Last night a majority of Scottish MPs voted to oppose the updating of Britain’s nuclear weapons. This was a rebellion of 15 Labour MP, all six SNP MPs, and twelve Scottish Lib Dems.
This is important as the elected representatives of the Scottish nation have rejected the genocidal “defence” policy of the British state. I hope that Scottish MSPs will urgently raise the issue in the Scottish parliament in Hollyrood, because even though defence matters are dealt with in Westminster, the constitutional position here is that English MPs have imposed nuclear weapons on Scotland, and even expect them to be based in Scotland at Faslane.
In May this year the Scots will go to the polls in what is fast becoming an independence election. Yesterday I posted a short article explaining how independence will economically benefit the working class in Scotland.
The bigger vote the Independence parties get, the worse the constitutional crisis for the British state. This Trident vote shows the potential for that crisis developing in a progressive direction, as an independent Scotland immediately raises the question of opting out of the imperial obligations of the blood soaked British state.
(by the way, I usually dislike the cheapening of the term genocide by overuse, but nuclear bombs are a weapon of genoicide, designed to wipe out whole populations)
2 comments:
This is indeed an interesting question. Last night at uni I raised this with a few classmates who were Labour Party members or Labour Party voters in England and both of them immediately objected, particularly my classmate from Middlesbrough. "No!" they said "This will open the way for a continual Tory majority".
I think this is something worth considering as there are a number of Tories hoping for Scottish independence to ensure that there is a "south-heavy" vote which keeps them in power for years to come. Do we want the English and Scottish working classes to be cut off from each other in this way? What do you think about this argument about the Tories?
Looking at that question another way, had scotland been independent than they wouldn't have had a Tory goverment for the last 50 years!!
the prospect of a cameron government in westminster, and a Labour or SNP government in Hollyrood will accelerate what i think is becomming an inevitable break up of the uk. what is more it is a recipe for resentment and division between scots and English worker for westminster to be foisting polices onto Scorland that the scots voted against - that won't lead to class unity.
i think the danger of the Labour party simply aruing the unionist position is that it misses the opportunity to debate what sort of england we want, and can we also ditch the British legacy of empire, and redefine our role in the world.
Also, why on Earth should labour lose an eletcion in england? only because in practice Labour doesn't inspire and turn out the working class vote.
Look how Brown's economic policy of an overvalued pound, and growth led by private debt has strengthened the financial sector and favoured the South east, rather than encouraging real jobs in manufacturing and distribution spread right round the country.
In the 1970s the labour left (and i am thinking of people like Stuart holland here,) advoctaed an alternative economic policy, but today the Labour left are incredibly quiet about Brown's economic policies, (except for details like PFI and private equity)
Post a Comment