As R Burns Esq., observed, “The best laid plans of mice and men gang aft aglee,” or words to that effect. Now I don’t know the quality of his insight into the world of rodents, but he was spot on for our specie.
For our purpose even the creation of a plan would invite attention and the construction of a counter plan to debunk and destroy our plan's objectives. Plans need organisations, organisations can be identified, infiltrated and the individuals intimidated. Remember the strength and quantity of our adversary. Against such odds, any attempt to sketch out a critical path to independence is expecting a miracle from a molecule.
So our plan is: there is no plan. No organisation, no flying pickets or goon squads. No particular blog site, no coded reference to affiliation and no hierarchies. We don’t need them, so why break our spirit and possibly body by trying to create anything that our adversary can so easily detect and destroy. To paraphrase the joke about Mel Gibson’s Braveheart – They can take our lives, but they cannot take us seriously. That’s a truism, especially where the establishment is involved. And we have to nourish that belief while we, the molecules, go quietly about the business of everyday life while building the miracle.
The aphorism of a molecule building a miracle carries more weight than simply wishful thinking. Scientists studying human behaviour and the neurological origins of individuality have mapped out this molecule to miracle route (they don’t call them molecules or miracles, but think of it in terms of evolution, you as both molecule and miracle – then as molecule to the tribe (or nation) and that as the miracle and the name you give the building blocks is unimportant.) They even tested this using Game Theory models which, without testing my understanding beyond its limits and sending you to sleep in the process, eventually indicated that the best result for the survival of any specie was by cooperation.
I’ve wandered off on this tangent to illustrate the tribe of Scotland as part of that specie which is presently not being offered the chance to cooperate but is, in fact, being cheated. I’ll labour the point further, by pointing out that it’s the establishment who finance the research into these esoteric investigations and who use and incorporate the results for their own benefit to manufacture consent under the guise of cooperation.
So we have no plan; but that doesn’t mean we don’t form an understanding of theirs, analyse their intentions and adopt the tactics to thwart them. (Another Game Theory –Tit for Tat)
We know their plan; it is to remain in control whatever the cost. This is especially relevant in the western world of today when the purpose of democracy is used as a euphemism for the controlled meeting the costs and by so doing making them more impoverished, confused and dependent in the process.
OK! Enough of the dismal stuff, lets get down to the abysmally dismal stuff; the situation Scotland has to overcome to gain its independence.
The first thing we have to recognise is shouting independence from the rooftops isn’t enough. Independence is above politics, it’s even above nationalism. It is fundamental to the survival of the specie and, in the parochial sense, the tribe called Scots.
In 2007 the election of the SNP to government, even as a minority, shook Westminster to its establishment core. This was exactly what the electoral system was designed to prevent and the purpose behind the devolution charade. What did it matter as long as the Westminster parties were in control of the “wee pretendy parliament” their wee pretendy politicians would bow the knee to the dictates of Westminster.
Since taking power the SNP have acted responsibly and, in general, administered well; within the restrictions that responsibility has forced on them. Despite this they haven’t gathered the support their efforts should have earned. Why is that?
Well, in my humble opinion, it is because they haven’t used the time - or if they have they haven’t made it public – to fill in a constructive analysis of what independence will actually mean.
Such as, what form will democracy take in an independent Scotland? What will the sovereignty of the people mean and how fundamental will its incorporation be in its parliamentary procedures? Will we have a written constitution? How will parliament be held accountable to the people? Why do we need to be in the EU? Why royalty as opposed to republic?
These are questions specifically within the brief of politics, especially the people’s sovereignty and constitution, which should have been drafted by now and made public.
Now, we’ll accept as a given this would be mocked and derided by the establishment and its lackeys, but under their guffaw’s and smug superiority, their parliamentary arses would be girded in winding cloots. It’s a risk that has to be taken, to underline the fact we have the confidence, intelligence and ability as a Nation to throw off the snares of dependency and the sneers of subsidiarity. The lack of this has a negative effect; supporters of independence can’t refer or draw attention to something which doesn’t exist, which means independence remains an abstract notion devoid of substance. A politicians promise; and we all know the high regard they are held in, means nothing whether it’s uttered from SNP or Unionist lips.
Carry on in this way and the SNP will win the skirmish, declare a draw in the battle and lose the war.
What other hurdles have to be overcome. An evolutionary fear of the unknown ( as above) and an inherited 300 year old tradition based on manufactured dependency.
Let’s start with the underclass: Welfare recipients, scroungers, the disenfranchised and disillusioned. The de-motivated, the very young, the old on state pensions, the infirm – lets shorten the list of shame by stating those whose life is restricted to the realm of existence – why would they be interested in the notion of independence?
What is their main worry? Quite simply that their capacity to survive be further tested by their benefits being cut. Offers of a better tomorrow don’t cut through the ice of existence unless they’re assured its not going to get worse than it is now. What do we know that can be used to nudge them (and it has to have integrity) towards independence?
Now let’s move on to the amorphous mass called the middle-class; they see themselves as the bedrock of society. They pay their taxes, make sure their children go to school, act responsibly and pragmatically on the treadmill of life. They have ambitions and practice them in the hierarchies of their workplace. Regard a dis-ease called stress as an indicator of how high they’ve reached and how hard they work; and commit themselves to 30 year debts and a lifestyle that’s matched to what can be serviced from earnings.
Now this group is so large, let’s say £15k to £150k, we need to break it down a little to get to any sensible analysis.
So we’ll split them at the £40k level. Below £40 k it’s easy, their priority is not so different from the underclass – they want to keep their jobs and another £5k per year would be nice. In ambition and aspiration they are of course different. But mega-richness to them is generally limited to winning the lottery.
Again, and these must be the substantial mass, what tools have we been given that would offset the risks? They, of all the classes, probably know what the Union does and are probably not too happy about it, but they’re also very aware that the Union is and where they are in relation to it.
If we move on now to the £40k + to the £100k bracket; they’re similar to the lower bracket in as much as their income services their outgoings. But their expenditure will include paying for their children education along with collecting the furniture and styles that will advertise the rung they’re on in society. They pay lip service to morality in society but have generally nodded to a few dogs on their struggle to reach the top. What clever ploy can we employ to convince them their cleverness will allow them to exploit and profit from independence?
The £100k+ and above are the gatekeepers of our final class The Alpha’s. They’re not rich enough to destroy or even distort communities but they’re well into the comfort zone provided they remain fit enough to keep the Alpha’s gates clear of rif-raff and maintain the ability to keep the graph of cash flow rising.
How do we target them? Do we even want to target them? Do we need to target them? Can a balance sheet be produced that would see the Saltire flying over their crow stepped gables? Is it sensible to even try?
Having reached this stage of the quandary and having given a very generalised analysis of the hurdles that have to be leaped I would like to refer back to the article from which the title Scottish Stalemate was plagiarised; wherein the author, a professional commentator – as was the person the article was aimed at – claimed that both were “iconoclastic individuals” within the arena of tribal politics. Without getting into semantics I’m very doubtful of there being any cherished beliefs left in the world of politics that can reach the status of being worthwhile let alone cherished.
Cherished beliefs to me run along the line of freedom within the paradigm accepted as the common good. Professionalism to be earned by committed excellence, or at least capability, rather than elitism. For the odds of birth to be mitigated by genuine opportunities in life. For governance to be open and accountable and sackable when it’s not. (Particularly pertinent today with the Wikileaks exposures).
Ah well! All power corrupts, says the sceptic. Only if you have less than absolute and are found out says the cynic. Bullshit, it’s only what it costs you that matters, says the oligarch; meanwhile the politicians scramble for the appropriate mask.
Add to the wish list as you will, it has no claim to being comprehensive. But for me, the only cherished beliefs in politics today are held by those who practice it. And that is too small a minority for too selfish motives to claim the comprehensiveness of being cherished.
One final comment on Part 2:
All of the questions posed should have been flagged by the politicians; especially by the SNP. Why are they leaving their supporters to beat a skinless drum?
In Part 3. We’ll title it The Swell of the Peoples Sovereignty. Part 3 will be published tomorrow morning.
In it I’ll do what I’ve advocated others should do, and expose my ideas, and the reasoning behind them, on how we can all help to achieve a worthwhile independence.