If I vote yes, is it a vote for Alex Salmond?

This is a question and an opinion trend that I’ve seen sweep across Twitter and other social media, and it really rips ma knittin’ – Let me be absolutely clear here, by voting yes for Scottish independence, you are not voting for or endorsing Alex Salmond and the SNP. You are voting for and endorsing your country’s right to self determination; and one beautiful prospect about an independent Scotland is that you will have the chance to vote for your preferred Scottish party at our very own general election, only a few short weeks after Scotland declares independence on March 24th 2016.

 

Many times in recent months I’ve seen and heard people state “I really hate Alex Salmond, so I’m voting no” – What I completely fail to understand, is the logic behind that argument. By their very own reasoning, voting no due to a dislike of Salmond, they are then pledging to support a Westminster government they in all likelihood won’t have voted for (if recent opinion polls which show the Conservatives gaining points are correct), and probably don’t even like very much either…. Nope, I still don’t get it, I am utterly baffled.

 

Last night George Galloway appeared on BBC2’s Newsnight Scotland to debate with Jim Sillars on Scotland’s independence, and he seemed thoroughly intent on issuing his severe warning to voters in the referendum that if they voted yes then Alex Salmond will be their Prime Minister. What George completely failed to comment on, even once, was the fact that from the day Scotland declares its independence until Scotland democratically votes for its Prime Minister in the Scottish general election, there is only a lapse of 44 days. That’s it, 44 days of Alex Salmond being in sole charge of Scotland before the people of Scotland decide his political fate. Considering the vast majority of Scots didn’t vote for David Cameron in the UK 2010 general election, and yet we’ve had to suffer 1169 days thus far of his policies and government, what’s 44 days in comparison if it means an end to Westminster rule over our country once and for all?!

 

Independence isn’t about political party affiliation with the SNP, if that was the case there wouldn’t be a growing number of right wing conservative voters intending to vote yes at the referendum. If it was all about Salmond, there wouldn’t be the Labour For Indy group. We wouldn’t have socialist Tommy Sheridan traipsing up and down the country putting across the case for independence (in his own colourful and unique way). The fight for independence transcends political allegiance. Members and voters from all the main parties have put aside their political differences to unite in the strong belief that Scotland will be a more equal, fair, just, and prosperous country with a yes vote.

 

A vote for independence isn’t a vote for Alex Salmond, it’s a vote for Scotland.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “If I vote yes, is it a vote for Alex Salmond?

  1. I’ve 2 issues with this ‘vote for independence isn’t a vote for Salmond’ idea.

    Firstly, it’s Salmond/SNP who would be negotiating the terms of independence and the form of the national institutions, between September 2014 and May 2016. This is going to be the starting point for any future government and will have a big effect in defining the country. For example, he still wants a defence force that can contribute to international coalitions. He’s open about that. If a different party won the 2016 election they are then bound by any deals he makes in that regard and are hugely unlikely to change it quickly. If people think the currency issue doesn’t matter they should have a look at how fucked up Greece or Spain have been since they got that wrong. Again, a change of government is not going to immediately solve that, it would probably take a number of parliamentary terms.

    Secondly, there are a lack of other credible candidates to Salmond to win a 2016 election. All other major parties would be standing on the platform of saying “vote for us to run a country we didn’t think should exist last year”. That’s unlikely to appeal to many voters. Most people are also of the opinion that Sheridan, the Greens etc wouldn’t be ready to form a government. They come close to winning the trust of the majority now, even with the limited powers of the current Scottish Parliament. Does Sheridan even have a party these days?

    Maybe in principle a vote for independence isn’t the same thing as a vote for Salmond but it’s naïve to think he wouldn’t have a major influence over what happens next.

    Like

    • Hi PO, huge apologies I only noticed there was a comment just now. I don’t know why comments await moderation, I was sure I had clicked to allow open comments.

      I’m not saying he wouldn’t have major influence over the next steps, obviously he will have, seeing as it will be him who negotiates the terms of independence as you pointed out. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone say the issues surrounding currency don’t matter, of course they do – but it has been pointed out that Scotland has several workable options (or plans B,C,D etc) as explained by the Fiscal commission’s report. The two most popular options I’ve witnessed being discussed online and at debates are the currency union, and our own currency.

      The point you make about any future elected governments being bound by any deals Salmond makes in the negotiating of independence… Well isn’t that true of any future elected government anywhere in the world? Is that really a deal breaker when it comes to deciding which way to vote? It isn’t for me, personally.

      I agree mostly with what you say regarding the other main parties having to fight for votes in a country they had no faith in pre-independence, but I do hope that we might see an uprising of new political parties within an independent Scotland, and I have a sneaking feeling that more than a few opposition members might actually begin to express their unity with the yes movement before September.

      Like

  2. Well I would have thought that considering the history of Scotland over the past couple of centuries people would have realised that all the SNP have done is won the right for the “People of Scotland” to actually have a say in whether they agreed with decisions taken way back 307 years ago that they were not allowed to either comment or definitely vote on.
    We have fought, and by we I do not mean the Scottish National Party. to have Home Rule ever since the 1707 treaty was still wet. The Scottish National Party was born out of that frustration. WE were put off just before the first World War, how nice of Mr Cameron to reminds us of a war where the Scots lost more people as a percentage of the population than anywhere else. We tried again as a Nation in the 50’s. 2 million of our people signed the claim of right the first time round and again ignored.
    Paranoid Obsession ignores the fact that he.she may be perfectly happy with the position but the fact is Labour who were the major players in Scotland one whose other reason for existence the first being the end of poverty for the working man was as you said Home Rule, how well has that worked I asked.
    I will make no bones about it, I am a member of the SNP, this party has one other reason for it’s popularity in that it has over the past seven years done what it can to look after the people of Scotland and that is shown by it’s popularity today by everyone but the sorry state of Labour, who should admit they have done nothing over the Century they have held power.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s