There is a lot of argy-bargy about whether Greens should stand candidates for the general election in Scotland.
"Me? Well, I am indifferent".
"How so?", you may or may not ask.
It is the Green Party's right under the democracy and sovereignty of the Scottish people, we independista's claim to wish to preserve, to enter lots or no candidates at all. There can be no issue there.
The real argument is not whether the Greens should stand candidates (see above) but whether the Scottish electorate will dwell the important marching pace and ask themselves whether by giving their vote to the Greens in Scotland they will damage the real chance to gain Scottish independence reducing a maximum return of SNP MPs to Westminster.
This is not a normal election for Scotland, it is not a General Election where the degree of your "green" credentials actually matters one jot. The only issue which matters, for independistas of what ever political persuasion, is to reduce the current cadre of Unionist MPs in Scotland returned to Westminster to the smallest possible number where zero will be optimal.
The real argument is if Green voters really wish to see 'Green Policies" coming to the fore in Scotland, if they really wish to see Scotland do its bit to "save the world from itself", then voting Green and risking returning a Unionist MP in their Scottish constituency is not the way to go about it.
The only way Scotland will see a future for minimal carbon output, maximal use of renewable energy resources, energy efficient homes and offices is as an independent Scottish nation. Westminster is "owned" by fossil fuel and associated financial vested interests who continue to lobby for fracking to be allowed. INEOS, in its many guises, has not gone away. INEOS has invested millions in UK fracking licenses for which it expects a return from, having put money in the coffers of Westminster Unionist Parties, especially the Tory Party.
Now whether the Scottish Greens would fare any better in an independent Scottish Parliament, than at present, is of course moot but their voice has a better chance of being heard in a future independent Holyrood Parliament, of being an influence in a future Scottish Parliament's decision making than as even one MP at Westminster.
Maybe, for all of us, it is time not to think about narrow party issues, membership of the EU / EFTA, who you can or can not stand as an individual but what will be best for the Scots as a nation.
I have only one answer:
If you want independence for Scotland there is only one vote which will count, one for the SNP, no matter how much it may stick in your craw to do so.
"Me? Well, I am indifferent".
"How so?", you may or may not ask.
It is the Green Party's right under the democracy and sovereignty of the Scottish people, we independista's claim to wish to preserve, to enter lots or no candidates at all. There can be no issue there.
The real argument is not whether the Greens should stand candidates (see above) but whether the Scottish electorate will dwell the important marching pace and ask themselves whether by giving their vote to the Greens in Scotland they will damage the real chance to gain Scottish independence reducing a maximum return of SNP MPs to Westminster.
This is not a normal election for Scotland, it is not a General Election where the degree of your "green" credentials actually matters one jot. The only issue which matters, for independistas of what ever political persuasion, is to reduce the current cadre of Unionist MPs in Scotland returned to Westminster to the smallest possible number where zero will be optimal.
The real argument is if Green voters really wish to see 'Green Policies" coming to the fore in Scotland, if they really wish to see Scotland do its bit to "save the world from itself", then voting Green and risking returning a Unionist MP in their Scottish constituency is not the way to go about it.
The only way Scotland will see a future for minimal carbon output, maximal use of renewable energy resources, energy efficient homes and offices is as an independent Scottish nation. Westminster is "owned" by fossil fuel and associated financial vested interests who continue to lobby for fracking to be allowed. INEOS, in its many guises, has not gone away. INEOS has invested millions in UK fracking licenses for which it expects a return from, having put money in the coffers of Westminster Unionist Parties, especially the Tory Party.
Now whether the Scottish Greens would fare any better in an independent Scottish Parliament, than at present, is of course moot but their voice has a better chance of being heard in a future independent Holyrood Parliament, of being an influence in a future Scottish Parliament's decision making than as even one MP at Westminster.
Maybe, for all of us, it is time not to think about narrow party issues, membership of the EU / EFTA, who you can or can not stand as an individual but what will be best for the Scots as a nation.
I have only one answer:
If you want independence for Scotland there is only one vote which will count, one for the SNP, no matter how much it may stick in your craw to do so.
No comments:
Post a Comment