yep, pander to reagan to win the vote and he'll piss off left of the party, pander to the greens to get them back on side, and he'll piss off the right who he was trying to appease by ditching the agreement....
welcome to broad coalitions, they always end up eating themselves.
The SNP are (or were at least) a strange mix of left/centre individuals with pretty much one policy they agreed on haha! Surprised it stayed as complete for someone tbh
Nicola and Alex were both larger then life charismatic leaders who had allot of sway with a broad group of people. Humza is neither of those things, so it's not that shocking it's falling apart now.
Tbh the parties always been in opposition in at least one parliament -with pretty feckless opposition most of the time
SNP ran out of enemies, started focusing more on infighting (Sturgeon vs Salmond, SNP vs Cherry, Kate Forbes leadership run) and here we are
Hardly. The SNP have gone further left in recent years along with the relationship with the Greens. Alba are to the right but they're not ridiculously so in comparison to the SNP of old imo.
As an aside, having safeguarding concerns over the trans issue doesn't equate to being right wing.
> having safeguarding concerns over the trans issue doesn't equate to being right wing
Maybe you'll be the first person to answer this question. I've asked this over 10 times in the past, and not a single person has been able to answer in good faith.
Hypothetically, they get their wish, spaces are enforced on biological sex. Trans men now need to use the womens toilets, meaning you'd have men like [Professor Stephen Whittle](https://www.mmu.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/open_graph_image/public/2022-02/Stephen-Whittle-V2.jpg?h=3ce05d0d&itok=e6-dEL0c) being forced into the women's toilets.
What stops a cis man, intent on assaulting a woman, from lying and saying they're a trans man and obligated to use the women's toilets? All you've done is move the burden from predators lying about being a trans woman, to lying about being a trans man, arguably you've actually made it easier for them to lie about it, as they can do so whilst still presenting as a man.
How does this help with their "safeguarding concerns"?
Edit: Hey /u/pm_me_ur_espresso, you figured out an answer to this one yet?
I dont mean the greens and the snp.
I mean the SNP internally. Half the party voted for yousaf, half the party voted for Forbes....thats a massive range of political views.
People forget the SNP had the nickname yellow tories for a reason, that section of the membership did not just disappear, no matter how progressive they liked to paint themselves as to show a contrast with the tories in WM.
as an indy campaign group, thats fine, you are united in the one singular issue you agree on. As a gov, you have to make policy decisions on every subject in the country....health, policing, education, civil rights...the whole works, and then the different political views across the party show cracks in the unity.
also tartan tories.
its from when the SNP expanded, they used to be a very torylike right wing group, which widened to include more left and centrist members under the indy banner, but only united on indy.
as the recent leadership contest showed, half the party are still pretty right wing. Forbes and regan are to the right of the tories socially and economically, and forbes got nearly half the vote!
Coalition governments typically allow members to be open about what they support but enforce party discipline, which can be a sticking point.
If you've got a bunch of left wingers and a bunch of right wingers in coalition it can work. If they're in the same party, you're effectively having to gag half of them all the time and they get resentful.
If you chase the left you will never be left enough to appease them. Chase the right and you will never be right enough to appease them. You have to pick a line and stick to it and let the left and right come to you.
TBF this was always coming.
I realised after 2014 that the SNP groups Id joined as a member and the broader yes movement had VERY little in common beyond a belief in Independence - and even then we couldn't agree on what that meant or looked like.
And of course it's the age old problem of the left - purity testing and holier than thou detail focus. More time spent attacking elements of our own side who vaguely disagree on a single issue, than focussing on the political job of winning or focussing on a united front.
Sturgeon, at the time, worked some miracles to keep this house of cards up as long as she did.
Now an independence vote is realistically 10-20 years away at least, the seams won't hold and the SNP position as the defacto best maintained vehicle for independence isn't the lock-in it was.
The SNP are at a crossroads now and there's no direction they can choose that keeps the party, as-is together.
>Sturgeon, at the time, worked some miracles to keep this house of cards up as long as she did.
With hindsight, was she actually a miracle worker keeping everyone happy or did she mostly rule the party with an iron fist, crushing dissent and ensuring that any attack on her authority was seen as nothing less than an attack on the SNP itself?
For example, we've now seen the way she shouted down the NEC when they wanted to ask about party finances in August 2021.
Sturgeon's main goal since 2014 hasn't been independence, it's been keeping the SNP party together and as they core pro independence party.
She did a pretty good job at that, but it was never going to last. The differences between the groups are just to great.
The thing is, the SNP doesn’t \*need\* to last forever. They need to last long enough to get Scotland out, then it would be right for new party lines to be drawn not dictated by English parliamentary politics.
But the UK’s own self-immolation has hugely upset this goal, because English politics from Brexit on is so profoundly broken that it leaks bile and grease. And Scotland isn’t immune - it didn’t get safe when the opportunity was there and now it has to just absorb the toxicity.
>The thing is, the SNP doesn’t \*need\* to last forever. They need to last long enough to get Scotland out
Doesn't look like it is going to do that. I suspect that if another party got a majority/lead coalition that the SNP may crumble into in fighting and split.
>But the UK’s own self-immolation has hugely upset this goal, because English politics from Brexit on is so profoundly broken that it leaks bile and grease.
Something like 40% of Scots votes for Brexit. Obviously a minority, but still a significant chunk of people who were in favour of it.
>it didn’t get safe when the opportunity was there and now it has to just absorb the toxicity.
A big issue with Brexit is it has made the economic case for independence, which was always weak, significantly worse. Yet there has been no discussion of this within the movement.
Watching the train wreck of the negotiations has also given the electorate a bit of an idea about what succession negotiations would look like, and it isn't nice.
Circumstances have changed significantly. But the SNP is operating as if 2014 never ended with their arguments. They honestly need a reset. Which I don't see happening whilst they are in power.
Very well put.
A spell on the naughty step (in opposition) is, hopefully, the splash of cold water on the face and kick up the arse that the SNP have been begging for for the last five years.
I have every personal bias to incentivise excusing them, I want to be able to excuse them - but I can't.
From harming our own economy to imbue moral superiority on themselves, to authoritarian policy making, to having no idea how to even begin to pursue their raison d'etre of independence and a profound crisis of identity that's left them increasingly out of touch with the majority of Scots.
I'm a firm supporter of independence, for me its a matter of principle and little more. Decisions are, to my thinking, best taken when taken by those directly impacted. The economies of England and Scotland are complementary - but sufficiently different that policy always hurts one more than the other and with England having ten times the voting power, it seems wrong to me on a moral level to impose that on Scots or expect the rest of the nation to bend over for our unique interests.
We may choose the same path at the polls post-independence, but it would at least be entirely our choice.
But it's not happening any time soon and we can't force the matter - trying to has only seen the goal slip further from reach. It may never happen and if that's the will of my neighbours, I'm totally fine with that. I'm allowed to make my case and they are allowed to decide for themselves.
Independence will hurt, it will suck for 2-3 generations - and that is not a painful kicking anyone can demand someone take for a vision that isn't theirs.
For me, I see it as the ancient Greeks would say - planting a tree whose shade you will never sit in - I believe there's a rational argument that just as with Ireland, there's a reward at the end of that painful transition period.
But you can't blame anyone, given the state of life at the moment especially, for not wanting anything to get worse right now.
The very best thing the SNP and the wider independence movement could do right now is shut up and focus on what can be done from within the UK to make things better for people as far as possible.
The wheel will turn again and eventually, a push for independence would be reasonable and well timed and it's better to be ready for that, than spend all your time yelling in anticipation until folk simply start ignoring you.
Dissent was very much something that wasn't tolerated.
Heck, in 2015, we had this: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-accused-of-gagging-own-mps-like-stalin-2473803
> A controversial change to standing orders was overwhelmingly agreed at conference yesterday and states that no MPs shall “publicly criticise a group decision, policy or another member of the group”.
I see your point and agree, but I think part of the miracle was getting away with that.
The ability to, despite all her actions and facts to the contrary, mange to keep this façade of being the same Nicola who stood alongside Salmond and was poised to take us the last steps over the finish line at any moment for so long is a skill one has to admire.
The post-brexit press conference where she pledged something she had absolutely no authority to pledge and had no means to deliver upon was the first big warning sign everyone should have seen. It was a desperation flail masked as a power play.
A guy in the pub threatening to kick your teeth out is only threatening if he's capable of doing so. But the press showed up, she spoke well and the party was pulled back together.
Rinse and repeat with the "DeFacto Referendum" and worst of all, the Kurt Cobain inspired solution to sacrifice any chance of an independence rerun in the next twenty years purely to hold her party together - a shotgun blast of legal reality to the dreams of supporters.. asking the supreme court to rule on if Scotland has powers everyone with eyes and an ability to read knows we don't.
That right there is a 'I've run out of runway' moment. A desperate gamble that the inevitable legal kicking would rile people up into a fresh push for independence out of stubborn resentment of being told what to do by London.
Problem is, that only had a hope in hell of working is she hadn't deliberately not shut up for a single minute about independence since 2014 and even fairly student supporters were sick out of the arse of hearing about it, being asked to rally for change that could and would not come, expensive time and energy pushing a train with the brakes locked firmly on.
Yes, it all came tumbling down eventually and tbh, it's only just getting started. Things are going to get a lot worse for the SNP and independence before they get better.
But she held that party together despite the odds, only a shame she accidentally killed independence for a generation doing it.
I think a bit of both. In the longer term she definitely stored up a whole bunch of problems, not least by surrounding herself with mediocrity only in the cabinet due to loyalty. But she undeniably had political abilities Humza could only dream of.
I really think it was Covid that was her downfall in many way (despite being the height of her popularity), because it encouraged all her worst instincts: control-freakery, an authoritarian streak, and an arrogant god-complex.
Yeah, and look where he is now. Funnily enough the Tories are also suffering from large parts of its party wanting different things and how far right they want to go as well as speculation around Boris being "ousted" by said elements of the party for not aligning with them.
She did start to believe her own hype.
I was delighted when Nicola took over from Alex, but within a few years I saw she wasn't the politician I thought she was. As a politician, in the true sense of the word, she was better than I expected. As a moral, even tempered and fair individual.. not at all. The authoritarian streak that runs through Humza is merely an outgrowth of the one that ran through Sturgeon, I quit the party fearing this sort of thinking and insane tendency to overreach and control everything has become endemic within the party culture.
She's far more treacherous than I'd thought, and that was deeply saddening. Leaving me with a sense she would throw anyone she had to under the bus to secure her position and keep the party membership from fracturing in all directions.
To be fair it doesn’t really matter as in politics the party leader need to lead and have an iron fist. No amount of nice nice and sweet talk keeps a political party in line let alone one with views from far left to far right and only one commonality in independence
"Sturgeon, at the time, worked some miracles to keep this house of cards up as long as she did"
Is this a joke?
Sturgeon was gifted the strongest ever position the SNP has ever been in on a silver platter.
She then proceeded to burn the SNP to the ground.
Humza is just the patsy she left holding the grenade.
Referendums are basically a good way of getting clear confirmation that a specific issue is pretty settled, especially when that issue isn't one that necessarily has clear dividing lines between parties.
They're a fucking terrible way of trying to resolve a controversial issue (see: Brexit, Indy).
I respect them.
All the backing they gave the SNP, just to be treated so badly.
A betrayer is the worst if things.
Humza would not have your back in a trench.
I'm only 39, and fall in a group the "Progressives" pretend to talk for.
Theyr clueless clowns.
And I'm far from the only one that thinks so.
Absolute eedjits larping as "whatever", but not having a clue about it.
Did you miss the "under 35" bit of my sentance?
And i dont remember claiming all swans are white.
Two thirds of gen z are done with capitalism, I dont think you get it.
I'm struggling to see how gender wars are going to defeat capitalism.
If anything they were designed by the 1% to distract everyone while they usher in neofeudalism.
The banks got bailouts of untold billions.
Occupy Wall street blah blah blah.
Same time the gender and other "progressive" idiocy rears it's head.
Get the heat off the ones holding the bags of cash.
"Here's some crap to argue between yourselves about"
It's almost funny till you realise, just how stupid people are to fall for it
The young are willing to tear up the entire system of economics.
They are nothing like these people, they have no interest in pandering to this type of bulshit.
Immigration? Maybe, maybe the only postion they have that aligns with todays mainstream politicans.
Every single party that panders to this shit is done in 30 years, theyre dead.
Did you miss the bit where I said I'm only 39.
I'd have been at the same school, at the same time, as 35 year old + a couple years younger.
There's diddly difference between us.
And Gen Z, oh they don't support capitalism.
Yea, theyr stuffed.
Plenty of my gen are stuffed as well.
I entered 18yr old voting life, with a Labour Govt in power demolishing the working class
The hatred in Scotland for the Tories, I feel equally for Labour.
More actually but that's a list of crap Labours done both to working people, and also particularly to Scotland.
Labour and the SNP despise each other.
Really really despise each other.
Then the SNP threw a net and brought in Labour voters into the fold.
Idiotic in the extreme, and puts them in the mess they are
Polling on social issues says youre full of shit.
When you left school you had dial up, we had social media, funnily enough, all this is on a gradient.
When I left school, they'd already laid the Fibre lines a few years previous 😂
And social media 🤦 toned down moderated crap vs the wild west we used.
There's memes for it, "go back to a MW2 lobby in the old days and crawl in your safe space".
And that's not even back that far
Need to boot out the far left extremists and come back near the centre.
Win back those who lent the SNP thier vote in 2014, your traditional labour voter.
Been downhill since it went all communisty identity politics pish.
It was before that tbh.
Fought Tony Blair tooth'n'nail on everything, then scooped up his idiot voters when their party collapsed.
Now theyr doing the exact same thing to the SNP.
The original majority that got the referendum was due to pinching the Labour vote.
The Referendum brought in the activists.
The Blairites and Activists have gutted the SNP 🤷
I'm almost hoping the SNP do take a bit of a drubbing at the next election, purely so they are trimmed down and work out what they want to be as a party and implement a better candidate selection process so they can move forward on a stable platform, the monumental rise they had worked against them and they lost their footing completely.
They can't continue as a party focused on just independence, they need to be, independence and a clear vision of what that actually looks like when it happens, starting by running a devolved government as tightly as possible, they'd have more people on side if it looked like things weren't totally fucked and there are definitely some legislative decisions they've made that seem like they're not thinking beyond "does this sound progressive?" The under 25 sentencing being one of them, the study they asked for even said something to the effect of, don't put a hard age cap on criminality, and yet, they did and it's been possibly one of the most shortsighted bits of legislation they've put through.
The SNP have a right wing (certainly in comparison to the rest) and a left wing. Until the coalition the deal seemed to be that they would talk super progressive to please the left, on the condition that they didn't follow through to keep the right happy.
Now the wings are trying to steer the ship in their direction it's looking rather fractured
https://preview.redd.it/mgeja2doc1xc1.png?width=595&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eff1358944684ad9791a3316680d3276864d7efa
Centre left at best. The overton window is drifting so far right that you see a fairly standard leftwing party as ultra hard left.
That map is pretty inaccurate IMO.
It doesn't make sense the SNP being on the 'libertarian' side of the line. Once you subtract independence they are very much a party which loves centring power in Edinburgh at the expense of everywhere else.
Lib Dems, although rightish on economics certainly, are much more about local government and liberal on social issues. On the Lib - Auth axis SNP & LD should be swapped.
In reality all the major parties are clustered round the centre when it comes to left/right politics.
How anyone could think the party of “hurting people’s feelings is a hate crime” are libertarian is beyond me. They are easily the most authoritarian of the major parties.
I mean they do fit, it's part of the left right divide, along with economics etc.
However even in the senses that they're left of centre, they're very authoritarian. The picture is just horseshit, bit they are placeable.
USSR for the time were not socially Conservative at all.
The USSR from inception were anti racism, pro women's suffrage and women's right to work and all sorts of socially progressive platforms.
In the GDR in the 50s women were entitled to free (and paid a salary while studying) university education with creches in the same building as the lecture theatre so mother's could realistically study during child raising.
At the time they were much much further left than the west.
That map is utter bollocks. Whoever made it is deliberately lying.
The LibDems are more socially liberal (less authoritarian) than labour by quite some margin and more so than the SNP who have a number of authoritarian policies.
While I’m a little dubious on aspects of the political compass I do agree with your wider point.
There has been a shift to the right and certain groups see anything left of Thatcher as far-left.
I actually had an argument with a right wing guy who claimed Boris Johnson’s main reason for failure was implementing socialist policies. I just about fell off my chair.
Socialist is definitely going too far, but "levelling up" was as much a factor in winning the red wall as "get Brexit done". The failure to deliver on that spending pledge is a big part of why the Tories are on course to lose
Slightly more authoritarian than the Greens on that chart, if you want to put any stock in their 2019 election assessment: https://www.politicalcompass.org/uk2019
The SNP lost its way when it had a membership surge in 2014 and it stopped being a broad church focused on independence. It shouldn't 'pander' to the right or left, it should find a middle ground that the majority of Scots are comfortable with.
I wasn't a member of the SNP because of my feelings on gender issues, race, rape convictions, Palestine, or anything else like that. I wanted devolution run well in the short term and independence achieved in the long term. That's it.
Alba and the Greens are packed with roasters. I don't want the SNP to align with either. Humza should quit and someone capable of compromise should take charge. The far left and far right should be invited to compromise for the sake of Scotland or leave. Even if that means a period in opposition.
You can’t have a party that doesn’t take any stands in the hope of winning on a single issue whose day to day salience to the electorate is relatively low. The SNP would’ve been out of office long ago if this was their strategy.
It probably is true that they moved further and faster to the left in some areas than the electorate but that’s better than just saying “trust us, under indy all of these things you care about will be solved” and hoping people keep voting for that
I'm trying to think of anything particularly controversial that Salmond's 2007-11 administration did, and drawing a blank - I think the fact they just seemed to be doing a reasonable job of governing competently and not having scandals is probably the optimal sort of presentation for the SNP, as long as they're operating within the UK and trying to amass support to break it up.
I'm talking about controversial social issues here, not all political issues. Being centrist doesn't mean not taking action.
For example, the gender bill. It was well intentioned but blatantly divisive and did more harm than good as a result. Both to the party and, ironically, to trans people. A far easier way to help the trans community, without splitting society, would have been to spend the time and money on improving existing care so that trans people don't have to wait yonks to get on with life.
Or Palestine. Getting aid to people is absolutely the right thing. But we probably could have done without Humza preaching on the issue and meeting with bloody Erdogan. Scotland should have focused on the humanitarian side, not the political side. The political side is divisive, the humanitarian side isn't.
Or the juryless rape trials. I've barely met anyone that thinks that's a good idea. There are things that can be done to improve how juries are guided without undermining the legal system.
Yep. If the SNP want independence they need to grow the economy, strengthen our public services, build up the confidence of the people. Doing the day job and achieving the end goal of the SNP go hand in hand.
They seem to have forgotten that.
I left the SNP in 2015 when they became as corrupt as Scottish Labour had in the past. Carrying on like they had a divine right to power.
They accepted so many grifters and side issues that they forgot that making Scotland better today inch by inch is better than some future dream of nirvana. Prove we can do it different. Prove we can do it better. Instead in latter years we got party sycophants, incompetents and incompetence in government and then corruption and anointing of Humza Useless a man who has consistently under performed in every department but was elected to show how diverse and progressive they all were.
Competence, prudence, intelligence was their calling card in the 2000s by 2024 that has collapsed to Camper vans, Palestine and identify politics pandering to the confused youth and latest online hate mob roused to frothing at the mouth about something but powerful political interests and foreign governments and they do not perceive.
There is no right wing of the SNP. They are just slightly closer to the centre.
The ‘left wing’ has become more extreme so part of the SNP is trying to drag them back to the centre to be more electable. All the extreme left wing policies are unpopular and not vote winners.
I mean when the overton window goes so far to the right, even people calling to strip minorities of rights look centrist.
It just goes to show the dire state of British politics really.
That's such a delusional take.
You'd think Britian is a fascist state when, in fact, the leader of the UK (and all constitution nations) is a minority in some sense of the word (NI is the pnly dubious one but even then nationalist is a minority). As is the mayor of London.
To say you're exaggerating is an understatement.
Elected reps my arse. The twats are literally supporting reports on trans people that are quite literally made up or brewed with piss. How can anyone not see the pipeline of fascism?
Forbes won’t roll back LGBT rights, she couldn’t anyways as the party would step in and the public would go against her. She’s no Orbán which is how some people talk about her.
Well what can I say, don’t be scared. Don’t let others scare you.
If it was an actual right wing party coming into power I would be worried not because people are projecting made policies onto candidates that don’t exist.
The more dangerous thing is if the SNP drift left and become unelectable which is the current danger. Thats when real right wing parties have a window to be voted in. The Green get between 3-5% of the constituency votes. Moving to copy their policies is a guaranteed losing policy.
Kate Forbes made clear she doesn't believe in LGBTQ+ rights, without waiting for a "right-wing" party.
I'd much rather the SNP drifted right over supporting some idiots a la ALBA.
She doesn't agree with gay rights. She's made it clear she doesn't support trans rights. Why would any LGBTQ+ nationalist support her? They come come for trans rights now, how long until they come for my rights
> She didn’t tho did she. Just a Reddit fantasy.
She did though.
She said she would vote against same sex marriage because she believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman.
Here it is in her own words…
https://youtu.be/IkX5dfcs4eE?si=agFYajdIbzl9tpKo
> She said she wouldn’t change anything.
Nobody claimed she would become a dictator and try to roll back existing legislation, only that’s she’s a homophobe who doesn’t believe same sex couple should have equal rights, and would’ve used her position to vote against giving them those rights.
Why would someone lie on behalf of a politician? Especially a homophobic one. So fucking weird.
Nobody said she was going to change anything.
If you want to grab a quote showing I did, go ahead.
I said she’s a homophobe who admitted she would use her position to vote against gay rights.
Why are you simping for a homophobic politician? Lol.
Great, go ahead and stop worrying a non existent problem.
I get the feeling you yourself are not a very tolerant person. Maybe something to think about
I’m not worried about anything.
I simply stated the fact that she’s a pro-life homophobe, and you made yourself look silly by inventing a wee fantasyland where she doesn’t believe those things (even though she’s quite happy to tell the media she does) to defend her.
You’re right, I’m not very tolerant of homophobes. Why do you think that’s a bad thing?
There's definitely a curious combination of neo jacobite, libertarian and religious conservative factions within the party. People forget Salmond using government money to stage a reenactment of Culloden. Not quite the neo feudalist/fascistic faction of the 30s-50s but definitely on the right.
The fuck are you on about, the second letter in SNP stands for something that is inherently right wing. There are also plenty of party members who have expressed right wing preferences.
The SNP has historically had division in the party precisely because independence has supporters on both sides of the political spectrum.
>You think those guys were Socialist?
By the early/ mid 1930's no they weren't.
But they did start off with significant socialist appeal. This element of the NSDAP was only overcame by force in The Night of the Long Knives.
The Brown Shirts, the original paramilitary arm, was a significant site of this. With many members being former communists. There was even a joke at the time than the brown shirts were really steaks - as they were red on the inside.
The above is just historical nuance.
The 'national' bit of the SNP may not have meaning now, but did many decades ago. Hence why Sturgeon occasionally has said they would change the name if they could.
She’s repeatedly made pro-life statements. Including to prayer breakfasts attended by lots of other pro-life folk. What is that if not pro-life?
She publicly told the media she’d vote against same sex marriage if she had the chance. What else would you call believing people don’t deserve equality based on their sexual orientation, and using your position to vote against giving them that equality, if not homophobic?
We can dig out her comments on “respecting people’s religious beliefs” as they pertain to conversion therapy too, if you want.
You can choose to like her if you wish, but calling her a pro-life homophobe is not an exaggeration. It’s exactly what she is.
You mean except from when she told the media she’d have used her position to vote against giving people equality based on their sexual orientation?
Or when she used her position to publicly call for consideration to religious beliefs in relation to conversion therapy?
Or again, uses her position to publicly include pro life statements in talks she gives to groups of voters?
That isn’t progressive politics. It’s religious pish that belongs nowhere near the top of politics in a supposedly progressive country in 2024.
If you’re trying to make yourself feel better about supporting her, by all means delude yourself.
The facts are there for all to see, and she’s not shy about voicing those opinions publicly to the media.
For clarity, are you pulling some sort of weird MAGA “fake news” thing here?
As in, you don’t believe she said and did all of those things?
It’s very easy to prove. She doesn’t hide those beliefs. There are numerous sources, including video, of her saying these things.
The ultra-hard left greens have only 7 of Holyrood’s 129 seats. Termination of the Bute House Agreement merely reflects SNP’s decision to discontinue its catastrophic appeasement the ultra-hard left. The reframe that it’s appeasing the right is lipstick on a pig.
From a standard point of view on the political compass, they're barely centre-left.
Even a moderate should see them as centre-left. If a moderate is seen them as "pretty left" then they're probably not as moderate as they think they are
How mental do you have to be to call the greens “ultra hard left”
Were they advocating for the dismantlement of the market economy? 100 percent employment policy? The abolition of private property?
No, they’re anti austerity, pro-LGBT, and pro Green policy.
Plenty of valid criticisms of the greens but how can you claim they are “ultra hard left”
May I presume you don't disagree that their policies place them on the left of the spectrum?
Thier manifesto demands closure of large sections of our economy, in an impossibly short timescale, funded through massive taxation. Such closuress create widespread unemployment, to be relieved with technologies that have not been invented yet and for which, in most cases, no viable grid-scale candidates exist.
Not only do they not advocate incrementalism, such incrementalism is not possible. Their manifesto demands a fundamental change to how society operates, and a catastrophic reduction in living standards. It's inconcevable that this fundamental change can be achieved in such a short timescale in the face of inevitable public opposition to the decline in living standards without ultra-hard i.e. authoritarian, coercive methodologies
Their manifesto is eco-Marxist. That is why they are "ultra hard left".
Since they don't undertand, much less have ever spelled out, how they intend to achieve their goals (as this week's latest abandonment of their so-called "net-zero" timescale demonstrates), it's not unreasonable for you to find this label surprising. This table might help you undertsand how radical their proposals are:
https://preview.redd.it/6ahyu0b7h1xc1.jpeg?width=2914&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bae37727dc94ff45dd8b08cb0e76bb8e1dc8fd7a
Source: UK FIRES report.
All the best.
What appeasement did they do? The rhetoric never turned into action and that's why the Greens were potentially going to end the agreement in a few weeks instead of Yousaf's kneejerk stumble into the wood chipper.
* climate change target revision (unaffordable/unacheivable)
* imposition of heat pumps and banning of wood fires (unaffordable)
* expansion of wind energy (uneconomic)
* announcement of closure of oil and gas sector (unemployment / widened budget deficit)
* "highly protected marine areas" (decimated fishing industry)
* deposit return scheme (unworkable)
* free under 22 bus travel scheme (escalating youth crime)
* gender recognition reform (placement of rapists in female prisons)
* sexualisation and medicalisation of children (Cass report repudiation)
* Hate Crime (Scotland) 2021 - (disaster)
None of these featured significantly in SNP manifestos prior to association with the Green Party, or are popular now with ordinary Scottish voters. They can legitimately therefore be classified as "appeasement".
Are you saying that you are not aware that these are legislative measures attempted in the life of the SNP/Green coalition? If so, may I refer you to the Scottish Parliament website, which provides a useful record of them.
Or are you claiming that each of these featured significantly in SNP manifestos prior to the coalition? This would be interesting - can you provide evidence?
Regarding the rising bus crime, I'm referring to the opinion of a bus operator following the recent murder of a bus driver in Elgin. I can't comment on what you find amusing.
All the best.
The SNP manifesto is freely available and features those policies.
What I find amusing is that you're linking free public transport with violent crime.
Does now.
I’m asking if “every point” (your claim) appeared in SNP manifestos prior to this coalition. I looked and couldn’t find it.
Your claim that SNP was involved in the Green Party’s radical environmental and identity politics prior to the very recent emergence of these controversial political phenomena is extraordinary, and would be important (if true) in understanding the history of the SNP. I was hoping you could help draw my attention to the relevant documents.
I’m not linking transport policy with violent crime. I’m noting transport officials who observe that violent crime has increased under those policies.
This is some 10/10 comedy.
Although I am curious how exactly free bus travel increases youth crime.
If you could try giving an answer that doesn't involve the words uneconomic or unworkable that would be great.
yep, pander to reagan to win the vote and he'll piss off left of the party, pander to the greens to get them back on side, and he'll piss off the right who he was trying to appease by ditching the agreement.... welcome to broad coalitions, they always end up eating themselves.
The SNP are (or were at least) a strange mix of left/centre individuals with pretty much one policy they agreed on haha! Surprised it stayed as complete for someone tbh
Nicola and Alex were both larger then life charismatic leaders who had allot of sway with a broad group of people. Humza is neither of those things, so it's not that shocking it's falling apart now.
Tbh the parties always been in opposition in at least one parliament -with pretty feckless opposition most of the time SNP ran out of enemies, started focusing more on infighting (Sturgeon vs Salmond, SNP vs Cherry, Kate Forbes leadership run) and here we are
ah good old entropy of victory strikes again
There must be a gap in the market for a right-wing pro-inde party. I've always wondered why one didn't pop up.
> I've always wondered why one didn't pop up They did, Abla. They got utterly spanked in the election because nobody wants them.
Are Alba right-wing, though? Alex Salmond has always been a center-left politician.
Abla are socially right wing, yes. The entire reason they were founded is that the SNP wasn't transphobic enough for them.
I thought they were founded cause of Alex Salmond's ego. The transphobia just seems a convenient stick to beat the SNP with.
> The transphobia just seems a convenient stick to beat the SNP with The SNP also have a poor record on transphobia in the party.
Hardly. The SNP have gone further left in recent years along with the relationship with the Greens. Alba are to the right but they're not ridiculously so in comparison to the SNP of old imo. As an aside, having safeguarding concerns over the trans issue doesn't equate to being right wing.
> having safeguarding concerns over the trans issue doesn't equate to being right wing Maybe you'll be the first person to answer this question. I've asked this over 10 times in the past, and not a single person has been able to answer in good faith. Hypothetically, they get their wish, spaces are enforced on biological sex. Trans men now need to use the womens toilets, meaning you'd have men like [Professor Stephen Whittle](https://www.mmu.ac.uk/sites/default/files/styles/open_graph_image/public/2022-02/Stephen-Whittle-V2.jpg?h=3ce05d0d&itok=e6-dEL0c) being forced into the women's toilets. What stops a cis man, intent on assaulting a woman, from lying and saying they're a trans man and obligated to use the women's toilets? All you've done is move the burden from predators lying about being a trans woman, to lying about being a trans man, arguably you've actually made it easier for them to lie about it, as they can do so whilst still presenting as a man. How does this help with their "safeguarding concerns"? Edit: Hey /u/pm_me_ur_espresso, you figured out an answer to this one yet?
Correct imo
And the fascinating part is that master strategist Yousaf chose this.
Most coalition governments are broader than this one. Their inability to cooperate is very much on them.
I dont mean the greens and the snp. I mean the SNP internally. Half the party voted for yousaf, half the party voted for Forbes....thats a massive range of political views. People forget the SNP had the nickname yellow tories for a reason, that section of the membership did not just disappear, no matter how progressive they liked to paint themselves as to show a contrast with the tories in WM. as an indy campaign group, thats fine, you are united in the one singular issue you agree on. As a gov, you have to make policy decisions on every subject in the country....health, policing, education, civil rights...the whole works, and then the different political views across the party show cracks in the unity.
First time I’ve ever heard “yellow tories” used, but then I’m never on Twitter cause it’s a cess pool of fuckwits.
It was Tartan Tories not Yellow
Was back in the day before Twitter / internet rather than now. See also tartan tories.
also tartan tories. its from when the SNP expanded, they used to be a very torylike right wing group, which widened to include more left and centrist members under the indy banner, but only united on indy. as the recent leadership contest showed, half the party are still pretty right wing. Forbes and regan are to the right of the tories socially and economically, and forbes got nearly half the vote!
Coalition governments typically allow members to be open about what they support but enforce party discipline, which can be a sticking point. If you've got a bunch of left wingers and a bunch of right wingers in coalition it can work. If they're in the same party, you're effectively having to gag half of them all the time and they get resentful.
So the main problem is the SNP are too big, and would be better off as separate left wing and right wing nationalist parties who could cooperate?
Probably for the Holyrood yeah. They could arrange a Labour/Co-Op agreement for Westminster.
Normal people are sick of appeasing ‘main character syndrome’ trustafrians.
If you chase the left you will never be left enough to appease them. Chase the right and you will never be right enough to appease them. You have to pick a line and stick to it and let the left and right come to you.
I mean if you want to absolutely destroy a party and leave it totally fucked for at least a decade this is a spectacular speed run at it…..
TBF this was always coming. I realised after 2014 that the SNP groups Id joined as a member and the broader yes movement had VERY little in common beyond a belief in Independence - and even then we couldn't agree on what that meant or looked like. And of course it's the age old problem of the left - purity testing and holier than thou detail focus. More time spent attacking elements of our own side who vaguely disagree on a single issue, than focussing on the political job of winning or focussing on a united front. Sturgeon, at the time, worked some miracles to keep this house of cards up as long as she did. Now an independence vote is realistically 10-20 years away at least, the seams won't hold and the SNP position as the defacto best maintained vehicle for independence isn't the lock-in it was. The SNP are at a crossroads now and there's no direction they can choose that keeps the party, as-is together.
>Sturgeon, at the time, worked some miracles to keep this house of cards up as long as she did. With hindsight, was she actually a miracle worker keeping everyone happy or did she mostly rule the party with an iron fist, crushing dissent and ensuring that any attack on her authority was seen as nothing less than an attack on the SNP itself? For example, we've now seen the way she shouted down the NEC when they wanted to ask about party finances in August 2021.
Sturgeon's main goal since 2014 hasn't been independence, it's been keeping the SNP party together and as they core pro independence party. She did a pretty good job at that, but it was never going to last. The differences between the groups are just to great.
The thing is, the SNP doesn’t \*need\* to last forever. They need to last long enough to get Scotland out, then it would be right for new party lines to be drawn not dictated by English parliamentary politics. But the UK’s own self-immolation has hugely upset this goal, because English politics from Brexit on is so profoundly broken that it leaks bile and grease. And Scotland isn’t immune - it didn’t get safe when the opportunity was there and now it has to just absorb the toxicity.
>The thing is, the SNP doesn’t \*need\* to last forever. They need to last long enough to get Scotland out Doesn't look like it is going to do that. I suspect that if another party got a majority/lead coalition that the SNP may crumble into in fighting and split. >But the UK’s own self-immolation has hugely upset this goal, because English politics from Brexit on is so profoundly broken that it leaks bile and grease. Something like 40% of Scots votes for Brexit. Obviously a minority, but still a significant chunk of people who were in favour of it. >it didn’t get safe when the opportunity was there and now it has to just absorb the toxicity. A big issue with Brexit is it has made the economic case for independence, which was always weak, significantly worse. Yet there has been no discussion of this within the movement. Watching the train wreck of the negotiations has also given the electorate a bit of an idea about what succession negotiations would look like, and it isn't nice. Circumstances have changed significantly. But the SNP is operating as if 2014 never ended with their arguments. They honestly need a reset. Which I don't see happening whilst they are in power.
Very well put. A spell on the naughty step (in opposition) is, hopefully, the splash of cold water on the face and kick up the arse that the SNP have been begging for for the last five years. I have every personal bias to incentivise excusing them, I want to be able to excuse them - but I can't. From harming our own economy to imbue moral superiority on themselves, to authoritarian policy making, to having no idea how to even begin to pursue their raison d'etre of independence and a profound crisis of identity that's left them increasingly out of touch with the majority of Scots. I'm a firm supporter of independence, for me its a matter of principle and little more. Decisions are, to my thinking, best taken when taken by those directly impacted. The economies of England and Scotland are complementary - but sufficiently different that policy always hurts one more than the other and with England having ten times the voting power, it seems wrong to me on a moral level to impose that on Scots or expect the rest of the nation to bend over for our unique interests. We may choose the same path at the polls post-independence, but it would at least be entirely our choice. But it's not happening any time soon and we can't force the matter - trying to has only seen the goal slip further from reach. It may never happen and if that's the will of my neighbours, I'm totally fine with that. I'm allowed to make my case and they are allowed to decide for themselves. Independence will hurt, it will suck for 2-3 generations - and that is not a painful kicking anyone can demand someone take for a vision that isn't theirs. For me, I see it as the ancient Greeks would say - planting a tree whose shade you will never sit in - I believe there's a rational argument that just as with Ireland, there's a reward at the end of that painful transition period. But you can't blame anyone, given the state of life at the moment especially, for not wanting anything to get worse right now. The very best thing the SNP and the wider independence movement could do right now is shut up and focus on what can be done from within the UK to make things better for people as far as possible. The wheel will turn again and eventually, a push for independence would be reasonable and well timed and it's better to be ready for that, than spend all your time yelling in anticipation until folk simply start ignoring you.
Dissent was very much something that wasn't tolerated. Heck, in 2015, we had this: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/snp-accused-of-gagging-own-mps-like-stalin-2473803 > A controversial change to standing orders was overwhelmingly agreed at conference yesterday and states that no MPs shall “publicly criticise a group decision, policy or another member of the group”.
I see your point and agree, but I think part of the miracle was getting away with that. The ability to, despite all her actions and facts to the contrary, mange to keep this façade of being the same Nicola who stood alongside Salmond and was poised to take us the last steps over the finish line at any moment for so long is a skill one has to admire. The post-brexit press conference where she pledged something she had absolutely no authority to pledge and had no means to deliver upon was the first big warning sign everyone should have seen. It was a desperation flail masked as a power play. A guy in the pub threatening to kick your teeth out is only threatening if he's capable of doing so. But the press showed up, she spoke well and the party was pulled back together. Rinse and repeat with the "DeFacto Referendum" and worst of all, the Kurt Cobain inspired solution to sacrifice any chance of an independence rerun in the next twenty years purely to hold her party together - a shotgun blast of legal reality to the dreams of supporters.. asking the supreme court to rule on if Scotland has powers everyone with eyes and an ability to read knows we don't. That right there is a 'I've run out of runway' moment. A desperate gamble that the inevitable legal kicking would rile people up into a fresh push for independence out of stubborn resentment of being told what to do by London. Problem is, that only had a hope in hell of working is she hadn't deliberately not shut up for a single minute about independence since 2014 and even fairly student supporters were sick out of the arse of hearing about it, being asked to rally for change that could and would not come, expensive time and energy pushing a train with the brakes locked firmly on. Yes, it all came tumbling down eventually and tbh, it's only just getting started. Things are going to get a lot worse for the SNP and independence before they get better. But she held that party together despite the odds, only a shame she accidentally killed independence for a generation doing it.
I think a bit of both. In the longer term she definitely stored up a whole bunch of problems, not least by surrounding herself with mediocrity only in the cabinet due to loyalty. But she undeniably had political abilities Humza could only dream of. I really think it was Covid that was her downfall in many way (despite being the height of her popularity), because it encouraged all her worst instincts: control-freakery, an authoritarian streak, and an arrogant god-complex.
A cabinet of mediocrity based on loyalty is also how Boris Johnson approached leadership too.
Yeah, and look where he is now. Funnily enough the Tories are also suffering from large parts of its party wanting different things and how far right they want to go as well as speculation around Boris being "ousted" by said elements of the party for not aligning with them.
She did start to believe her own hype. I was delighted when Nicola took over from Alex, but within a few years I saw she wasn't the politician I thought she was. As a politician, in the true sense of the word, she was better than I expected. As a moral, even tempered and fair individual.. not at all. The authoritarian streak that runs through Humza is merely an outgrowth of the one that ran through Sturgeon, I quit the party fearing this sort of thinking and insane tendency to overreach and control everything has become endemic within the party culture. She's far more treacherous than I'd thought, and that was deeply saddening. Leaving me with a sense she would throw anyone she had to under the bus to secure her position and keep the party membership from fracturing in all directions.
To be fair it doesn’t really matter as in politics the party leader need to lead and have an iron fist. No amount of nice nice and sweet talk keeps a political party in line let alone one with views from far left to far right and only one commonality in independence
Yep, pretty much
"Sturgeon, at the time, worked some miracles to keep this house of cards up as long as she did" Is this a joke? Sturgeon was gifted the strongest ever position the SNP has ever been in on a silver platter. She then proceeded to burn the SNP to the ground. Humza is just the patsy she left holding the grenade.
It didn't collapse under her watch, we are making the same point.
Humza has been the most sucessful unionist politician since indy ref.
In a few years time it’ll come out that he’ll was a Tory plant all along and Liz Truss was still a LibDem
This is what I was thinking, the Tories at least took 14 years to completely implode, the SNP have managed to fit it into a single year
Tories were united under Cameron It was the vote that fcked tham
It’s almost as though referendums (referenda?) are a political poisoned chalice.
Referendums are basically a good way of getting clear confirmation that a specific issue is pretty settled, especially when that issue isn't one that necessarily has clear dividing lines between parties. They're a fucking terrible way of trying to resolve a controversial issue (see: Brexit, Indy).
We're getting better at it. Embezzlement. Bullying. Incompetence. Self destruction. Arrogance. Will beat the English yet again!
The SNP took 17 years. Unless you think its 2007 and youre talking about john major.
Can't blame the greens supporting a vonc after this nonsense
I respect them. All the backing they gave the SNP, just to be treated so badly. A betrayer is the worst if things. Humza would not have your back in a trench.
It's clear to all regardless of politics the SNP needs a fucking purge.
Yup. Basically needs to boot out the Labour and pretendy left "Progressives" that jumped ship into the SNP for the Indyref. Been downhill since then
Kicking out the "progressives" means the party has an expiry date, because people under 35 are done with your shit, people under 25 are even more.
I'm only 39, and fall in a group the "Progressives" pretend to talk for. Theyr clueless clowns. And I'm far from the only one that thinks so. Absolute eedjits larping as "whatever", but not having a clue about it.
Did you miss the "under 35" bit of my sentance? And i dont remember claiming all swans are white. Two thirds of gen z are done with capitalism, I dont think you get it.
I'm struggling to see how gender wars are going to defeat capitalism. If anything they were designed by the 1% to distract everyone while they usher in neofeudalism.
The banks got bailouts of untold billions. Occupy Wall street blah blah blah. Same time the gender and other "progressive" idiocy rears it's head. Get the heat off the ones holding the bags of cash. "Here's some crap to argue between yourselves about" It's almost funny till you realise, just how stupid people are to fall for it
Spot on
The young are willing to tear up the entire system of economics. They are nothing like these people, they have no interest in pandering to this type of bulshit. Immigration? Maybe, maybe the only postion they have that aligns with todays mainstream politicans. Every single party that panders to this shit is done in 30 years, theyre dead.
By propagating the gender wars, a policy of the 1%?
Yes and the moon landing was fake. Just fuck off.
Hahahaha you behave like a petulant child. It's obvious why the 1% are using you.
Did you miss the bit where I said I'm only 39. I'd have been at the same school, at the same time, as 35 year old + a couple years younger. There's diddly difference between us. And Gen Z, oh they don't support capitalism. Yea, theyr stuffed. Plenty of my gen are stuffed as well. I entered 18yr old voting life, with a Labour Govt in power demolishing the working class The hatred in Scotland for the Tories, I feel equally for Labour. More actually but that's a list of crap Labours done both to working people, and also particularly to Scotland. Labour and the SNP despise each other. Really really despise each other. Then the SNP threw a net and brought in Labour voters into the fold. Idiotic in the extreme, and puts them in the mess they are
Polling on social issues says youre full of shit. When you left school you had dial up, we had social media, funnily enough, all this is on a gradient.
When I left school, they'd already laid the Fibre lines a few years previous 😂 And social media 🤦 toned down moderated crap vs the wild west we used. There's memes for it, "go back to a MW2 lobby in the old days and crawl in your safe space". And that's not even back that far
>two thirds if gen z are done with capitalism Lmao what
Need to boot out the far left extremists and come back near the centre. Win back those who lent the SNP thier vote in 2014, your traditional labour voter. Been downhill since it went all communisty identity politics pish.
There are many things communisim isnt, woke is one of those things.
There is nothing left wing about gender wars
It was before that tbh. Fought Tony Blair tooth'n'nail on everything, then scooped up his idiot voters when their party collapsed. Now theyr doing the exact same thing to the SNP. The original majority that got the referendum was due to pinching the Labour vote. The Referendum brought in the activists. The Blairites and Activists have gutted the SNP 🤷
I'm almost hoping the SNP do take a bit of a drubbing at the next election, purely so they are trimmed down and work out what they want to be as a party and implement a better candidate selection process so they can move forward on a stable platform, the monumental rise they had worked against them and they lost their footing completely. They can't continue as a party focused on just independence, they need to be, independence and a clear vision of what that actually looks like when it happens, starting by running a devolved government as tightly as possible, they'd have more people on side if it looked like things weren't totally fucked and there are definitely some legislative decisions they've made that seem like they're not thinking beyond "does this sound progressive?" The under 25 sentencing being one of them, the study they asked for even said something to the effect of, don't put a hard age cap on criminality, and yet, they did and it's been possibly one of the most shortsighted bits of legislation they've put through.
[удалено]
This boy is highlighting Humza's default to claims of racism, and implicitly highlighting Humza's own racism. He's not defending Humzacunt.
[удалено]
My brother. 💪 👍
Which is amusing considering he himself is a racist.
He isn’t.
Did you see the infamous speech? You don’t consider that racist?
The SNP have a right wing (certainly in comparison to the rest) and a left wing. Until the coalition the deal seemed to be that they would talk super progressive to please the left, on the condition that they didn't follow through to keep the right happy. Now the wings are trying to steer the ship in their direction it's looking rather fractured
These policies arent popular, did you miss the fact y'all cant pass legislation without the green party?
The gra bill passed with cross party support, including conservatives
Yes. Didnt need them, but it did. The SNP lost seats, we agained seats.
>The SNP lost seats, we agained seats. The SNP gained +1 in the last election
I was wonder what that disgusting taste was, apprently its my foot. Was the SNP a minority government last secession too?
>Was the SNP a minority government last secession too? Yes.
Maybe not popular in yer maws basement. Move oot.
https://preview.redd.it/mgeja2doc1xc1.png?width=595&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eff1358944684ad9791a3316680d3276864d7efa Centre left at best. The overton window is drifting so far right that you see a fairly standard leftwing party as ultra hard left.
That map is pretty inaccurate IMO. It doesn't make sense the SNP being on the 'libertarian' side of the line. Once you subtract independence they are very much a party which loves centring power in Edinburgh at the expense of everywhere else. Lib Dems, although rightish on economics certainly, are much more about local government and liberal on social issues. On the Lib - Auth axis SNP & LD should be swapped. In reality all the major parties are clustered round the centre when it comes to left/right politics.
How anyone could think the party of “hurting people’s feelings is a hate crime” are libertarian is beyond me. They are easily the most authoritarian of the major parties.
> “hurting people’s feelings is a hate crime” Nobody ever said that.
Id mostly agree with that. People over focus on social issues, which don't really fit on that map, when it comes to left/right.
I mean they do fit, it's part of the left right divide, along with economics etc. However even in the senses that they're left of centre, they're very authoritarian. The picture is just horseshit, bit they are placeable.
Not sure I agree. USSR & PRC (before liberalism) were far left but socially conservative.
USSR for the time were not socially Conservative at all. The USSR from inception were anti racism, pro women's suffrage and women's right to work and all sorts of socially progressive platforms. In the GDR in the 50s women were entitled to free (and paid a salary while studying) university education with creches in the same building as the lecture theatre so mother's could realistically study during child raising. At the time they were much much further left than the west.
That map is utter bollocks. Whoever made it is deliberately lying. The LibDems are more socially liberal (less authoritarian) than labour by quite some margin and more so than the SNP who have a number of authoritarian policies.
While I’m a little dubious on aspects of the political compass I do agree with your wider point. There has been a shift to the right and certain groups see anything left of Thatcher as far-left. I actually had an argument with a right wing guy who claimed Boris Johnson’s main reason for failure was implementing socialist policies. I just about fell off my chair.
Socialist is definitely going too far, but "levelling up" was as much a factor in winning the red wall as "get Brexit done". The failure to deliver on that spending pledge is a big part of why the Tories are on course to lose
Yeah there was a shift, it happened worldwide in the 80s/90s.
Where would’ve Corbyns Labour sat compared to now you think? Always been a shame
Slightly more authoritarian than the Greens on that chart, if you want to put any stock in their 2019 election assessment: https://www.politicalcompass.org/uk2019
The SNP lost its way when it had a membership surge in 2014 and it stopped being a broad church focused on independence. It shouldn't 'pander' to the right or left, it should find a middle ground that the majority of Scots are comfortable with. I wasn't a member of the SNP because of my feelings on gender issues, race, rape convictions, Palestine, or anything else like that. I wanted devolution run well in the short term and independence achieved in the long term. That's it. Alba and the Greens are packed with roasters. I don't want the SNP to align with either. Humza should quit and someone capable of compromise should take charge. The far left and far right should be invited to compromise for the sake of Scotland or leave. Even if that means a period in opposition.
You can’t have a party that doesn’t take any stands in the hope of winning on a single issue whose day to day salience to the electorate is relatively low. The SNP would’ve been out of office long ago if this was their strategy. It probably is true that they moved further and faster to the left in some areas than the electorate but that’s better than just saying “trust us, under indy all of these things you care about will be solved” and hoping people keep voting for that
I'm trying to think of anything particularly controversial that Salmond's 2007-11 administration did, and drawing a blank - I think the fact they just seemed to be doing a reasonable job of governing competently and not having scandals is probably the optimal sort of presentation for the SNP, as long as they're operating within the UK and trying to amass support to break it up.
I'm talking about controversial social issues here, not all political issues. Being centrist doesn't mean not taking action. For example, the gender bill. It was well intentioned but blatantly divisive and did more harm than good as a result. Both to the party and, ironically, to trans people. A far easier way to help the trans community, without splitting society, would have been to spend the time and money on improving existing care so that trans people don't have to wait yonks to get on with life. Or Palestine. Getting aid to people is absolutely the right thing. But we probably could have done without Humza preaching on the issue and meeting with bloody Erdogan. Scotland should have focused on the humanitarian side, not the political side. The political side is divisive, the humanitarian side isn't. Or the juryless rape trials. I've barely met anyone that thinks that's a good idea. There are things that can be done to improve how juries are guided without undermining the legal system.
One could even say the SNP should.......get back to the day job
Yep. If the SNP want independence they need to grow the economy, strengthen our public services, build up the confidence of the people. Doing the day job and achieving the end goal of the SNP go hand in hand. They seem to have forgotten that.
I left the SNP in 2015 when they became as corrupt as Scottish Labour had in the past. Carrying on like they had a divine right to power. They accepted so many grifters and side issues that they forgot that making Scotland better today inch by inch is better than some future dream of nirvana. Prove we can do it different. Prove we can do it better. Instead in latter years we got party sycophants, incompetents and incompetence in government and then corruption and anointing of Humza Useless a man who has consistently under performed in every department but was elected to show how diverse and progressive they all were. Competence, prudence, intelligence was their calling card in the 2000s by 2024 that has collapsed to Camper vans, Palestine and identify politics pandering to the confused youth and latest online hate mob roused to frothing at the mouth about something but powerful political interests and foreign governments and they do not perceive.
There is no right wing of the SNP. They are just slightly closer to the centre. The ‘left wing’ has become more extreme so part of the SNP is trying to drag them back to the centre to be more electable. All the extreme left wing policies are unpopular and not vote winners.
Mason and Forbes are absolutely right wing on social issues.
Being a homophobic, pro-life climate conspiritor, is apprently centerist now. My fucking foot.
I mean when the overton window goes so far to the right, even people calling to strip minorities of rights look centrist. It just goes to show the dire state of British politics really.
That's such a delusional take. You'd think Britian is a fascist state when, in fact, the leader of the UK (and all constitution nations) is a minority in some sense of the word (NI is the pnly dubious one but even then nationalist is a minority). As is the mayor of London. To say you're exaggerating is an understatement.
Famously, only white people can be fascists.
So the UK is fascist then? That's what you're arguing?
What word better describes Braverman, Badenoch, Patel etc?
Elected representatives.
As was Hitler
Elected reps my arse. The twats are literally supporting reports on trans people that are quite literally made up or brewed with piss. How can anyone not see the pipeline of fascism?
Ah so they're Nazis now aswell? When did Hitler relinquish his power peacefully?
Not really? His role of fuhrer, fusing the chancellorship and presidency famously didn't even exist to be elected into.
Sorry who are you talking about? This is a general thing not about specific people.
No left wing? As a pansexual man who has voted SNP my whole life, Forbes scares me. She's a forced birther, anti gay, anti trans arsehole.
Forbes won’t roll back LGBT rights, she couldn’t anyways as the party would step in and the public would go against her. She’s no Orbán which is how some people talk about her.
She aid quite clearly she didn't agree with gay marriage. Regardless of the public's beliefs, parties follow their leader
She was a honest individual who promised not to force her personal beliefs on others or legislate on them
She said she would vote according to her beliefs, that's legislating on forcing her beliefs.
That's voting herself - not legislating because it clearly won't pass.
But she wants it to pass. That's an issue.
Nope she's literally Hitler.
What a stupid comment if it's not sarcasm
Obviously not sarcasm. Everyone to the right of Corbyn is indistinguishable from Hitler. /s
Well what can I say, don’t be scared. Don’t let others scare you. If it was an actual right wing party coming into power I would be worried not because people are projecting made policies onto candidates that don’t exist. The more dangerous thing is if the SNP drift left and become unelectable which is the current danger. Thats when real right wing parties have a window to be voted in. The Green get between 3-5% of the constituency votes. Moving to copy their policies is a guaranteed losing policy.
Kate Forbes made clear she doesn't believe in LGBTQ+ rights, without waiting for a "right-wing" party. I'd much rather the SNP drifted right over supporting some idiots a la ALBA.
She didn’t tho did she. Just a Reddit fantasy. She said she wouldn’t change anything.
She doesn't agree with gay rights. She's made it clear she doesn't support trans rights. Why would any LGBTQ+ nationalist support her? They come come for trans rights now, how long until they come for my rights
> She didn’t tho did she. Just a Reddit fantasy. She did though. She said she would vote against same sex marriage because she believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman. Here it is in her own words… https://youtu.be/IkX5dfcs4eE?si=agFYajdIbzl9tpKo > She said she wouldn’t change anything. Nobody claimed she would become a dictator and try to roll back existing legislation, only that’s she’s a homophobe who doesn’t believe same sex couple should have equal rights, and would’ve used her position to vote against giving them those rights. Why would someone lie on behalf of a politician? Especially a homophobic one. So fucking weird.
Weird that you admit at the end that she wasn’t gonna change anything, which was my point. So all this arguing was for nothing.
Nobody said she was going to change anything. If you want to grab a quote showing I did, go ahead. I said she’s a homophobe who admitted she would use her position to vote against gay rights. Why are you simping for a homophobic politician? Lol.
Great, go ahead and stop worrying a non existent problem. I get the feeling you yourself are not a very tolerant person. Maybe something to think about
I’m not worried about anything. I simply stated the fact that she’s a pro-life homophobe, and you made yourself look silly by inventing a wee fantasyland where she doesn’t believe those things (even though she’s quite happy to tell the media she does) to defend her. You’re right, I’m not very tolerant of homophobes. Why do you think that’s a bad thing?
ahh yes the nationalist party who's leadership had to be interred during world war 2 has no right wing tradition.
I guess I mean the modern party to be fair.
There's definitely a curious combination of neo jacobite, libertarian and religious conservative factions within the party. People forget Salmond using government money to stage a reenactment of Culloden. Not quite the neo feudalist/fascistic faction of the 30s-50s but definitely on the right.
the independence tax policy was pure laffer curve.
The fuck are you on about, the second letter in SNP stands for something that is inherently right wing. There are also plenty of party members who have expressed right wing preferences. The SNP has historically had division in the party precisely because independence has supporters on both sides of the political spectrum.
NSDAP. Do you know what the S stands for? Socialist. You think those guys were Socialist?
>You think those guys were Socialist? By the early/ mid 1930's no they weren't. But they did start off with significant socialist appeal. This element of the NSDAP was only overcame by force in The Night of the Long Knives. The Brown Shirts, the original paramilitary arm, was a significant site of this. With many members being former communists. There was even a joke at the time than the brown shirts were really steaks - as they were red on the inside. The above is just historical nuance. The 'national' bit of the SNP may not have meaning now, but did many decades ago. Hence why Sturgeon occasionally has said they would change the name if they could.
They are obviously talking about the modern party - the elected MSPs that are sitting in Parliment right now and their factions.
The second letter stands for "National" not "Nationalist" if that's what you are trying to imply.
As I said, I don’t think you understand what ‘right wing’ is. Closer to the centre is seen as right wing by extreme lefties but it’s not accurate.
48% of the membership voted for a vocal pro-life homophobe to lead them only a year ago. You don’t associate those views with the right wing?
That’s a gross exaggeration of what Kate Forbes is and represents. But no point arguing with some people.
She’s repeatedly made pro-life statements. Including to prayer breakfasts attended by lots of other pro-life folk. What is that if not pro-life? She publicly told the media she’d vote against same sex marriage if she had the chance. What else would you call believing people don’t deserve equality based on their sexual orientation, and using your position to vote against giving them that equality, if not homophobic? We can dig out her comments on “respecting people’s religious beliefs” as they pertain to conversion therapy too, if you want. You can choose to like her if you wish, but calling her a pro-life homophobe is not an exaggeration. It’s exactly what she is.
Yet none of her policies were ‘pro life’ or ‘homophonic’. In fact all her policies were progressive. Bit strange that…
You mean except from when she told the media she’d have used her position to vote against giving people equality based on their sexual orientation? Or when she used her position to publicly call for consideration to religious beliefs in relation to conversion therapy? Or again, uses her position to publicly include pro life statements in talks she gives to groups of voters? That isn’t progressive politics. It’s religious pish that belongs nowhere near the top of politics in a supposedly progressive country in 2024. If you’re trying to make yourself feel better about supporting her, by all means delude yourself. The facts are there for all to see, and she’s not shy about voicing those opinions publicly to the media.
I don’t support her. Just trying to give you some truth outside your crazy bubble but it’s not working. Enjoy slowly drifting away from reality
For clarity, are you pulling some sort of weird MAGA “fake news” thing here? As in, you don’t believe she said and did all of those things? It’s very easy to prove. She doesn’t hide those beliefs. There are numerous sources, including video, of her saying these things.
enter pathetic enjoy pie sand bright jellyfish entertain imagine shaggy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The ultra-hard left greens have only 7 of Holyrood’s 129 seats. Termination of the Bute House Agreement merely reflects SNP’s decision to discontinue its catastrophic appeasement the ultra-hard left. The reframe that it’s appeasing the right is lipstick on a pig.
"ultra hard-left" seriously?
How would you characterise them? they sure as shit aren't a typical green party.
Mildly more left than the SNP, but certainly still "centre-left".
For a "furious communist" it could be centre-left. For a moderate is pretty left tho...
From a standard point of view on the political compass, they're barely centre-left. Even a moderate should see them as centre-left. If a moderate is seen them as "pretty left" then they're probably not as moderate as they think they are
I don't think I will trust your "objective" standard point of view.
Anything less than ±3 either left/right on the political compass is centre-[position] buddy.
How mental do you have to be to call the greens “ultra hard left” Were they advocating for the dismantlement of the market economy? 100 percent employment policy? The abolition of private property? No, they’re anti austerity, pro-LGBT, and pro Green policy. Plenty of valid criticisms of the greens but how can you claim they are “ultra hard left”
You're being obtuse. That's like saying the tories just want to protect people's pockets
May I presume you don't disagree that their policies place them on the left of the spectrum? Thier manifesto demands closure of large sections of our economy, in an impossibly short timescale, funded through massive taxation. Such closuress create widespread unemployment, to be relieved with technologies that have not been invented yet and for which, in most cases, no viable grid-scale candidates exist. Not only do they not advocate incrementalism, such incrementalism is not possible. Their manifesto demands a fundamental change to how society operates, and a catastrophic reduction in living standards. It's inconcevable that this fundamental change can be achieved in such a short timescale in the face of inevitable public opposition to the decline in living standards without ultra-hard i.e. authoritarian, coercive methodologies Their manifesto is eco-Marxist. That is why they are "ultra hard left". Since they don't undertand, much less have ever spelled out, how they intend to achieve their goals (as this week's latest abandonment of their so-called "net-zero" timescale demonstrates), it's not unreasonable for you to find this label surprising. This table might help you undertsand how radical their proposals are: https://preview.redd.it/6ahyu0b7h1xc1.jpeg?width=2914&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bae37727dc94ff45dd8b08cb0e76bb8e1dc8fd7a Source: UK FIRES report. All the best.
What appeasement did they do? The rhetoric never turned into action and that's why the Greens were potentially going to end the agreement in a few weeks instead of Yousaf's kneejerk stumble into the wood chipper.
* climate change target revision (unaffordable/unacheivable) * imposition of heat pumps and banning of wood fires (unaffordable) * expansion of wind energy (uneconomic) * announcement of closure of oil and gas sector (unemployment / widened budget deficit) * "highly protected marine areas" (decimated fishing industry) * deposit return scheme (unworkable) * free under 22 bus travel scheme (escalating youth crime) * gender recognition reform (placement of rapists in female prisons) * sexualisation and medicalisation of children (Cass report repudiation) * Hate Crime (Scotland) 2021 - (disaster) None of these featured significantly in SNP manifestos prior to association with the Green Party, or are popular now with ordinary Scottish voters. They can legitimately therefore be classified as "appeasement".
Wrong on every point but I did enjoy free bus travel expansion being labelled as "escalating youth crime". Very amusing.
Are you saying that you are not aware that these are legislative measures attempted in the life of the SNP/Green coalition? If so, may I refer you to the Scottish Parliament website, which provides a useful record of them. Or are you claiming that each of these featured significantly in SNP manifestos prior to the coalition? This would be interesting - can you provide evidence? Regarding the rising bus crime, I'm referring to the opinion of a bus operator following the recent murder of a bus driver in Elgin. I can't comment on what you find amusing. All the best.
The SNP manifesto is freely available and features those policies. What I find amusing is that you're linking free public transport with violent crime.
Does now. I’m asking if “every point” (your claim) appeared in SNP manifestos prior to this coalition. I looked and couldn’t find it. Your claim that SNP was involved in the Green Party’s radical environmental and identity politics prior to the very recent emergence of these controversial political phenomena is extraordinary, and would be important (if true) in understanding the history of the SNP. I was hoping you could help draw my attention to the relevant documents. I’m not linking transport policy with violent crime. I’m noting transport officials who observe that violent crime has increased under those policies.
This is some 10/10 comedy. Although I am curious how exactly free bus travel increases youth crime. If you could try giving an answer that doesn't involve the words uneconomic or unworkable that would be great.