THERE is no middle way! Kevin McKenna and others with deep-rooted socialist beliefs need to decide whether they wish to have a realistic opportunity of achieving their ambition of a socialist state run from Holyrood, or they wish to consign future generations to more right-leaning government from Westminster (Here’s why the SNP better organise an indyref sooner rather than later, February 3).
In today’s harsh political reality, the greater their efforts to undermine the First Minister, the SNP and the current SNP organisational structure (built up under Alex Salmond and earlier leaders of the SNP), the greater the likelihood that future generations will not inhabit a Scotland free to determine its own destiny!
READ MORE: Here’s why the SNP should organise indyref2 sooner rather than later
Kevin McKenna could have conveyed a wholly positive message in support of independence if he had perhaps ended his most recent column (read: diatribe) after writing his first seven paragraphs, but clearly he could not subdue his core anti-SNP feelings that also still permeate what remains of the party seemingly closest to his political ideals.
Regrettably his words apparently demonstrate that while he is now an advocate of independence, he struggles to see beyond his personal view of the path to living in a socialist state. Of course he is sympathetic to others both within and outwith the SNP who express similar views, but resorts to the denigration of those whom he deems to have “facile and lazy views” because they refuse to be drawn into narrow short-term agendas.
The SNP is certainly far from perfect, and although I am not a member of any political party it seems that there needs to be fundamental change in the SNP organisational structure, including separation of “management” and “political” roles, but we already know that with independence achieved the SNP will, by necessity, need to transform due to the political realities of the new constitutional dawn.
READ MORE: No individual’s ego is bigger than the SNP or the Yes movement
If Mr McKenna is not confident of winning the argument on socialism in an independent Scotland, he should at least be honest and admit to this rather than trying to force a split in the SNP at this critical time in our country’s progress to self-determination. Should she so desire, Joanna Cherry will be much better placed to attain the leadership of the SNP if she is patient rather than – perhaps under the influence of others with less open motives – tempted to pursue a more immediate role as a popular political maverick.
Others such as Jim Sillars may also, if they do not succumb to short-term instincts, live to see their personal visions materialise should the people of an independent Scotland democratically wish to elect an independent Labour government that possibly would not wish to re-join the EU. However, all of these individuals are less likely to achieve their long-term political ambitions for their country if they cannot resist the temptation, for at least the next three months, to denigrate the SNP and its current leadership rather than focus on removing Scotland from the control of the corrupt authoritarian regime at Westminster.
As a footnote, most objectively minded people are more likely to endorse those they have, with good reason, come to trust in making decisions on which their lives depend than those who may be highly principled but who have become frustrated at not yet having achieved their personal political missions.
Stan Grodynski
Longniddry, East Lothian
I WAS appalled to read of the sacking of Joanna Cherry but was greatly heartened by Kevin McKenna’s piece, redolent with his usual humanity and concern at abuses of democracy. And my old acquaintance Joe Farrell’s letter.
Ms Sturgeon is a fine First Minister with a most impressive track record, and for me at least, she had no record of public blunders until she initiated, or at least condoned and permitted, the disgraceful treatment of Ms Cherry.
READ MORE: Three cheers for Joanna Cherry, a politician unafraid of upsetting people
There is still time for the FM to find a way to utilise Ms Cherry’s huge range of talents and abilities, and thus diplomatically go at least some way to assuage the anger and malevolence Cherry is surely entitled to feel. Do it, First Minister, and perhaps Scots can again approach the election (should Bumbles allow us one), with pride and optimism.
Should Ms Sturgeon fail to act with human decency, I for one will be seriously wondering whether I should vote SNP for my constituency MSP and Green on the list, as has been my wont in every Scottish election since 2003. In my constituency the SNP will be fielding a new candidate. I will certainly be arguing in my local Green party branch that we should consider standing, unless the FM acts NOW.
Last year I opposed running a Green candidate in the UK General Election, and personally worked (with the knowledge of my local Green branch) to help Amy Callaghan make the then UK leader of the LibDems redundant.
Dougie Harrison
Milngavie
IT is all very well for Alan Black (Letters, February 2) to call for more team spirit and follow the manager’s instructions, but when there is good reason to suspect that the manager and the coaching staff are not playing to win, at least in the foreseeable future, and that their opponents, seeing this is happening, are content to keep silent to keep the manager in place, being a meek team player is not the way to go. In contrast, full marks to Kevin McKenna for perhaps his best article yet. Willing to give praise where praise is due but not mincing his words when calling out what is going terribly wrong.
Andrew M Fraser
Inverness
I WOULD respectfully suggest Kevin Mckenna does a little more research before describing Boris Johnson as “academically gifted”. Johnson is undoubtedly far from stupid but the various books and articles he has written are notoriously replete with errors. A glaring example is in his 2014 biography of Winston Churchill, the Churchill Factor, where Boris tells us that during World War Two, the Germans captured Stalingrad!!
Alan Woodcock
Dundee
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel