Although this site sustains respect for the output of Glasgow’s journalist Kevin McKenna, even his disagreeable opinions, he has seen fit to block access to his work, effectively cutting off his nose to spite his face. I have no idea why he employed censorship on a site that has reproduced some of his best columns in support of Scotland’s civil rights. Moreover, he gets paid to write about Scotland and increase his readership, I do not. Nevertheless, in the spirit of open democracy, and to tease the hell out of his misstep, here is his most recent column reaffirming his belief in a free Scotland reinstated.
THE TIME IS NOW TO TALK OF INDEPENDENCE
By Kevin McKenna
A PARCEL of paradoxes is always evident when the west takes umbrage at someone else’s imperialist adventures. Four days into Russia’s clumsy attempt at invading Ukraine several incongruities have already become apparent in the populist British response.
These are rooted more in a desire to showcase empathy than to seek a long-term solution in the volatile Russia/Ukraine border. As social media expresses outrage at the actions of Vladimir Putin there has been silence about the genocide that’s been visited on the population of Yemen, mainly by the west’s most important ally in the Middle East: the pirate kingdom operated by Saudi Arabia’s brutal royal family.
A NATO coalition has formed that includes all the UK parties once considered left of centre. They have all become the willing glove-puppets of a Conservative Party whose ideology has been formed by centuries of imperialist expansion. The UK Tories currently reside in the grip of hard-right ultras who were swept to power on a sewer of racism and British exceptionalism during Brexit. There is now no left in British politics, only “leftism”, the favoured aspersion cast at those who oppose NATO and its aggressive expansionism.
They all proclaim the virtues of peace and mutual cooperation and express fury at President Putin’s violent incursions into Ukraine. Yet, far less indignation has ever been expressed about Israel’s brutal repression of the Palestinian people. There’s little said about how the rich west maintains an economic stranglehold on Africa by refusing to forgive old debts, despite having looted the continent of its natural resources over centuries.
The civilised west has failed to share Covid vaccines with the world’s poorest communities and the UK Government routinely supplies arms to regimes in the knowledge that they’ll be used as instruments of oppression against poor people. But this stuff happens in less eye-catching lands which don’t possess a large and charismatic social media footprint. And they’re at the wrong end of the racial conflict scale where white Caucasian casualties are considered a hundred-fold more newsworthy than other ethnicities.
BBC banjo players
The BBC has become an uncontested platform for a host of dreadful, six-fingered Tory banjo-players seeking the enlargement of NATO as the only known antidote to Putin’s megalomania. Yet, after the fall of Soviet communism in 1989 which removed the last of the three pillars on which NATO was built it has more than doubled in size and become a conduit for America’s global messiah complex. Its new gathered territories have taken the world’s most powerful military alliance right up to the front door of Russia despite US promises back then that NATO would cease any further expansion. But, of course we must accept that NATO had absolutely nothing to do with the Russia/Ukraine conflict.
The west is now seeking to punish the Russian oligarchs in the manner of drug barons who claim they thought their couriers were involved merely in the importation of cuddly toys. Following the collapse of the old Soviet Union these kleptocrats were treated like princes by the US and Britain who handed them all-inclusive, no-questions-asked access to our banking system and viewed them as a gateway to the riches of Europe’s largest country. The civilised west points to the relative poverty of Russians under the Putin regime but have nonetheless been eager to offer safe havens for those who robbed these people of their natural resources.
Ukraine, right or wrong
In the UK right now a Ukraine empathy-fest is underway. Let’s re-name our streets after Ukrainian towns; let’s all paint our social media profiles in blue and yellow. Why should it end there? Let’s have a weekly clap for Ukraine and have Chicken Kiev Saturdays. When Celtic and Rangers next meet, let Celtic play in blue and Rangers play in yellow. For world peace, you understand.
It’s just that, according to the World Population Review, 21 countries are at war – including civil conflicts – right now. They are all about power, influence and money. And the west, either directly (such as Yemen) or indirectly (by supplying arms) have their fingerprints all over many of them. As with Ukraine and Russia it’s poor and working-class people who suffer the greatest number of casualties in these conflicts. Our outrage is measured by how many clicks we can accumulate on Twitter by being tearful about them.
Public sanctimony
Sometimes, in our haste to exhibit sanctimony about our pet conflicts we can overlook some inconvenient facts. This was part of Amnesty’s appraisal of Ukraine prior to Covid in 2020. “Allegations of torture and other ill-treatment, particularly in police custody, continued. Security service officials responsible for secret detention and torture in eastern Ukraine from 2014 to 2016 continued to enjoy complete impunity. Attacks by groups advocating discrimination against activists and marginalized minorities continued, often with total impunity. Intimidation and violence against journalists were regularly reported.”
Much of this is perpetrated by far-right groups against the minority Roma population; LGBT activists; feminists and Jews. There has been a civil war raging in the pro-Russian Donbass region for eight years with human rights abuses perpetrated by both sides. It’s what we’re fond of calling a ‘powder-keg’ situation, yet for the entirety of that time the West’s response has been to encourage the Ukrainian government to join an anti-Russian military confederacy. Did no one in Washington, London, Berlin or Brussels ever wonder how this might end? Surely they wouldn’t be using Ukraine as a geo-political patsy to lure Putin into an action that will destabilise him in the long-term and have him replaced by a more west-facing actor?
SNP fanboys
In Scotland, fuelled by the pathetic narcissism of the SNP’s NATO fanboys, the Ukrainian crisis has led to some predictable concerns about independence. This is no time to be thinking such things, they say. There is a paradox here too. Those who are falling over themselves to salute the sovereignty of Ukraine and the nationalistic pride of its people routinely disparage Scottish nationalism as ugly and divisive when it’s nothing of the sort.
Yet, there’s another view. That by having a keenly-contested independence referendum fought peacefully and reaching the highest standards of civic engagement (as the first one was) would be a fine example to the rest of the world. In Kiev they might even name one of their boulevards Sauchiehall Street in tribute.
*************************************************
Grouse Beater 
“… There is a paradox here too. Those who are falling over themselves to salute the sovereignty of Ukraine and the nationalistic pride of its people routinely disparage Scottish nationalism as ugly and divisive when it’s nothing of the sort… ”
Ugly and divisive is only applicable when it’s someone they don’t agree with who’s doing it, ergo Ukraine good; Russia bad. For those with no sense whatsoever of the nuanced and the multi-faceted – no sense at all, in other words – things are always black-and-white, and one-sided. It takes a certain lack of intelligence and a great deal of steely determination to always see the world in black-and-white terms. One thing we may all rest assured about, though, GB, when it comes to any expression of Scottish independence in the face of an invader, or even a putative one, the lack of a spine comes in handy for the same cerebrally-challenged, and Collaboration sings its siren song, perched on the Bass Rock. Pity a state of being wholly invertebrate won’t save them as the entirely expendable UK and Western front-line in a nuclear holocaust.
Post apocalyptic dittie: I remember there was a Scotland
Before the Nukes and the tolling bell
Unionism was her undoing
Now Unionism resides in Hell
Great article, echoing many of your points about the Ukrainian situation. Thanks for posting (and Kevin McKenna, wake up; you and Grouse Beater are on the same side most of the time!)
He even quotes the same Amnesty Passage as I have in my essay. Sheesh!
Kevin tells us that the Ukrainian crisis has led to some predictable concerns about the question of independence. That suggests there were no concerns predating the Ukrainian war. His opinion entirely ignores the reasons why the clear majority of Scots voted against secession in 2014. Nothing has changed in this respect, apart from the discussion on whether we really need another white paper (Scotland’s Future 2) and who should write it.
Those who drafted the original are probably very reluctant to contribute a new updated version as a common thread to the pro-Indy position seems absent. How can a country vote YES if those proposing independence are at loggerheads as to how to proceed. It isn’t enough to glibly say “These issues can be decided after a YES vote”.
The Scottish voters won’t be impressed.
Reblogged this on Ramblings of a now 60+ Female.
Robert Lennox:
The blanket statement “We lost in 2014” is in reality a myth. We did incrementally, but when the figures are exposed we see a different reality. First, we were restricted to a local election franchise – of the ‘everybody is welcome’ kind. No nation allows incomers and visitors to vote on constitutional matters, but we had no choice.
However…..
A majority of Scots voted to reinstate independence. (The propose 70% in a future vote is utterly unattainable in a colonised country.) Of the 55% of others, many non-Scots, 37% wanted greater powers short of full autonomy. Many said they switched from Yes to No on the basis the illegal and fraudulent Vow promised to restore self-governance in large measure. Since then, the British State has followed a policy of withdrawing powers. Boris Johnson plans to remove referenda for 25 years if used for independence votes. That shows, whilst a few were unsure of this and that, autonomy was not an issue, and indeed upon Brexit 58% said they would vote Yes. The electorate will unite in a Yes vote if told the truth and given the opportunity, neither of which is on offer.
No matter how you paint the picture, simple arithmetic tells us that the pro-nationalist voters were comfortably out-voted by those who wished to remain part of the UK. I see that your reply chose to avoid dealing with the abject failure to face up to the questions independence brings to the table. These remain substantially similar to those of 2014.
This substantially centres on our economy which is shrinking, whilst the rUK is seeing a post-Covid expansion. There has also been the recent matter of Eilidh Mactaggart’s rapid and unexpected exit from the Scottish National Investment Bank (SNIB). What is equally concerning is the refusal of the SG to explain her departure.
This is not a good look for a country claiming to desire to move on to a bright and exciting independent future.
Covid? Bank departure?
You have introduced issues to the discussion that happened recently, NOT in your original comments. Am I supposed to be clairvoyant? I have not dodged your questions, which you seem unable to answer your self.
Mozambique was almost destroyed by the Portuguese in their slash and burn and destroy retreat, but the people were resolute and ultimately triumphed. Ireland had nothing material to fall back on when it took its independence, thought nothing of economy, only freedom and rights, and now we see what an independent country can achieve facing the lows and the highs of nationhood.
I disputed your ‘we are doomed’ defeatist attitude by stating the analysis of the 2014 vote which shows Scots won the vote, incomers thwarted and warped it. I don’t give a damn if you don’t like the facts. If we are to have another referendum it will lose again if organised as a local franchise. Hence it matters not a jot if the SNP provide every acceptable answer under the sun to the populace of the kind you vaguely indicate, we will still lose a referendum. That is why I advocate a plebiscite election, or simply withdrawing from the Union offering a new Accord in exchange, as Mia Mottley did for Barbados with her mandate from the electorate. I reject the moronic too small, too weak, too stupid mantra.
Nor do I doubt, or ever have, that the British State is on the move to pacify Scotland and plunder it for another 100 years. I write and lecture on the subject constantly volunteering hours of my day to informing people who will listen. I have no idea why you think I am inert or complacent. Sheesh! Direct you protests to the SNP hierarchy where it belongs – that’s where the problem lies, that where people are aiming their polemic.
What are you doing to achieve independence?
Robert, postcolonial theory (Fanon; Memmi’ Cesaire; Said etc) tells us why some natives especially among the bourgeoisie vote and plot against their own national liberation; its called the colonial mindset.
“Scottish people, often quite moderate in outlook, are beginning to think about autonomy, to feel they are pushed into an inferior position. They have a good deal of reason. In some areas, at any rate, Scotland is almost an occupied country.” George Orwell.
Your logic is seriously flawed, Robert. If we are in such bad shape within the Union, it makes sense to look at all avenues of action that might make the situation better. Logic would dictate that it cannot be the same old-same old, so what do you suggest? Same old-same old, as far as I can see. That is the definition of madness – doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome – or the logic of the hamster wheel – just go round and round and expect to reach the ends of the Earth by so doing. Just think, the Pilgrim Fathers could have just stayed at home with their same religion and still ended up in America. That is the conclusion of your premise.
A referendum has been tried, and I have to agree with you that another would e a waste of time and effort unless we can be 99% sure that we can win it. Like you, I have my doubts. Unlike you, I’d have been looking for another avenue long since. We will never even have the referendum, lose or win, without the Scottish government actually doing something. They won’t, so we can’t possibly win a non-existent referendum. Who says we need one, anyway?
I stopped wanting another referendum a long while ago. Firstly it involves asking permission from the very people we want to secede from, rather than from a position of it being our right.
Secondly, if Johnson suddenly said yes to a S30, I reckon Sturgeon would be the only person not to view it with abject suspicion
Thirdly, this is a woman who has wasted mandate after mandate, when the goal was wide open – can anyone really see her slotting the indy ball into the net now?
Fourthly, if Johnson allows it, it will be rigged to fail – why would we give him that chance?
Next, incomers – sorry but why would we give the vote to people who have no stake in this country? I used to argue against changing the franchise, I have come to see why the status quo cannot prevail
Finally, Nicola Sturgeon has made a complete erse of everything she has touched so far – judge her on education, health, housing, COVID, constitution, Europe, criminal justice and she comes out wanting. She has spent seven years putting innocent citizens through hell in court, jailing them & putting 52% of the population to the back of the queue while 0.04% have had the run of the sweetie shop. Oh aye, and with £600k of our spending money don’t forget.
Scotland has the right to be independent – we don’t need a referendum, we don’t want Sturgeon’s dodgy referendum. We no longer want Sturgeon. Saor Alba.