SHERIDAN IS RIGHT - SSP ARE OUT TO GET HIM

It's with a sense of wonder that anyone who cares about Scottish socialism witnesses the SSP tearing itself apart over Tommy Sheridan's court case. Anyone from outside can see clearly how much damage is being done to the party with their statements and counter statements denouncing each other.

I have to say though that I think Tommy Sheridan's statement was right. I've came in contact with a lot of SSP people and whenever Sheridan's name is mentioned, shortly after he ends up being accused of something outrageous, the only thing consistent being that no two stories are ever the same.

Kev Williamson wrote an excellent article on the Sheridan case which has sadly been spiked by the Scottish Socialist Voice. In it he tries to look at the bigger picture and concludes that it was in the British state's interests to orchestrate a character assassination on Sheridan. He has published this on his own blog and it is an interesting and thoughtful read.

Since Sheridan's kniving the party has undergone a disastrous drop in popularity and the Scottish Socialist Voice, once an excellent paper, hardly even mentions the word independence any more (except when Allan Armstrong writes in to slag of the SNP with inaccurate speculations) and the words socialism, internationalism and independence have been moved from the front to the back pages.

Obviously the decision to admit the arch Brits in the SWP was a disastrous miscalculation. The SWP love to wax lyrical about Ireland and the IRA but they hate Scotland with a passion. Why can't they see that their international campaigns are meaningless without freedom and democracy in Scotland? They can't claim it's never been pointed out, I was writing to these characters almost twenty years ago making the same points I'm still having to make now (see my discussions below with John Wight) and the only logical answer to their obstinacy is that they are in fact a political front for the secret service. Maybe not all of them, but a good proportion and enough to keep the left hopelessly divided in England, and now the same thing is happening in Scotland.

Sheridan's letter was a harsh and biting effort but it was 100% accurate. He has been getting stabbed in the back on a regular basis as have others on the pro-independence left of the SSP.

Some SSP branches hate the SNP more than the Labour party, why because they are now obviously run by the SWP. Donald Anderson's branch in Maryhill is one, the one in Dundee which opposed the plan to go only for the second vote is another.

When Sheridan led the SSP they were in the vanguard of the pro independence left. While the SNP were weak under Swinney, the SSP could capitalise oin their mistakes and paint themselves as a genuine alternative for the pro independence vote (which is growing fast and is still a lot larger than the SNP). The SSP took votes of the SNP by showing them up and by contrasting Sheridan's political honesty with the actions of some within the SNP who (at the time) were trying to steer it in a number of different directions.

Under Salmond of course the SNP are no longer divided and their political positions have clarified. Both their MP's at Westminster and their MSP's in the Scottish Parliament are singing from the same hymn sheet and as a result the SNP appears a lot more credible.

Meanwhile Colin Fox, within months of being selected showed his contempt for Scotland and Scottish culture by attacking St Andrew and the Saltire, an incredible act of political stupidity that his desperate denialas did nothing to avert. Fox had pulled his trousers down and exposed his union jack pants and no-one would ever really trust the SSP on Scottish independence again.

Of course there is no doubt that McCombes supports independence and that he and Sheridan are both genuine Scottish republicans, but that is not coming through in their paper or their press releases and subsequently it's not being seen any more by the public.

The tragedy is that the SSP are still working with the SNP and Greens in the Convention and the potential is there to have a united pro-independence campaign in 2007 if they take up the 1M votes initiative provided by Independence First.

Kev's column hit the nail on the head, and was replied to by some loon who calls herself Mary Whitewash, she proved Sheridan right by spouting out a huge amount of spurious allegations, naturally anonymously. She even admitted she's tried to get Sheridan removed early on in his career within Militant. Obviously his talent was spotted early by the British state.

Of course up untill relatively recently (before the formation of the SSP) Sheridan was one of the good Brits, and it was only once he had his new party and it became successful that he was marked for removal.

Sheridan says that the party is obsessed with gender issues and Kev confirmed that by suggesting in an answer to Whitewash that he personally favoured all woman candidates lists with no men allowed! I like Kev and admire his work in keeping promoting the independence arguments withen the SSP through his column but this particular political stance is quite absurd.
Inadvertantly Kev has proven Sheridan right, if this kind of bollocks can be treated seriously by a leading thinker in the SSP then they are indeed completely out of touch with the Scottish people and their interests. Disenfranchising the male population by removing their rights to stand as candidates is political correctness gone mad.

Swans Letters Page

http://www.swans.com/library/art12/letter90.html

Socialist Disagreement between two Joes:

Joe Middleton's The Only Road To Scottish Socialism Is Independence

To the Editor:

Joe Middleton continues to trumpet, erroneously, Scottish independence under any banner as a way forward for the Scottish working class. It is not. Unless the struggle for independence is wedded to the class struggle (and where applicable, subordinated to the class struggle), then it is based on nothing more than a Scottish exceptionalism which does not, and cannot, enjoy any credibility with anyone who is in possession of anything approaching political awareness or consciousness.

Elements campaigning for independence under the umbrella of Independence First envisage a future Scotland with the monarchy continuing as head of state; with Scotland becoming a haven for global corporations; and with Scotland as a member of NATO.

Progress? I think not.

Unless the minimum demand in any campaign for Scottish independence is for a republic, then it is not independence we are discussing, but rather enhanced devolution, with no qualitative change in the composition of the British State.

Any meaningful campaign for Scottish independence can only be waged under the banner of anti-imperialism and internationalism, with the only relevant argument in support of independence, based on existing material conditions, the breakup of the British State, an imperialist construct which today is a major ally of US imperialism, the common enemy of all humanity. Anything else is nationalism, an emotional and atavistic desire to replace the Union Jack with the Saltire (the Scottish flag) over Edinburgh Castle.

The great James Connolly, the finest Marxist ever to come out of the British Isles, put it best when he said: "There can be no socialism without national liberation. There can be no national liberation without socialism."

Regards, Joe Davison (aka John Wight of the SSP) Edinburgh, Scotland - April 26, 2006

Joe Middleton responds:

The clear choice for the Scottish left must be whether they operate on a "we are politically purer than all the rest" philosophy, whereby they make excuses for disengagement with the rest of the independence movement and thereby accept continued British rule, or whether they engage positively with other pro independence forces in the Independence Convention and Independence First. I know which action the British state would prefer!

As a republican socialist I believe the arguments for both can be won within a future independent and democratic Scotland but we need to get our national independence first. The independence referendum campaign Independence First (http://www.independence1st.com) has no position on the monarchy or the EU or any other political issue because we believe the people of Scotland must decide on all issues once they have the democratic space to do so.

The simple reason for this stance is that we're heartily sick of the British state's policy of Divide "N" Rule and have decided to remove all extraneous policies and go for the simple question -- do you support Scottish democracy or not? If you do, then you can support Independence First, and indeed many MSP's and most pro-independence groups have decided to do so.

James Connolly was a Scot who believed in smashing the British state, not contemplating his own navel. I'm sure he wouldn't thank Mr Davison for his accolade of "the finest Marxist ever to come out of the British Isles" if it meant turning his back on his fellow countrymen. According to opinion polls most of the Scottish public now support independence. We need to translate that majority into victory at the Scottish elections in 2007 and we will only achieve that objective by working together.

Greens ready to support SNP

Greens ready to support SNP government

By Paul Hutcheon, Scottish Political Editor

ALEX Salmond could be installed as First Minister and protected from votes of no confidence under plans being developed by the Scottish Greens. Robin Harper’s party is drawing up a blueprint whereby the Greens would back the SNP leader to front the Scottish Executive but decline to take seats in his Cabinet.

They would also promise to vote for an SNP budget in exchange for guarantees on key environmental issues, such as nuclear power. The “confidence-and-supply” model is one of the options being considered by the Greens as they prepare for the 2007 Holyrood elections.
Both they and the Nationalists opened talks earlier this year on the possibility of working together in a future coalition.

The mainstream political parties believe the Greens could play kingmaker after next year’s poll, and are cosying up to a party that currently holds seven seats. An internal working group set up by the Greens on coalition options is focusing on confidence-and-supply, a model that provides support to either a one-party or two-party minority government. The device, already used in Sweden and New Zealand, allows smaller parties to prop up a government without signing up to its entire agenda or accepting Cabinet places.

A Green source told the Sunday Herald that the blueprint could result in the party supporting an SNP-led Executive without entering into a formal coalition. It would mean the Greens backing Salmond as First Minister, as well supporting his budget and protecting him in the event of no-confidence votes tabled by opposition parties.

“The model is meant to allow minority government to work,” the source said. “It would allow us to build a relationship with a party that we can work with on certain issues.” In return for supporting Salmond, the Greens would expect assurances on “red line” issues that would be closed down for one four-year term. The party would insist on no new nuclear power stations being built in Scotland as one of the “bare minimum” guarantees.

The confidence-and-supply option was discussed at recent meetings between the parties, where the proposal is said to have been met positively by the SNP. The only major obstacle preventing a deal, said the Green source, was the presence of Fergus Ewing as Nationalist transport spokesman.

Ewing, who is on the right of the SNP, is deeply unpopular amongst Green activists, who describe him as a “petrol head.” Green MSP Mark Ballard confirmed his party was looking at a model that could put Salmond in Bute House.

“We are looking seriously at the confidence-and-supply model among a range of different models. I personally think, looking at the experience of green parties around the world, that it could be the best option. It would reflect the new politics that people expected to see in the Scottish Parliament,” he said.

SNP leader Alex Salmond said the confidence-and-supply model had been discussed during his talks with the Greens. We are talking about a proportional parliament and so we have to work with other parties. That model is one of a number of possibilities. It is a model worth considering,” he said.

A spokesman for Scottish Labour dismissed the potential pact.

“Neither the Greens nor the SNP should count their coalition chickens before they are hatched, otherwise they might end up with egg on their face. It seems odd the Greens would want to support the oil-obsessed and inexperienced Nationalists with their plans to rip Scotland out of the UK,” he said. [obviously a bit thick - the Greens support independence! JOE]

07 May 2006 (Sunday Herald)

Scottish Independence Guide Launched

New guide launched to the Scottish independence movement.

A new website has been launched which aims to give a complete and comprehensive guide to the Scottish independence movement.

The Scottish Independence Guide www.scottishindependence.com has in depth articles on Scottish history and politics as well as information about Scottish films and bands.

It looks in depth at the various pro-independence parties and campaigns and at the history and culture of Scotland and answers the following questions:

Where is Scotland (Alba)?

What Languages are spoken in Scotland?

What is Scotland's history?

How did the British Union come about?

Why do most Scots now believe the time has come for independence?

What political parties support independence?

What other organisations support independence?

What stage is the independence movement at?

How YOU can help! - and a lot more

It also has an 'MP3 jukebox' of popular Scottish music.

Anyone interested in helping develop the site further should contact: info@scottishindependence.com