UK General Discussion: Rishecession

[Dan the Roman]

One other thing regarding Scottish independence is that the SNP really needed Brexit to be a success after 2020. Any hope they had of an independent Scotland being welcomed by the EU suddenly depended on the EU being willing to take on the morass of an extended land border with the UK on an island. Not to mention, the need to unwrap integration with a substantial population in the millions who were unhappy with the divorce and wanted to remain ties including dual citizenship. The experience of the Northern Ireland protocol must make the prospect of trying to integrate Scotland, especially a divided Scotland on bitter terms with the UK and without the goodwill in Washington the Irish have, into the EU, and in the process being dragged into every single legacy dispute with London.

I would go as far to say that an independent Scotland has a dubious path into the EU even with voluntary divorce in the near future. The idea that any path at all exists for an SNP that leaves on anything other than amicable terms with London seems delusional post-Brexit.

Spain is the least of their problems. They should worry about France and Germany. Not to mention Poland probably isn't too hot on their ideological worldview.

Scottish independence likely isn't viable until the next Tory government after the next Labour government. They will need Labour to clean up the Northern Ireland situation enough for the EU to risk taking on Scotland. So we really are talking 2030s. But the SNP cannot tell their base that.

[Dan the Roman]

I think the association with "Remain" was another SNP error, but illustrates, and currently Scottish posters can correct me on this as I have not lived their in over a decade, one of several examples of the SNP leadership being much more upscale than their electorate. However, it is key to the way in which Sturgeon has tried to sell independence which is in an almost conservative, "this is the best way of keeping things the same" way. In their narrative, Scotland is under attack by English Nationalist Tories who want to change it, so Indy is a defensive tactic to keep Scotland as it is. The EU became prime proof of that, but in the process, Indy messaging became bogged down on something which in practice became less possible after Brexit even if more potent with some.

Part of the problem from my perspective is the Sturgeon leadership is responding to suspicion they are less independence activists and more Left-Liberal Democrats who are using the issue to create their own vision of Scotland on devolved issues. That suspicion exists because there is good reason to believe it is at least partially true.

Alba was a farce, but the idea behind Alba is scary because done correctly by credible people not solely obsessed with Trans issues could cause the SNP problems down the line in the same way the PQ in Quebec gave way to the more right-leaning CAQ.

[Dan the Roman]

That’s not *entirely* true. 15-30 Scottish Labour MPs being elected *does* disarm most of the SNP’s populist arguments (“Scotland didn’t vote for this Westminster government”, “we need to free ourselves from Tory England” etc).

But independence remains an open question so long as the SNP holds 49% of seats at the Scottish Parliament and the parliament has a pro-independence majority.

MSPs are up for reelection in 2026, which is going to be the crucial moment. Even with the state ScotGov is getting itself into, they’d probably win reelection in the face of a fifth Tory term. Against a Labour government that’s got Scottish support, the race could be a lot more interesting.

Independence is an open question only in a domestic poltiical sense. In the real world the moment was lost in 2019, and it's not really possible on anything like the model available in 2014.

Scotland requires an open border with England to function economically and extremely favorable separation terms which are solely up to the magnamity of London to avoid being crushed by liabilities without access to resources.

When both were in the EU and the Brits were viewed as annoying by Brussels there was the prospect, though chimera, of Scotland being able to make a relatively painless transition mediated by the EU. Post 2019, it would require the EU to manage a second land border with London which no government will have any interest in attempting on behalf of Scotland after the painful experiences in Northern Ireland. The monetary transition will be incomprehensible- Scotland will be keeping the Pound while transitioning to the Euro which again requires the goodwill of both and doubly restricts monetary policy.

Then the United States will be hostile to the idea under most administration's and downright hostile to any SNP government under Donald Trump.

It would probably take 60%+ support for a 2014 style model to get anywhere close to wanting to pay the price for what's available now. Which is why I find these polls meaningless, 48-53%support would never survive contact with reality

[Dan the Roman]

There’s lots of reasons to think the NEC will use an election to purge the PLP of its more embarrassing members, overtly or otherwise (Coyle, Duffield, Begum to name a few) and fill safe/held seats with people loyal/reliable to the leadership. The only reasons not to are 1. The media backlash throwing off the campaign or 2. A fear that LOTO/L2W’s control of the party is less than total. Given the abject humiliations inflicted on the left in recent years, 2 seems unlikely to me.

I really think there’s an underestimation of how much the party leadership overlearned the lessons of Corbynism in general & specifically O’Mara/Onasanya and the degree to which they are trying to make sure the PLP is as rigid as possible.

Duffield, if she would shut up a bit, has value as a Sister Souhjah. As long as she exists in the parliamentary party, and is perceived as "protected" by the leadership, they can counter any backlash for any policies they do undertake. As it seems clear a Labour government will do a lot of things that will piss off Duffield's, erm, fan-base, keeping her around while also passing a Trans-inclusive conversion therapy-ban allows attention to be redirected as needed. Provided Duffield has an on/off button. That, of course, has been called into doubt.

[Dan the Roman]

I think any chance of that passing this parliament died with Johnson’s authority in early 2022. Although it’s unclear how enthusiastic even he was, given the feet-dragging.

No chief whip was going to be enthused by the prospect of a public spat, with Alicia Kearns and Caroline Nokes in the red corner, and JRM and Miriam Cates in the blue corner.

The irony, of course, is that this will almost certainly surface in the next parliament, when Labour fancy watching the Tory backbenches have a public bust-up, while most others (bar the DUP and Duffield) heads through the Aye lobby.

If we end up with a Braverman or Badenoch as LOTO, wonder whether they will whip against, and risk a moment akin to IDS whipping against gay adoption.

I mean that's the whole reason why they even bothered in the first place right? Labour will glide this through without much fanfare the moment they come to power. So why not push it yourself with all the pomp, and avoid a potential conflicted vote that is hard to explain to the public. From that perspective,  killing the proposal is yet another bad move by a Tory government that is running in circles.

Always an error to assume people do not genuinely believe in this as a point of principle. It's one reason I can't see someone like Alicia Kearns having much of a future. Because she does not share the fundamental moral values of the vast majority of the right on this issue(not to mention her Israel stuff).

This is like abortion. You can charge prolifers with fanaticism but you will not find an answer to their behavior in strategic political calculation.  They may be deluded as to how unpopular some of their preoccupations are, but at most that might change their tactics. They are fighting against mass murder. The belief that Western society is seeing an epidemic of child abuse is deeply held and Tory MPs have to reflect that.

Sunak does not have a future. Which is why I think it is something he believes.  That leaked video of him mocking trans women from a year ago reflects the real Rishi.  He has the luxury of riding off into the sunset, so for him this is pleasure not work. If he faced overwhelming pressure to pass this he would, but he genuinely does not like Trans people, does not like activists,  and does not like the self-righteousness of liberal Tories like Kearns and Nokes who insist on acting as though they represent a serious party running a serious government with some sort of future. If they aren't swept away by the tide, well they and Kemi deserve each other.

[Dan the Roman]

The belief that Western society is seeing an epidemic of child abuse is deeply held and Tory MPs have to reflect that.

Very few people in Britain — including very few Conservative voters — believe this. This is the language of the conspiratorial American far right.

Indeed, the above post seemed to import Trumpism/Qanonism wholesale into the UK. Without being at all complacent, that is a very mistaken reading of where we currently are.

I worked in London for seven years intermittently before transfering back in 2023 and while I would not suggest it should be imported wholesale, I watched in Tory circles the reaction to Mordaunt's campaign including from her own team in 2022.

The strength of feeling outside the politicalized elite was much less than in the US and you could argue for the absence of mass mobilization but there was a total overnight consensus the very day she announced that her past record on the issue was an obstacle and that reversing was a prerequisite for a serious leadership bid. In short that no one could disagree and lead the Conservative party. Hence the cringe, late-night tweet thread.

Is it far weaker and elite focused than in America? Yes. But what struck me is that internally disagreement had been branded as leftwing and disloyal in a way that meant party loyalists would all go one way. The critical issue is not even that pushback is viewed as leftwing but that it is viewed as elitist and antipopulist after a decade in which "elites" have been viewed as nemesis. If you don't think the last decade has had an impact on the makeup of the party it has.

I don't see much evidence that has slowed down, not with the Cass review seeming to confirm every prejudice. When I say "child abuse" I mean the Cass Review perspective, or perhaps the freakin front page of Today's Guardian. Every major newspaper is running with that.

And don't underestimate the increased "Americanization" which will come from GBnews* and the media pull.

I would be interested in some evidence for organized division within the party on this since 2022. Something to show Kearns/Nokes represent important currents and not throwbacks to another era.

Or why Rishi dosen't actually believe in it.

*I realize Harwood is an exception but even he seems to have been told to shut up.

[Dan the Roman]

I mean there are all sorts of conspiracy theories relating to child abuse here, but they relate to Operation Yewtree and so on rather than... all that.

I guess that wording did associate with things I did not intend. What I meant is that when I worked in Conservative politics the attitude of those who cared about this issue reminded me of hard-core American Prolifers who are convinced they are right, and unpopularity is a temporary result of the ignorance of everyone else. Once the "truth" is brought to their attention it won't matter.

Which means the politics take on the form of an information war where those who are off-message are actively undermining the cause.

I wasn't convinced voters cared, because to be frank, I wasn't convinced they cared deeply about much by American standards. But it was clear a critical mass within the rightwing elite had decided what they thought and believed if they could enforce internal conformity that conformity would spread to everyone else. And they were in a position to execute the first part.

Which is why I posted a few years ago in this thread predicting rhe Tories would go hard in this direction.

But back to the original point. I don't get the impression this is strategic on the part of most. Kearns and Nokes are absolutely not behaving strategically from the perspective of their own political futures. Rishi is not thinking about the longterm interests of the party. And those who opposed this either truly believe or recognize the strength of those who do.