.
But really, this is wild. What will Tasmina, Kate, Ash, Joanna and Humza agree together? (and don’t write in all angry about Humza being at the coronation, I know! I know!). What will Craig Murray and Robin McAlpine reveal, and how will it be transformative to our nation’s destiny?
At the Eagles Inn with Alex
The presenters seem to custom a tone that seems simultaneously patronising and arrogant. The talk of the ‘energy in the room’ and the excitement with which they have witnessed the downfall of their closest enemies is vivid. But the missing bit seems to be how ALBA and Alex are the beneficiaries of the SNP collapse? The assumption seems to be that (if I’ve followed this correctly …) that as the SNP collapse huge swathes of voters will switch their allegiance to ALBA. From a percentage support of 1% and zero representatives they will be transformed into a governing party and win independence. Alternatively they will forge a grand alliance with the despised SNP and the mighty ISP and together we will win our independence (?)
But this, like the Convention idea – seems to be based on some Magical Thinking. Somehow the bringing together of Ash Regan and Joanna Cherry and Kate Forbes will transform our prospects for independence, but how we will never know.
The imminent collapse of the SNP does not translate into electoral advantage for other parties. I predict a riot. Electoral shambles, splitting, defection and a massive realignment is more likely than a distinct new force coming through. Why? The comparisons with the collapse of the Scottish Labour Party are easy but don’t quite work. When Scottish Labour floundered on the rocks of Blairism there was waiting in the wings a big political idea: national self-determination, a potent idea that had been lurking in the shadows for decades gathering strength. Fast forward to today and no such equivalent political energy lies latent.
Logan Roy is dead, but who succeeds him is unclear.
Liberal Nationalism (Kendall Roy) is fatally wounded by recent events, and uninhibited by its own failings will continue to pursue a ridiculous ‘more of the same’ approach to government and campaigning. The Scottish Left (Roman Roy) has some great one-liners but is a damaged and confused person. Scottish Labour (Siobhan Roy) looks like a possible inheritor of the business, but has done nothing to work through her (constitutional) issues and remains tied fatally to the Starmer project, which offers little of substance to Scotland. And ALBA (Connor Roy) remains committed to running for office, blinded by its own inadequacies and holed-up in pub venues talking about the Declaration of Arbroath. The mistake here is to see this moment as a fresh-start. If independence is dead, ALBA is the shroud. These are people operating not inside one bubble, but inside a bubble within a bubble within a bubble. They are, as Logan put it of his feuding children: “Not serious people”.
We are supported only by our readers. We don't have corporate backers and we don't take advertising, so we rely entirely on your support.
Help to support independent Scottish journalism
Have you anything positive to say? Or any ideas on how we can move Scotland towards independence?
Humza should tell Sunak gives us the same deal as N Ireland by 31/12/2023 or we dissolve the Union by removing our MPs and setting up a provisional government in Edinburgh.
in the meantime the SP should legislate to raise all public funding using existing devolved powers through Annual Ground Rent and set a zero rate for income tax on earned income and providing a Universal Citizens Income of £200 per week for everybody
Why ask Westminster for permission? We know what they want. It’s not the same as what we want. I agree with direct action. Bring back our MPs from the House of Commons, and hold a vote to secede. (47 out of 59 would do it.)
Then the fun begins, and the hard work. We will have to set up all the functions of an independent state from scratch. Might take a couple of weeks.
There is no option. Secession is the only way.
Secession. Aye, with at least 50% of Scottish electorate opposed to independence. What could possibly go wrong?
Do you think it will be smooth and easy? Just keep asking the Westminster parliament for permission to hold a referendum? Is that not what has been happening? Why would they? Do you not think the the last one was maybe fixed? Certainly some of the voting papers were simply photocopies.
The half of the population you mention will accept it, while the other 50% cheer rather loudly. There is no other option apart from our acceptance of being a colony whose economy is siphoned away and out culture diluted to invisibility.
Not right now.
It’s a scunner.
Well if you don’t, maybe just shut the fuck up for now.
I think we’ll fin its you who is doing the shutting the fuck up
“Moving Scotland towards Independence” is not realistically on the agenda, Scottish independence having been rejected as an unsound proposition in the independence referendum.
Moving Scotland towards the maximum degree of self-government that is realistically achievable within the United Kingdom is all’ that was ever really possible, in view of the economic fragility of this demographically problematic little country within a state which is too important to the Western alliance for any further disintegration to be allowed apart, conceivably, from the loss of Northern Ireland in due course.
When a parliamentary Independence party loses the faith and trust of those who voted for it, its long-winded blusterings on the floor of the House of Commons, punctuated by laughter and ridicule, can no longer be perceived to serve any form of useful purpose, and so its days are inevitably numbered. This happened to the Irish Home Rule party when Home Rule was set aside for the duration of the Great War.
Ireland, however, is not Scotland. Profound grievance in those circumstances opened up an opportunity for armed rebellion by young men who rejected “the Flemish abattoirs” in favour of the prospect of martyrdom in the General Post Office in Dublin at Easter in 1916, when “a terrible beauty” was born. The UK general election of 1918 was accordingly won in Ireland by the political wing of that extremist movement, which had sufficient ruthlessly sustainable support from a traumatised population to lay the foundations of independence and a national unity which is still a work in progress.
Apart from a small core of unwavering believers, support for Scottish independence is not firmly grounded in any way which comes near to being sufficient to overcome the massive obstacles which would have to be overcome. The people of Scotland do not have what it would take to “defeat the British empire by ignoring it”, as De Valera put it. Nor could we ever have been disposed to do so, as we valued it.
As for the United Kingdom that has come down to us in the present day, we voted in 2014 for the safety and security which it affords us rather than the shocks and alarms of an independence adventure for which we are not cut out. Reforming the constitution of the UK is what we are cut out for, and the sooner we reconcile ourselves to that the better.
Incoherent stream of thought rant.
Not really.
While you were (mercifully) brief.
Surely you mean Incoherentstreamofthoughtrant.
We need something to get people marching again.
The Scottish govt should arrange an independence referendum.
If the yoons organise a boycott, the Scottish govt should state that the referendum will go ahead anyway, and if the YES vote amounts to what would’ve been a majority in the 2014 referendum then it’s assumed that independence is the wish of the Scottish people.
If the yoons continue to advise a boycott that means they won’t be campaigning, which in turn makes it easier to achieve the equivalent of that 2014 majority.
If you were Douglas Ross, what would you recommend?
Following a YES vote the Scottish govt should seek the support of the UN who generally take a dim view of colonies being held against their will.
Almost wept reading your piece….like Tom Ultuous’s idea …at least there is some energy in it ….
you failed to mention the SNP MPs…..is all lost with them for you Mike?
Not all is lost for anyone Alice but big and deep changes required imho
I don’t get the Netflix(?) metaphor stuff, but here’s another metaphor. Ash Regan was like her namesake from King Lear, you will recall, the middle daughter telling uncomfortable truths to the senile King and being disinherited for it. Other notables in the “Regan” category were McKenna, McAlpine, McWhirter, and yes, the abrasive Wings.
“Hard agree” that Alba is nowhere near filling the political vacuum that an imploding SNP might leave. Their critical weakness is still Salmond’s spectacularly ill advised cavorting with “RT.” In fact I’m not sure the SNP’s collapse will be Labour 2014-like either. But nonetheless, in a phrase of Debord, “the secret thickens on everyone’s plates” that what you rightly call “liberal nationalism” is a spent force. In truth, it has been a spent force for a long time. Why? _Because it never showed any credible intention to win over the “No” voters_!!
It was, ultimately, the intention of the “Regans” to commit that heinous sin of “populism” and actually win a majority for “Yes.” Even if that meant foregoing certain modish causes or not always doing the most naively idealist things. In other words, actually practicing /politics/ as opposed to murky, technocratic get-yourself-invited-to-Davos-after-leaving-office “governance.”
Above the line, it’s observed that 2014 was an underappreciated moment. Yes it was. But it seems to have been reframed less as a Corbyn/Sanders type left-populist moment than as a triumph for the entrenched class in the SNP who capitalized upon it. The SNP’s fall, however drastic it turns out to be, will likely be a foreshadowing of the peaking of liberal globalism in general.
Like the nomeklatura who did so well in the Eastern Bloc, and just couldn’t figure out what was wrong with state capitalism anyway, the Scottish “laptop class”, so many of whom have gotten by reasonably well on ScotGov grants, will be moaning about all this to their dying day and blaming it all on bigotry, conspiracy theorists, etc. Again this phenomena will be generalized across the Western world.
What comes next? Well, a rapprochement with the “Regans” and a hard look at the “Gonerils” and the “Cordelias” would be a start.
Thanks Politically Homeless – much to agree with – though “It was, ultimately, the intention of the “Regans” to commit that heinous sin of “populism” and actually win a majority for “Yes.” Except, as widely noted neither her delivery nor her strategy suggested this was in any way likely. I can say “I will make the first priority independence” but I then dont have ideas, comms and strategy to deliver this its just words isnt it?
@Politically Homeless, apparently you don’t get the Shakespeare stuff either, particularly since Regan lies to her father’s face (in more of an honesty test than a love test).
https://blog.sleepingdog.org.uk/2020/11/enter-cordelia-disguised-as-fool.html
King Lear is about the inevitable clash between private government and public service. Regan and Goneril play the numbers game to gang up on their younger banished sister Cordelia, in the raising of armies, but the question of what is right for the realm is not best suited to ‘who has the biggest army’.
Indeed, if your answers look like a multiple choice between A, B or C, or the response 42, you have been asking poor questions and maybe not even understood the question you are asking. If politics is how we arrange to live in groups large enough to contain strangers, what is the point of government?
Abrasive Wings? You mean the unionist Tory-supporting Wings.
Exactly ,“ nationalismisformugsandhaters “ and that’s why England should go Indepedent
If independence is dead, Alba may be the shroud but the SNP is the murderer.
like the Alba cast, Alex’s making good point’s as usual.
I enjoyed the Succession analogy! As Mike says, big changes are needed. And therein, just maybe, might lie a positive: perhaps the crisis at the top of the SNP will provide the impetus for such changes. After all, we were treading water and getting nowhere: clearly a new direction of some sort was needed.
The problem, however, goes deeper than the SNP, as one look at the AUOB line-up for May 6th tells us. Rather more attractive is the planned Calton Hill rally in Edinburgh on the same date, supported by RIC and Our Republic, with an altogether fresher array of speakers. At least this holds out the prospect of reaching out to progressives of different political colours, whatever their take on independence. The same goes for challenging the Westminster veto on the GRR. A new focus on the progressive aims of independence, rather than independence itself? Perhaps there lies the way to rebuilding the independence movement, rather than the forlorn task of uniting all the elements of the post-2014 Yes movement.
OUR SCOTTISH Gov should go ahead with indy without the Right Wing english gov say so! In do that we hold two indy votes on the same day one for all Scots and 1 for all non-Scots that way if SCOTS choose with a majority then that’s it, if it’s close 53 -47 or similar the non-Scots votes are then taken into account my guess is the majority of SCOTS about 79% would say YES and that result would stand. We wouldn’t need the non-scot votes so job done first time! Since all unionists don’t want a Scottish government everybody that votes for YES will get the Scottish benefits and all the No’s get the English benefits systems which s fuck all. That way we will here the unionists inbreds screaming blue murder as they don’t get the Scottish benefits from OUR SCOTTISH Gov. The little RIGHT WING England can pay for it as they want RIGHT WING little england to be in control of us!!
Hello Mike. I know we have major differences in our view of the situation in Scotland and indeed, Alex Salmond, but can I just take the time to thank you for taking the time to respond to my views over the last few months. I assume, and sometimes I forget, that you are putting your views in front of an invisible audience knowing that some will support, some will disagree and some will attack (I have been one of them). I know from a different life that the attacks can be hurtful no matter the resilience within the heart. It’s not an easy gig. So, here we go. I don’t know who the Roys are as I no longer watch television and am not on social media – the internet and the websites on it is all I’ve got. I feel that there is despair in some of your writings, I feel that you don’t see the way out, and please forgive me if I misrepresent, I mean it kindly, but it is not as bleak as it seems, we can get independence if we want it. We really can. All it takes is the will and the belief and the acceptance that we have to ride alongside those we find at best objectionable. we have to realise that our ideological viewpoint is trumped by the need for independence. The communist, the socialist, the anarchist have to be ready to stand alongside the Tory united, even if all that we agree on is independence. I want. I believe in a Scotland free to sit at the UN table between Saudi Arabia and Senegal. Have we forgotten that? Are we going to let a couple, the Murrels, a party the SNP, a body the supreme court, a governor the Westminster parliament destroy that dream? are we going to let the machinations of the political class subordinate us once again?
I rad a lot of the comments on here and other websites and I don’t understand the words or references that people use – I am not the best educated person, but I believe. Please, all of you out there put down your barbs, hold hands and join the independence movement, not the SNP but us, all of us.
Spot On!
Thanks WT
The only way to independence is via the SNP. Perhaps it is a coincidence that a number, perhaps most, of the speakers have put the boot into the SNP more often than they have done so to the Tories. No doubt being cheered on from Queen Elizabeth House. By their actions ye shall know them.
And we are all expected to sit in a circle and sing kumbaya?
Aye right.
Someone with the courage to speak from the head …and the heart ! Thank you.
I would respectfully suggest that what we are seeing at the moment with the SNP and wider independence movement is almost inevitable with the main causes being:
1.the final realisation that the 2014 referendum was lost and there is no easy way to independence as can be seen from failure to agree on a workable strategy following Section 30 refusal by Westminster. The hope of another referendum sustained many independence supporters and to now find out that the politicians had no realistic plan as to how achieve this has left many with a feeling of anger and despair.
2.the independence movement is by its very nature going to be a broad church of views and opinions held together by the prospect of independence. With that prospect disappearing over the horizon it is inevitable that the divisions within independence movement, long submerged, have come to the surface.
3.the SNP are the political wing of independence movement and like many political parties that have been in office (not sure the term power is applicable to Holyrood?) for a sustained period of time they have become complacent, factionalised and rather lost their way. In addition it appears the organisation of SNP is at best chaotic suffering the inevitable outcome of any organistaion which is run by a small, unaccountable clique. Warning signals were apparent when NS became leader and her husband continued in his CEO role.
However despite all that has occurred and may be about to occur some fundamentals remain:
1.The established way to independence is via an democratically transparent referendum recognised by international community.
2.Westminster will only grant this referendum when support for independence is overwhelming >60% in polls and elections I would suggest.
3.The independence movement requires a political wing which can demonstrate competency and improvement of life for majority of people while in government at Holyrood.
4.The political wing of independence movement must represent Scotland at Westminster promoting constituents and Scotland’s interests at all times while ceaselessly highlighting where Westminster polices are detrimental to Scotland.
5.The independence movement must both acknowledge differences that exist and come together to engage communities across Scotland in broader independence movement to convince enough people of benefits of independence.
I find it difficult to envisage a different political party from SNP being the political wing of independence though I may be proved wrong. The SNP need to understand where they and Scottish electorate are in 2023 and implement some fundamental changes in organisation and engagement or they will wither away as a credible political force. I am unsure whether this can be achieved while SNP are in power at Holyrood and a period of opposition may help them reorganise as well as expose electorate to having a party in government at Holyrood that takes its orders from head office at Westminster.
Lastly I would suggest that everybody in independence movement takes a deep breath and stops running around like Private Fraser shouting out ‘we’re doomed’. The opponents of independence are more than capable of doing that for us.
Always remember that demographics are in favour of independence and the opponents of independence are celebrating so much at present because they know full well that preserving the union in its current condition is an extremely difficult task for them.
Good comment JP58
Mike- since you liked my comment I would be grateful if you indulge me with one last comment.
I agree SNP has been rather timid and would have liked to see implementation of more policies around poverty, energy, land ownership etc but I would implore people not to make mistake Labour made post 2010 where they virtually disowned everything they had done and allowed Tories to establish narrative especially around the economy, public spending which then lead to the unnecessary implementation of austerity. The SNP governments have implemented some policies that have benefited people in Scotland often mitigating Westminster cuts as outlined by Moneybox’s Paul Lewis (hardly a radical independence supporter) in his assessment of how ‘Things are Better in Scotland’ post devolution.
Lots of good food for thought in these comments from JP58 and also WT.
We shouldn’t fall into desolation because two people have fucked up big-time.
But we do need an immediate plan to regroup. IMV that requires finding out the minimum of common ground and then ignoring rather than jettisoning everything else, especially anything with a worth of controversy.
The SNP managed to be successful under Alex Salmond and then Nicola Sturgeon because they reflected what a broad spectrum of the people wanted. They didn’t really lead the people in a particular direction, and you could reflect that the political capital from 2015 until recently was provided by the people to the SNP rather than the SNP earning it.
The real difficulty ahead as I see it is a lack of a unifier. Watching the video about the relaunched Brecon Beacon / Bannau Brycheiniog National Park linked to on here, I was really struck by the fact that we don’t have anyone at all with the power and charisma of Michael Sheen. Granted he’s an actor, but he can at least act as a convincing leader.
That needs to be an objective – find a unifier. It isn’t Yousaf, Salmond (!!), or Regan. It might be Forbes, but then the rejections of her by her fellow MSP in the leadership contest suggests it’s not.
It does need to be a serious person. For me the only person who comes close on this is Phillippa Whitford.
Jacob
In light of yesterday’s arrest it looks like 3 people have messed up.
This increasingly appears to be all about good governance and culture within the party and there are a lot of questions that need answered before the party can put this behind them and move on.
Unfortunately I do think some of the other senior people within party have some questions to answer eg:
The situation where the 2 most powerful people within organisation were husband and wife – this is a recipe for engendering lack of transparency and trust in any organisation. Why did other members of party not question wisdom of this and demand PM step aside when NS became leader?
Douglas Chapman resigned as Treasurer because he was not given information he requested – this should have been a red flag to other senior members to demand the information was made available. There is a serious question about state of current SNP finances with senior MSP’s and MP’s only able to say, unconvincingly, that they have been told finances are fine. Why did they not ask for more than reassurances when there have been obvious questions for a while?
All these questions need to be cleared up in an open transparent manner as quickly as possible to stop further damage to SNP and independence movement and while some senior members finally seem to appreciate, this unfortunately it appears the only people with the information are PM,NS & CB and with the ongoing police investigations it is unlikely that these questions will be able to be answered.
It appears HY knows little about this situation but this issue was in press and police have been investigating previous to leadership election. In such a situation surely it was incumbent upon all of the candidates to demand they were made fully aware of all available information to avoid the situation HY finds himself in. if he does know more about it and is withholding information he is finished. I found all 3 candidates pretty unconvincing and for HY to offer KF a demotion after such a narrow victory when he had whole party machine behind him showed a lack of judgement. Mind you KF seems incredibly naive also not only did she allow her religious beliefs to be such an issue but she then followed tis by making attacks on HY parroting opposition attempts to rubbish SNP government and now she is running around not really thinking through what she is saying.
It does appear that senior party members were happy to let NS,PM & CB(?) run the show and ask few questions as long as election results were good and polls were favourable and this appears to have led to a culture of deferment to the 3 senior people running party. This in turn has led to a situation where the handling of politically speaking a relatively minor amount of money (£600K) is causing a crisis within SNP and more importantly a potential loss of trust with voters. This is ineptitude on a grand scale even for a bunch of politicians.
While I agree the independence movement could do with someone as powerful and charismatic as Michael Sheen I would question the wisdom of having an all powerful leader of SNP after AS & NS issues.
I think that another “charismatic” leader is the last thing the independence movement needs. All leaders, in the end, turn out flawed in one way or another, as no one individual can possibly fulfill all the aspirations that are invested in them. I’m hoping for a period of collective leadership, in which ideas, not personalities, hold sway, and in which spaces for new voices to emerge are opened up.
@Paddy Farrington, I agree, the myth of leadership is cultivated for typically harmful reasons, and demand for a leader has long been recognised as indicative of an immature state of politics.
https://thebrickbible.com/israelitesdemandaking/
Anarchists may not have all the solutions, but their critiques of institutionalised leadership (archy) are often very sound too.