Will you vote for independence?

[danny la rouge]

Looks like he's refuting the argument that women can't get to the top in Scottish politics.

Next week: there's no racism in American politics.

 

[weepiper]

SNP win Oban by-election with over 40% of the vote. Turnout a couple of hundred up from last by-election (which was only in July). Tory and Labour share down about 2% and 3% respectively.

http://www.scottishelections.org.uk/scotland/lby/obannorthlorn3.php

 

[teuchter]

43% turnout is not very impressive; down from 2012 election. Is this the newly politically engaged population we've been hearing about, packing out meeting halls and joining parties with a vigour never seen before?

 

[danny la rouge]

43% turnout is not very impressive; down from 2012 election. Is this the newly politically engaged population we've been hearing about, packing out meeting halls and joining parties with a vigour never seen before?

You appear to be confusing engagement with electoral turnout.

 

[teuchter]

The high turnout for the referendum was widely touted as an indication of engagement so why is this so different?

And shortly after the vote, there was much excitement about the numbers of people joining various parties (parties who seek influence via the electoral process) and filling up their meetings. Again, remarked upon here as an indication of increased engagement post-referendum.

I've been watching my own barometer of engagement - Facebook - with interest for the past few months. certainly in the lead-up to the referendum i noticed a marked increase in the number of people - people who'd not previously shown a particular interest in politics - talking about politics (or at least the referendum). Some of them just reposting stuff, some of them writing surprisingly lengthy and thoughtful essays.

But that's pretty much all disappeared now. Back to photos of dinner etc.

I can see why people got involved with the referendum, especially with the yes side. An opportunity to get on side with a slightly nonspecific Hope! Change! Future! New! Positive! message.

Maybe that was easy compared to "real" politics? ie how the much anticipated change is actually brought into reality in either a yes or no scenario?

One thing I watched on fb is someone having a bit of a strop about the fact that people were questioning the wisdom of the name of the "45" thing. He felt it was just a distraction from the positivity of the movement. But to me it looked like the reality of getting into actual politics with all the complexity, factionalism, uncertainty and questions of compromise vs ideology that is the daily grind of somewhere like urban75. It's not easy; it's complicated and difficult and requires effort and time, and confrontation, and possibly ends up going nowhere anyway.

These are the reasons, I think, that most people don't really engage very deeply with politics. Especially if their lives are essentially fairly comfortable.

So it would be a big deal if people did start to engage more. I don't think the referendum really counted because as i say i think it was kind of "easy" politics. All you have to do is put an x next to yes. Obviously it sparked a great deal of discussion and thought and of course it seemed like perhaps it would have an effect post-referendum. But I'm a bit sceptical that things have really changed much.

If this newly widespread engagement really exists, what does it or will it look like? Is it unreasonable to suggest that electoral turnout would be one place to look for for evidence?

So a billion people joined the green party in an hour. But what are they planning to do? Doesn't it involved putting up candidates and going out and voting for them?

I will be a bit disappointed if the answer involves nothing more than vague statements about local level self-organisation blah blah. If that's where the significant action and potential is, then why get excited about replacing a Westminster government with an Edinburgh one.

 

[Sue]

Johann Lamont resigns with immediate effect.

'BBC Scotland understands that Ms Lamont has been unhappy for some time about the direction of party strategy.

In particular, she has wanted more autonomy for the party in Scotland and significant new powers for the Scottish parliament. She felt both of those objectives were being thwarted.

It is also understood that Ms Lamont was unhappy that a senior official of the Scottish party was to be removed from office without her being consulted.

Speaking to the Daily Record newspaper, Ms Lamont accused some Scottish Labour MPs at Westminster of being too concerned about their own interests and failing to realise that the "focus of Scottish politics is now Holyrood, not Westminster."'

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29765415

 

[DexterTCN]

She took the huff because England calls the shots?

 

[pogofish]

Its funny how some of the points she lists in her resignation are also matters that nationalists have held against Scottish Labour for many years now.

 

[DotCommunist]

I see salmond is calling for Gordon Brown to take the helm of Slab. Really?

 

[Celyn]

duplicate deleted

 

[Celyn]

Its funny how some of the points she lists in her resignation are also matters that nationalists have held against Scottish Labour for many years now.

Indeed! Branch office run from London. Johann not to talk about bedroom tax till Miliband allows her to ...

I'm not sure many people really believed she was leader anyway. Well perhaps she believed it. For a while.

I'm feeling a bit sorry for her, but I'm sure that will pass.

 

[Celyn]

I see salmond is calling for Gordon Brown to take the helm of Slab. Really?

i suppose if Gordon Brown went to Holyrood, he might just manage to turn up for work more often. He attends the House of Commons only slightly more frequently than Halley's comet.

 

[danny la rouge]

I will be a bit disappointed if the answer involves nothing more than vague statements about local level self-organisation blah blah. If that's where the significant action and potential is, then why get excited about replacing a Westminster government with an Edinburgh one.

Then you'll be disappointed, because the change I hope for in society is precisely community self-activity (both leading to and involving what is called, in the horrible jargon, "self-valorization") [Here is not the place to discuss why such valuable concepts need to be expressed in such exclusionary language].

I'm afraid I don't think that "engagement" either is or ought to lead to better turn-out at local government elections. In fact, local government in Scotland is far too big, distant, inaccessible, unresponsive, disconnected, officious, and Byzantine. The average population of a council in Scotland (we have remember now single tier unitary councils) is 163,000. People feel far more disengaged from local government than they do from Holyrood, for example. (Since you are interested in turnout, compare the turnout at the last council elections - 38% - with the turnout at the last Holyrood elections - 50.4% in 2011). Indeed one reason for wanting independence was to be able to reorganise local government.

The engagement I was interested in was in the run up to the referendum, rather than the turn out on the day (although that in itself was interesting). Engagement is to be found in communities discussing, doing, meeting, working together. For me, electoralism relinquishes all of that to someone else.

 

[teuchter]

So what you really meant was that I was confusing turnout with your particular preferred definition of engagement. (Rather than the kind of engagement illustrated by the recent massive increase of membership of various parliamentary political parties mentioned upthread.)

I'm interested to know how the increased engagement of the kind you mention will manifest though...what sort of thing will we see happening or changing (beyond people having meetings)?

(Or maybe I am wrongly assuming that you think things have changed significantly)

 

[danny la rouge]

So what you really meant was that I was confusing turnout with your particular preferred definition of engagement. (Rather than the kind of engagement illustrated by the recent massive increase of membership of various parliamentary political parties mentioned upthread.)

I'm interested to know how the increased engagement of the kind you mention will manifest though...what sort of thing will we see happening or changing (beyond people having meetings)?

(Or maybe I am wrongly assuming that you think things have changed significantly)

No, I meant that engagement and turnout at (local government) elections are not synonyms. You can argue that the latter may be a result of the former, but they are neither the same thing, nor is the latter necessary in order for us to be able to say that the former exists (which is what you appeared to be attempting to infer).

As it happens, I am worried now (as I was before the referendum - and said so) that the real engagement that still exists will be squandered and/or misdirected, resulting in disillusionment causing a retreat into disengagement again. I am worried that people may be placing too much faith in electoralism. Joining political parties seems to me to be a worrying trend. Whereas signing up for the RIC conference or the WfI meetings is not worrying (indeed I'd say it is encouraging, on current evidence), it may become worrying if the outcome is a trend to supporting parties.

 

[teuchter]

But what kind of thing do you want/hope to see happening? What real-world actions or changes, beyond people attending meetings and conferences? Can you give me an example of a significant change that could come about without the electoral system being involved?

 

[danny la rouge]

Can you give me an example of a significant change that could come about without the electoral system being involved?

"Without the electoral system being involved" is different from "using elections are the prime or only type of permitted agency". However, examples which have actually happened through community self-activity include the establishment of the welfare state in Britain (which wasn't magicked into being by electing Labour, but came about through decades of working class activity); the repeal of the Poll Tax; the establishment of co-ops; self-help organisations; LETS schemes; workers' councils; the Spanish revolutionary communities; and so on and so on. Real, practical organisation that doesn't rely on hoping a political party will carry out the change for you.

 

[Sue]

So, seems these Scottish Labour types cqnnot rule themselves out fast enough. Wonder who's going to be left with the buck when the music stops...

 

[weepiper]

So, seems these Scottish Labour types cqnnot rule themselves out fast enough. Wonder who's going to be left with the buck when the music stops...

It's going to be Murphy.

 

[Sue]

It's going to be Murphy.

I wonder if it'll be willingly or not. Obviously he's incredibly ambitious but is he stupid enough to go for it or will he be strongarmed into it because no one else is up for it? Or will he reckon in that case he'll have them over a barrell in the future..?

 

[danny la rouge]

It's going to be Murphy.

He'll end up with egg on his face.

 

[geminisnake]

It's going to be Murphy.

Nah, his sock puppet Boyack has thrown her hat into the ring apparently.

 

[Sue]

Saw that. Can't say I'd ever heard of her before.

 

[geminisnake]

Neither has anyone else I know and most of my pals are fairly politically aware.

 

[danny la rouge]

Neither has anyone else I know and most of my pals are fairly politically aware.

I had. She was a minister in the various Labour administrations at Holyrood. Most famously, Transport. She's a Blairite.

I'd never heard of the other candidate, though. Neil Findlay.

I see Crateman has finally entered the race: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29826513

 

[The Boy]

Boyack I knew, though she was an Embra MSP. Findlay is a new one on me, but West Lothian cooncillor and MSP since 2011 so probably not surprising really. Odd one to throw his hat in the ring tbh.

Murphy takes it, I guess?

 

[Sue]

He wants to "unite the country and the Labour Party". Which is nice.

Eta 'Crateman' that is.

 

[Sue]

Crateman .

 

[treelover]

Murphy is a creep, as NUS President he greased the way for student loans, he voted for the war in Iraq, tuition fees, etc, however, he is very polished and a smart media player.

Btw, I read that Findlay has said "Labour must be left wing to win"

 

[gosub]

http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides...nnihilated-if-general-election-held-tomorrow/