Fàilte gu Poblachd na h-Alba

In a shameless display of artificial outrage, Labour’s Ian Murray and the Tories’ Jackson Carlaw have declared that they are angered and appalled by the admission from the SNP’s Humza Yousaf that most people in his party would support getting rid of the monarchy. That’s a bit like expressing shock and horror that people in Edinburgh don’t put vinegar on their chips, or that exemplars of the species Ursus arctos feculate in sylvan sectors of substantial arboreal coverage.

There haven’t been any recent opinion polls on the topic in Scotland, as far as I can ascertain. The last seems to have been the ITV debate in the late 1990s which showed that Scotland was the only part of the UK where there was a majority in favour of a republic. Certainly judging from the spectacular lack of enthusiasm shown in Scotland whenever there’s some royal non-event or other, the SNP’s republican tendencies are pretty mainstream in this country. It would be fantastic if just for once when the Windsors were having some family event that they kept it private and only invited close members of the immediate family. Mind you, then Prince Harry wouldn’t get to go.

Scots are not enthralled by the magic of monarchy to anything like the degree that people in other parts of the UK might be. Announce that there’s to be some major royal event that is going to dominate our TV screens for mind numbing days on end, and the only mass enthusiasm you’ll find in Scotland is for booking a holiday in the Canaries that week so you can avoid it.

We’re a pretty bunting-phobic bunch. For some bizarre reason, Scots are not convinced that the best way to choose a head of state is on the basis of descent from a mediaeval robber baron who claimed to have a magic sword, a circular dining table, and a resident wizard. Most Scots remain of the view that if you want a head of state who understands the struggles of ordinary people it’s better to have one whose mother was on food stamps, rather than having one who had her head on postage stamps. Like thousands of others of my compatriots, I resent the fact that the BBC employs a professional royal sycophant and expects the rest of us to pay his wages so he can witter on inanely about irrelevant crap that no one with an IQ in double figures gives a feculance about and invites us all to be joyful because some inbred moron who has never done a day’s work in his over privileged life has waved at some people who do have to work for a living. And then without a shred of irony or self awareness the BBC cuts to a piece about North Korea and tells us about the uncritical and fawning coverage its leadership gets.

Jackson Carlaw might state in pursey lippit tones that a desire for an elected head of state puts the SNP at variance with most people in Scotland, but he doesn’t actually have a shred of evidence to back up his claim that love of the monarchy extends much beyond the Tory party and neanderthals in sashes and bowler hats. BBC Scotland news reports showing a gaggle of reporters outside Craithie church doesn’t count as mass popular support for the monarchy, and the views of members of the Tory party aren’t exactly representative of mass popular opinion in Scotland. The only people who love royal weddings or births more than the BBC are dictators in Commonwealth countries. It’s a convenient time to repress a few oppostion figures without attracting too much attention.

If anything, such evidence as does exist contradicts Jackson’s claim that Scots are as monarchist as the editors of Royal Walkabout Monarchygasm Magazine. Not even the deeply conservative people in the doucer parts of Edinburgh can be arsed enough to have a party when there’s a royal wedding or a new royal sprog, much to the desperation of BBC Scotland as it fails dismally to find any spontaneous outbursts of public joy to film for its bosses in London. To be fair, there was a wee spurt in sales of gin, but that was on Deeside so probably doesn’t count. If we’re going to be really honest about it, those of us of a Republican persuasion should recognise that giving birth to a royal wean is the only time that any of them have to do any labour. It’s also considerably more difficult and painful than giving birth to a commoner, on account of the silver spoon.

As for Ian in his Union Jack suit, when the Honorable Member for the Morningside Soviet is not trying to score a few political points, and let’s be honest here Labour needs all the help it can get in that department, he knows just like the rest of us do that there’s no great affection for the Windsors in the Labour party either. Labour posing as the great defender of the monarchy is about as convincing as its recent conversion to home rule.

The question of how Scotland chooses its head of state is entirely separate from the question of whether Scotland should become an independent nation or not. That’s why when the SNP announced the last independence referendum they did so on the basis that the monarchy would continue if Scotland voted to become independent and return to its rightful place in the international family of nations. Scots were not being asked to decide how we should choose our head of state, we were being asked who we thought had the right to decide the question. On that occasion we narrowly voted to allow the Westminster parlie the right to continue choosing for us. Next time we won’t make the same mistake.

It is only when Scotland becomes independent that the Scottish people will have the right to decide how we choose our head of state. Then Jackson will find out just how little popular support his fawning obsequience actually enjoys. He might like the idea of living in a backward looking ruritania, but the rest of us want to join the 21st century. We’re already a republic in our imaginations, it’s only a matter of time before the law catches up. Scotland’s future is as an independent republic, and then the Gaelophobic Jackson will be welcomed home by a sign on the border that says Fàilte gu Poblachd na h-Alba.

BUTRT cover front(1)BARKING UP THE RIGHT TREE Barking Up the Right Tree has now been published and is an anthology of my articles for The National newspaper. You can submit an advance order for the book on the Vagabond Voices website at http://vagabondvoices.co.uk/?page_id=1993

Price is just £7.95 for 156 pages of doggy goodness. Order today!

The two volumes of the Collected Yaps are in stock again. See below for order details.

Donate to the Dug This blog relies on your support and donations to keep going – I need to make a living, and have bills to pay. Clicking the donate button will allow you to make a payment directly to my Paypal account. You do not need a Paypal account yourself to make a donation. You can donate as little, or as much, as you want. Many thanks.

Donate Button

Order the Collected Yaps of the Wee Ginger Dug Vols 1 & 2 for only £21.90 for both volumes. A limited number of signed copies is still available, so get your order in now! P&P will be extra, approximately £3 per single volume or £4 for both sent together. If you only want to order one volume, please specify which. Single volumes are available for £10.95 per copy.

To order please send an email with WEE GINGER BOOK ORDER in the subject field to weegingerbook@yahoo.com giving your name, postal address, and email address and which volumes (1, 2 or both) you wish to order. I will contact you with details of how to make payment. Payment can be made by Paypal, or by cheque or bank transfer.

44 comments on “Fàilte gu Poblachd na h-Alba

  1. I’d love Channel 4 to do a series on royal scroungers, detailing how much is spent per royal persona, including their weekly hours at work and what they do exactly. We could also invade their privacy to see what they spend on food & drink, refurbishing their houses, travel etc. That’s how the plebs are treated, so why not the highest paid parasites? Lets see their tax returns too and monies in tax havens?

    Let’s out them and shame them, Channel 4. We could then compare the average benefit cheat costs per year with a royal benefits recipient’s annual bill.

  2. John says:

    Mmm … To be honest I’m not that bothered one way or another. The independence issue is waaay more important, I can’t get excited about the type of figurehead of state we then have.

    Just as a thought though, what would the United Kingdom be called if it became a republic?

  3. Marsel says:

    Brilliant. As usual.

  4. Macart says:

    Another expense folk can’t afford, near as I can see. If people are paying for a head of state, I’d rather it was one we elected for the post.

  5. […] Wee Ginger Dug Fàilte gu Poblachd na h-Alba […]

  6. BampotsUtd.wordpress.com says:

    Reblogged this on Bampots Utd.

  7. Steve Wood. says:

    The royals would be welcome to put themselves up for election for an independent Scotland’s head of state. If they won then fair enough but not my choice.

    • benmadigan says:

      would that be before or after the monarchy vs republic referendum? Which comes after indy2.
      And if Monarchy won, would we get a choice between Charles,Anne, Andrew, William and Harry et al right down to the last in line?

  8. The Scottish Play says:

    Will the line stretch out to th’ crack of doom? Another yet?

    Ceart – ‘the question of how Scotland chooses its head of state is entirely separate from the question of whether Scotland should become an independent nation or not.’

  9. Panama says:

    There have been more recent polls than the late nineties…this one for The Express in 2008 for example


    • Sandy says:

      Scotland can’t have been thinking too hard that day. ‘Keep Queen HM Elizabeth II as head f state’ doesn’t really work when we never had a Queen Elizabeth I as queen. Maybe everyone was hungover the day of that poll.

      • Panama says:

        She is titled Elizabeth II by convention. The convention being agreed around the time she came to the throne.


        • Brian Fleming says:

          Yes, well that rather begs the question of who decided the convention. I don’t expect Scotland had much input.

        • John says:

          Ok, but I think we can reasonably assume there will be no more Jameses or Alexanders. While we aheady have a William in line and a Henry not far off it.

        • JGedd says:

          A newly-minted ‘convention’ to get round a little problem? How convenient and so typical of the establishment. I am sure there were congratulatory giggles when someone came up with that one. Now just make sure that there are no future heirs called Alexander, Robert, David or James. Easy. Sorted. Completely cynical.

  10. lanark says:

    Before Ian Murray gets all indignant he should ask his own party leader ( Corbyn of course) what he thinks of the Windsors.

    Poblachd na h-Alba.

    • maxi says:

      Plonkers like Murray think Corbyn is a serf like commoner like most of us real people and he has no respect for him.We all need to get rid of him and his kind for the good of the country.
      As for the royals, they named a future king William(how original) who is going to keep the sash singing vacuos morons in a wealth of evil sectatian songs. It sounds if they are thinking about the people with that one????LETS GET RID.

      • Saor Alba says:

        Actually maxi, you hit it right on the head there.
        It explains a lot .

      • I have no doubt at all that naming his first born William, was Charles’ way of getting back at the IRA for Mountbatten. As to the question of monarchy or not, I don’t care. An elected head of state will probably be as much of a buffoon as the inherited version. Think President Boris or up here, President Mundell.

        • JGedd says:

          But they would be head of state within a Scottish constitution which should carefully define their duties and responsibilities and we wouldn’t have to pay for the elected head of state’s many relatives – as we do with the present head of state. We would also have the opportunity of throwing them out of office – unlike the present incumbent and their many relations and hangers-on who are on the civil list.

        • Norma Slimmon says:

          President Mundell? I’m going to throw up! Noooooooooooo!

  11. Panama says:

    Another poll: this time YouGov for The Sunday Times from 2014 – down on page 11.

    The headline numbers are 54% for Queen as Head of State
    31% for an elected Head of State
    15% Don’t knows


    • JGedd says:

      I don’t care how many polls you show us, these polls can be skewed by the methodology eg., the way questions are framed. However, I tend to go by the evidence of the obvious differences between Scotland and England, as expressed on the streets, shown by lack of jolly street parties, bunting etc. On the day of the royal wedding, travelling back home from another part of Scotland, I saw one celebratory banner.

      It is the case, though, that the royalist propaganda of the media has been in overdrive for the past couple of decades. It parallels closely the surfeit of ” Great British ” programming. In my family, though, it is very much counter-productive, driving us into teeth-grinding irritation and determined avoidance of any cloying, forelock-tugging bilge. I wonder how many others are similarly annoyed by it who might otherwise be indifferent?

      I hate the assumptions of these PR men that the public in general will fall prey to all this royal flummery because it brings colour into our drab little lives. Apparently they believe that people are not affronted by the displays of luxury and opulence in times of austerity which shows that they have a very cynical opinion of the public consciousness.

  12. Marconatrix says:

    I watched a bit of the swearing-in ceremony which I found online, mainly just out of curiosity, but it was interesting how quite a few MSPs hedged their bets with statements to the effect that they believed the Scottish people were sovereign, but then went on to ritually grovel in what quite honestly is a most distasteful manner. Needs must, I suppose …

    I wonder if a close examination of the recordings would reveal if any of them had their fingers crossed :


  13. Irene Danks says:

    “Labour posing as the great defender of the monarchy is about as convincing as its recent conversion to home rule”…ouch! Some ointment for that burn!

  14. Black Rab says:

    I’d walk and wave the walk and waving fuckers all the way to the nearest well.

  15. I’m a great fan of the royals. The history, the pageantry. Love it. They are my role models.
    My brother’s got a lovely house just over the border.
    I think I’ll arrange to have him bumped off by a bunch of mercenaries to expand my empire.
    Bow down before your imperial masters.
    Ian Murray; socialist.

  16. David Agnew says:

    I am very much with Thomas Paine when it comes to the monarchy. The idea of a hereditary head of state is the most absurd form of government possible. Of course he was saying this at a time when the monarchy still had some real powers. The monarchy we have is a sham. It’s a cozy fiction of a monarchy. The fiction being that HMG rules in her name. Does it f**k. It rules because it won an election. It does not need a head of state to give it legitimacy, it achieves that through the vote. That old German lady who sits in opulence, is simply there to rubber stamp whatever the real government of this country wants. If the Tories were to open parliament with a plan to make OAPs pick fruit on some rich mans estate to a get a pension – she’ll sign off on it.

    And we pay for this “Grand Duchy of Fenwick” tribute act. If we have to have them, we should be getting more for out money – and dammit I want change!

  17. J Galt says:

    Apart from the Gross Insult to Neanderthals – well said.

    Not a great fan of Republics – look at the USA.

    Why don’t we just declare Scotland to be a “Vacant Kingdom” – with no great rush to fill the vacancy!

    Love the allusions to Harry’s daddy problem – this is something “they” most definitely do not like – totally banned off the UK MSM – but if you read a wee bit o’ German it’s all over their Scandal Mags from time to time.

    I would say there must be a “Super Injunction” if you didnae get flung in the Jail just for mentioning them, so I’m not saying it!

  18. givinggoose says:

    If I wanted a half Herman (that was a mistype but I’m keeping it lol), half Greek next head of state, I’d move to Germany or Greece.

    However in the spirit of being welcoming to immigrants then next King Stavros (Charlie Guru) can stay.

    As for Harry, he actually has an English father so is probably the most ethnically qualified from the whole lot!

  19. Dose of Reality says:

    The point is that the position put forward by Humza is contrary to party policy. That is the glaring inconsistency which allows the faux outrage of the Yoons to gain traction.

    It was a stupid thing to say and folk in the SNP should just man up and admit that Humza got it badly wrong.

    Indeed, his performance on Thursday demonstrated just how much he has to learn. He has the over-confidence of the privately educated schoolboy that he is but lacks intellectual rigour and the ability to distil detail into meaningful contributions.

    Some people are talking about him being appointed to Cabinet this week but that would be some step up from his poster-boy position as a junior minister in a portfolio that should not have a dedicated cabinet position itself (in the first SNP Scot Gov, this whole portfolio was held by a junior minister reporting to the FM).

    Now ‘Culture and External Affairs’ over which the Scot Gov has very little responsibility has a Cab Sec and Junior Minister assigned. Meanwhile Education and Health, which are portfolios an order of magnitude larger and more complex and where the Scot Gov has almost total responsibility, have to get by with a Cab Sec and only two Junior Ministers. That is a very strange balancing of workload.

    It would be best for everyone, Humza included, for him to be sent to the back benches for a little while. Give him time to get to grips with being a constituency MSP (where the increased workload will come as a shock in itself) and to reflect on the skills that are required to succeed in Government.

    • Robert Graham says:

      Agreed putting forward ill prepaired and ineffective politicians ,does no good for either the politician or the SNP as a whole , all it does is provide a stick for all to beat them with , it was obvious to all Humza was out of his depth on this weeks Question Time , the most embarrassing point was when he had to be rescued by Kezia Dugdale of all people during the Named Person Question , probably a really nice guy but as you say short on experience .

  20. Dan Huil says:

    Give the royals, and Murray and Carlaw, a one-way ticket to Yekaterinburg

  21. Tinto Chiel says:

    And another great WGD fusillade rakes the decks of HMS UKOKia….

    One of the many reasons Scots have had little time for the Royals is that they are not our royals: they were dysfunctional half-wits imported solely to cut out the Stuarts from the succession. Then, when there was resistance from the Jacobites, they themselves were called rebels, just as Wallace, a Scot, had been called a traitor to the English crown. But then England waives the rules in these matters.

    I am detecting a ramping up of anti-SG drivel from MSM as they pile in behind Tank Girl in their Last Stand for The Union. Maximum effort will be expended for the next year in order to minimise the Cleansing of the Augean Stables next May.

    Hold on to your tin helmets, guys. Desperate people do desperate things, and it’s going to get very dirty.

    • J Galt says:

      The important thing was they were COMPLIANT imported “dysfunctional half-wits”.

      Even then the money men of “The City of London” were the power in the Land.

  22. hettyforindy says:

    Read, ‘Living of the State, a critical guide to royal finance’ by Jon Temple. 2008, Progress books. Gives some insight into the practices and operations of the royals, it will anyone reading it a tad mad. It’s probably even more secretive now. The royals use masses of our land and occupy our castles in Scotland, they are not going to give that up without a cat fight, a very big cat.

    Can anyone imagine the removal vans with all the swag from the castles, racing down the M1 These people do not like having their power reduced, they like things just the way they are…

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