Wednesday, 26 August 2015

Someone's taking the rise ...

Somewhere on the outer spiral left wing arm of the Yes galaxy, one hundred or so anarcho-Marxist monkeys are typing away furiously seeking to interpret the last three years of Scotland's political awakening as a massive success for their brand of politics to the point where they stand on the edge of claiming without them there would have been no 'Yes' movement to speak of.

I do not belittle their input into the campaign nor their willingness to put their shoulder to the wheel to gain Scottish independence but when they start claiming the SNP are no longer interested in independence because they have not declared UDI after May 2015, stir a pot of lies over fracking which ignores the moratorium nor are the able to concede pressure from the SNP MPs and MSPs have forced the unconventional gas people to go home and think again then, I have to ask if they are simply taking the RISE. The reality is the fracking and unconventional gas sector have now accepted, as long as there is a SNP Government at Holyrood, they may as well pack up their drills in Scotland and go home. This in spite of the legal technicality that Energy Licensing and exploitation (including fracking and unconventional gas) is reserved for Westminster.

Then there are the snide comments about SNP MP's increase in salary and how they have quickly 'gone native' at Westminster while ignoring the SNP MP's have agreed that their increase will go into a fund for their constituencies to benefit from. This apparently is not enough for those taking the RISE, it is in their Citizen Smith style hyperbole, " into the capitalist establishment at Westminster."

Now the insinuations are being made the SNP are living a lie because they are not a real 'left wing party', the sort of  "My statue of Marx is bigger than your statue of Marx, SNP splitists!" claim worthy of the 'Life of Brian' rather than Scottish politics while totally ignoring the crux of the matter.

The SNP are a left of centre social democratic party so is not 'left wing' in the sense of a Colin Fox or a Tommy Sheridan. This means the SNP always seek to deliver the best compromise between the needs of capital to create wealth and thus taxable income and profit, so it can afford to provide for the welfare, education and health needs of the population in general.

This means the SNP sometimes has to be nice to the money at say INEOS, to protect jobs, core chemical processing facilities, oil and gas pipe lines and all the other employees reliant on Grangemouth because by doing so it protects the tax income which pays for the welfare, health and education programs. The difference is the SNP Government does not roll over like Westminster and say, "Take me, I'm yours, INEOS, you big bad boy." which appears to be the norm for UK Governments of the last three decades when dealing with international corporations and the City of London in particular, if the SNP Government acted like the UK Government, the central belt coal and shale fields would already being fracked to bits.

On the other hand it takes its commitment to welfare, education and health of Scots very seriously within the one hand tied behind its back Westminster fiscal regime which it operates and has robbed and continues to rob 'Peter to pay Paul' on many occasions to protect key public services' funding while alleviating the worst of the Tory driven austerity dogma's impact on those most vulnerable in Scotland.

The bleats about FE cuts in Scotland are a case in point. The courses which lost funding were, by and large, ones which delivered no qualifications or were 'hobbies'. These were courses that would be nice to have if you had an unlimited budget but given the reduced real time Scottish FE budget, as a Barnet consequential, could not be afforded if SVQ's, City and Guilds and degree courses were not going to be impacted on. Other courses were cut to concentrate them in one FE college which for FE college's which lost courses was a disaster and lead to staff job losses. Sadly in the real world these decisions have to be made to ensure the whole system does not crash around our ears and no one has access to FE.

My problem with those on the outer edge left wing spiral of the Yes galaxy is this: their solutions are primitive and based on creating conflict within the very groups of people they need working together to deliver the effective solution (capital and the work force) and in this they are no better than the right wing austerity sharks and their core theory of 'There is not enough to go around, so let us grab all we can for ourselves'. The only real difference is the Left call this 'redistribution of wealth' while the Right call it 'trickle down' yet the reality is most of the capital stays in the same people's pockets and the workers get screwed over which ever way.


  1. I totally agree, it seems that some people want a slice of the pie, long before the pie has been baked. There would have been no YES galaxy, without the SNP delivering the mandate to hold a referendum, and there will not be another chance without the SNP being in a position to deliver a new mandate. No other, YES supporting, party is within a light year of delivering a second referendum.

  2. Jimn ... I posted the same article on the Bella facebook page and have been amused to read all the SSP clones describing the article as a rant without even addressing the substantive issue that their politics are as divisive as the right wing austerity parties and end up with the same result, the workers getting screwed over.

    I notice RIC are already distancing themselves from this SSP cabal masquerading as the RIC political wing. The reality is the folk behind RISE will be at each others throats by May 2016 because they could not even agree the fair division of a jam sponge - let alone a cohesive political front.

  3. Mmm..I smell a whiff of ultra-opportunists in assorted "progressive" guises - mega-Trots and pseudo-Greens, faux anarchists et al (perhaps with a soupcon of British security services in this admixture?).

    If they are genuinely serious in offering genuine, alternative democratic options, let them stand on their own, respective, democratically principled feet before the citizens of Scotland and make their ballot box arguments in the agora rather than trying to pull fly ones over the 1st and 2nd votes at the next Holyrood GEs.

    Infantilist, foot-stamping behaviour over the SNP's current popular mandate springs to mind.

    Hope am wrong, but suspect not.