Salmond denies sexual misconduct allegations

[jeremyp]

Doesn't really matter. You are indulging in the ad hominem fallacy

No, he was just explaining to you why he hasn't read the article or registered with the Times. He hasn't said why he thinks the article is wrong - or even if he thinks the article is wrong. How could he if he hasn't read it?

[Owlswing]

No, he was just explaining to you why he hasn't read the article or registered with the Times.

True.

He hasn't said why he thinks the article is wrong - or even if he thinks the article is wrong. How could he if he hasn't read it?

Can't disagree with that.

[Nearly Sane]

True.

Can't disagree with that.

You and jeremyp are correct here. Your reasons for disliking the Times are like mine for disliking the Sun. So My apologies and best wishes.

[Owlswing]

You and jeremyp are correct here. Your reasons for disliking the Times are like mine for disliking the Sun. So My apologies and best wishes.

You're welcome, but I would still appreciate a description of what ad hominem is, from you I might get an explanation in words that I understand!

[jeremyp]

You're welcome, but I would still appreciate a description of what ad hominem is, from you I might get an explanation in words that I understand!

It’s when you attack the person making the argument instead of the argument itself.

[Nearly Sane]

It’s when you attack the person making the argument instead of the argument itself.

Person or institution.

[Owlswing]

It’s when you attack the person making the argument instead of the argument itself.

Thank you one!

[Owlswing]

 Person or institution.

Thank you two!

[Nearly Sane]

The Return of Alec


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-53805254

[Nearly Sane]

And the split around this and other issues continues


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/mp-demands-probe-nicola-sturgeons-22696185.amp?__twitter_impression=true

[Nearly Sane]

And WoS's take

https://wingsoverscotland.com/cracks-in-the-fog/#more-118449

[Nearly Sane]

And a follow up from Iain Lawson


https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2020/09/18/difficult-not-to-be-worried/amp/

[Owlswing]

 

NS

Please forgive my (to you) well-known ignorance, but to me, it seems that a juvenile version of American political manoeuvring is alive and (relatively) well in Scotland.

[Nearly Sane]

NS

Please forgive my (to you) well-known ignorance, but to me, it seems that a juvenile version of American political manoeuvring is alive and (relatively) well in Scotland.

All such politics is the same, and all such politics is unique.


There is, in many ways, no reason why you should be closely foliowing or concerned with the internecine battles of the SNP. Their success, as is so often the case, brings about division, though the irony of politics is that failure redoubles division.


There is a longstanding division between gradualists and nowists in the SNP which is being played out in a number of ways. The Salmond rape case is one. The Gender Recognition Act reform another. The various constituency battles for who is nominated as an MSP candidate in next year's Holyrood election another. It's become a battle of Salmondites vs Sturgeonites. Each difference magnified by the overall split. In a sense this is Big Endians vs Little Endians - a tragedy of small differences.

 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lilliput_and_Blefuscu

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism_of_small_differences


The chance for Scottish independence has never been closer but the very success of the SNP puts that in jeopardy. It is, in the Greek mythological sense, tantalising.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantalus

To be fair, splits are always a thing in parties even without success. Salmond was, after all, thrown out of the party over 30 years ago and that was when they were not much more than a fringe grouping. No matter the size or success, there will always be the tendency to be The Judean People's Front, and The People's Front of Judea etc etc.

[Owlswing]

  Many thanks, NS

[Nearly Sane]

Certainly the inquiry has its issues


https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/inside-alex-salmond-inquiry-it-has-been-wading-through-treacle-2977541

[Nearly Sane]

And the split between Sturgeonites and Salmondites continues to deepen


https://www.thenational.scot/news/18742981.kenny-macaskill-calls-snp-suspend-peter-murrell/

[Nearly Sane]

More comment on the split

https://archive.is/s24dj

[Nearly Sane]

This is not a good look


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54439758

[jeremyp]

This is not a good look


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54439758

It's bound to happen. The SNP was formed as a single issue party and therefore attracted all sorts of people from across the political spectrum whose only common interest was Scottish independence. There's absolutely no reason at all why they should agree on anything else. This was not important back in the 70's and 80's but now they have partially achieved their aim and are the party in power in Scotland, they have to have policies on lots of things, not just who runs Scotland.

I think splits are inevitable.

[ProfessorDavey]

It's bound to happen. The SNP was formed as a single issue party and therefore attracted all sorts of people from across the political spectrum whose only common interest was Scottish independence. There's absolutely no reason at all why they should agree on anything else. This was not important back in the 70's and 80's but now they have partially achieved their aim and are the party in power in Scotland, they have to have policies on lots of things, not just who runs Scotland.

I think splits are inevitable.

I agree that the SNP is a broad church in terms of policy wider than independence, and were that main goal to be achieved then splits would be inevitable into factions based on more traditional political ideologies.

However I don't think that's what we are seeing here - I don't think Sturgeon and Salmond are politically far apart, more Brown and Blair than Thatcher and Kinnock. What we are seeing here, played out in the media, is the equivalent of a major family spat - parent/child or siblings who once got on famously and have now fallen out massively. There is also an element of top-dog and resentments. Salmond was top dog for so long, groomed Sturgeon as his successor then hated it when he was no longer in charge, even more so when Sturgeon excercised some authority over him. Sturgeon on the other hand probably massively resents that Salmond simply won't drift off into the background and cannot stop interfering, either directly or via his not inconsiderable band of loyal supporters.

As far as I'm aware none of this is about major policy differences.

[Nearly Sane]

I agree that the SNP is a broad church in terms of policy wider than independence, and were that main goal to be achieved then splits would be inevitable into factions based on more traditional political ideologies.

However I don't think that's what we are seeing here - I don't think Sturgeon and Salmond are politically far apart, more Brown and Blair than Thatcher and Kinnock. What we are seeing here, played out in the media, is the equivalent of a major family spat - parent/child or siblings who once got on famously and have now fallen out massively. There is also an element of top-dog and resentments. Salmond was top dog for so long, groomed Sturgeon as his successor then hated it when he was no longer in charge, even more so when Sturgeon excercised some authority over him. Sturgeon on the other hand probably massively resents that Salmond simply won't drift off into the background and cannot stop interfering, either directly or via his not inconsiderable band of loyal supporters.

As far as I'm aware none of this is about major policy differences.

To an extent I agree but there are, as I have covered previously, 2 main splits in policy. The more important is in terms of how to pursue independence with the Salmondites looking for a much more aggressive approach versus the gradualist Sturgeonites. Given it's a party  based around independence this is fundamental.

The other area is as regards the reform of the Gender Recognition Act with the Salmondites being much more likely to oppose the reforms.

[jeremyp]

I agree that the SNP is a broad church in terms of policy wider than independence, and were that main goal to be achieved then splits would be inevitable into factions based on more traditional political ideologies.

However I don't think that's what we are seeing here - I don't think Sturgeon and Salmond are politically far apart, more Brown and Blair than Thatcher and Kinnock. What we are seeing here, played out in the media, is the equivalent of a major family spat - parent/child or siblings who once got on famously and have now fallen out massively. There is also an element of top-dog and resentments. Salmond was top dog for so long, groomed Sturgeon as his successor then hated it when he was no longer in charge, even more so when Sturgeon excercised some authority over him. Sturgeon on the other hand probably massively resents that Salmond simply won't drift off into the background and cannot stop interfering, either directly or via his not inconsiderable band of loyal supporters.

As far as I'm aware none of this is about major policy differences.

I'm sorry. I quoted the wrong post from NS. I was responding to the content of this link

https://archive.is/s24dj

[Nearly Sane]

Tangled webs

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/10/either-nicola-sturgeon-or-geoff-aberdein-is-lying-on-oath-and-proving-which-will-be-easy/?fbclid=IwAR1Dzf7RtllRMAT5dz29Pb9zFQiq-I1-a56PImU6qqj9if0W8T7aNZ0FUeQ

[ProfessorDavey]

To an extent I agree but there are, as I have covered previously, 2 main splits in policy. The more important is in terms of how to pursue independence with the Salmondites looking for a much more aggressive approach versus the gradualist Sturgeonites. Given it's a party  based around independence this is fundamental.

The other area is as regards the reform of the Gender Recognition Act with the Salmondites being much more likely to oppose the reforms.

As I said Brown and Blair, not Thatcher and Kinnock.