Image
I couldn't believe my ears recently when I learned that George Galloway, long-standing thorn in the side of the British establishment... is a firebrand supporter of Scotland remaining in the United Kingdom that is ruled with an iron fist by said establishment! Here's a synopsis of his arguments against Scottish independence, from a recent 'speech' (more like an abrasive and illogical rant) titled 'Just Say Naw', apparently one of many as he toured Scotland to campaign against independence from the UK Crown.

I confess to not having been able to listen to it all - it was really difficult for me to see him fall so low after admiring his defence of working class interests for so long. Scots aren't merely voting 'Yes' for a change of passport, as he flippantly suggests; they're doing so because there is no way for them to continue the 'class war' - as he puts it - within the status quo.

While it's true that "fundamental class points" remain pertinent for Scots whichever state they live under, how those "class points" are addressed is another matter entirely. Scots have woken up to realize that said interests cannot be addressed by a government down in London. Of COURSE Scottish oligarchs envision 'the natural order of things' continuing more or less undisturbed. But surely reducing the number of oligarchs with access to Scotland's resources has at least the potential to improve things for Scots? At the very least, a smaller centralized state run by and for the Scots oligarchs he names in his talk is less likely to get away with as many war crimes, and as much corruption. than a larger centralized state run by and for many more oligarchs in London.

Galloway believes that British working class solidarity is the social cohesion which still unites the UK. But this is obviously long dead, destroyed by Thatcherism and Blairism. He of all people knows that. Except for that brief post-WW2 spell when UK elites treated people a bit more decently than usual (while not changing their attitude one single bit towards 'commoners' abroad, mind you), the UK has been a festering, open sore on this planet for far too long, pillaging and plundering under the banners of 'humanitarian intervention', 'Right 2 Protect', 'promoting freedom and democracy', 'liberating countries' and other 'noble causes'.

Why try to keep it alive? Let it go, for goodness sake! English researcher and author Mark Curtis says that the British regime - in the name of making the world safe for Western economic interests - is conservatively estimated to have directly or indirectly killed between 7.5 and 11.5 million people around the world from WW2 to 2004 [Source: Unpeople: Britain's Secret Human Rights Abuses]. Who would want to continue associating with that barbaric record??
Image

In truth, the British Empire stood for World Wars, wreaking destruction, and enslaving millions to debt servitude.
As regards Scots being responsible for a Tory government ruling England post-independence, this is the single most absurd thing I've ever heard Galloway say. Are Scots meant to remain under London's thumb in order to function as England's conscience?! Get real!

Galloway told his audience in Glasgow: "If it hadn't been for the Scottish votes four weeks ago in the Westminster parliament, we'd be in a war NOW with Iran, Syria, China and Russia!" This is pure scaremongering of the working class for whom Galloway claims to speak, and it's precisely the scaremongering that London oligarchs - via the British media - are using regarding Scottish independence, the "ISIS threat", "evil Russia", and "nuclear Iran". In fact, Galloway is doing their work for them! Where did it all go wrong George?!

The fundamental point of Scotland seceding from the UK is that Scots are trying to distance themselves from pathological warmongering maniacs in London. But Galloway insists that if they just stay, then the maniacs will be a little less maniacal. Maybe. But what kind of reason is that for Scots to maintain association with wars of aggression, subverting genuine democratic expression in foreign countries, and forcing unfair terms of trade on other nations?

I say the opposite. The sooner the UK, as such, collapses, the sooner people both in the UK, and around the world, will suffer less because one of the Anglo-Zio-American Empire's key focal points for infecting the planet with war, greed and corruption will have been neutralized, or at least significantly hampered in its ability to serve as 'Air Strip One' for US interests.

In response to sensible people telling Galloway, "At least if we're independent, Scotland wouldn't be in the war", Galloway went into a fit, saying "Oh, that's alright for you to say from the safety of Scotland, but what about all those bombed people in Iraq, Syria and elsewhere?" As if Scotland's involvement or otherwise would stop the mighty US-run empire from bombing whoever they damn well please!! Get real, George! In fact, it is by voting for secession that they are doing what they can to help victims of UK foreign policy abroad - they would be obeying the First Law: Do no harm! By choosing to no longer participate in bombing 'uncivilized' people abroad, Scots will have contributed towards helping the alleviation of suffering in Iraq, Libya, Palestine, Syria and elsewhere.

Do I really have to spell this out to the Right Honourable George Galloway!?

Saying that Scottish independence would condemn England to perpetual Tory rule is pure nonsense for another fundamental reason. Where has Galloway BEEN for the last 15 years? Labour ruled from 1997 and was EXACTLY the same as the its predecessor and the current Conservative government! Voting one way or another in England - given its perennial pathocratic conditions - doesn't change anything!

Maybe, just maybe, the horrifying realization of perpetual Tory-Labor rule can stir the English 'working class' to finally go, "Er, hang on, we live in an archaic anti-democratic state... maybe it's time for republicanism or secession from Londonistan?" Or maybe we should just kick every last one of them out of office?! Then again, maybe the average Englisher enjoys their lot? Whatever the case, it's THEIR own democratic choice, not the responsibility of the Scottish people and certainly not a reason for Scots to remain within the corrupt and blood-stained union.

Image

A still image from an unbelievably patronizing UK government ‘Better-Together’ campaign TV ad: it features a ‘Scottish housewife’ mulling over the issues related to independence, finding it all rather confusing, then electing to vote No to secession.
That Galloway used the 'Ibrox incident' IN DEFENCE OF Scotland staying in the Union is also bonkers. Members of the UK armed forces joining up with UNIONIST thugs in Glasgow to intimidate Scots of Irish Catholic descent would be a thing of the past with Scottish independence. With no Union, there would be no 'UK armed forces', no thugs coming up from England to participate in fascist parades, and the overall Unionist cause thereby WEAKENS, not strengthens! It becomes LESS of a threat to social cohesion within Scotland, not more, as Galloway bizarrely tries to demonstrate.

Just yesterday Galloway gave a somewhat calmer presentation of his reasons for Scotland remaining within the UK. Speaking with long-time establishment spokesman Andrew Neil of the BBC (oh, the irony!), Galloway presented his central economic argument: if Scotland breaks away, any new Scottish state will have to compete with England by cutting regulation and taxes, thereby attracting foreign investment and stimulating new economic activity at home.

Ok, that's what all countries do, so what's the problem?

This, says Galloway, will spark a "race to the bottom" that leaves the working class in both Scotland, England and Wales even worse off than they currently are. How does he know this will happen? Because it happens every time a new country is born? No, he 'knows' this will happen because the Book of Marxism says so, clearly stating that he "prophecy" this eventuality! I don't think I need to comment further on the religious adherence to socialist dogma.

There is absolutely no reason to fear that this possible eventuality that Galloway predicts is a dead certainty. Economics is not a fixed science, as much as the hardcore neoliberal ideologues running Western institutes on the study of economy would like everyone to think. Decisions relating to economic policy taken by governments in real world settings are largely informed by political positions they wish to defend or advance.

The UK government's political decisions to bail out the banks, to institute 'austerity' (aka 'poverty') for everyone else, to wage financial war on Iceland, to subvert and pillage developing resource-rich countries around the world... these are not 'forced upon it' by hidden laws of economics: these stem from the dominant liberal doctrines upon which the UK was founded, and upon which the US was founded, and which keeps their jointly-created Western empire together and functioning 'as if of one [psychopathic] mind'.

By striking out for independence, Scotland is at least giving itself a chance to part ways with this monstrosity, and that can only be commended and supported by decent people yearning for positive change everywhere. George Galloway has this idée fixe, where capitalism = bad and socialism = good, and it blurs his line of vision between seeing how the world actually works and how he believes it ought to work.

Image
How striking it is that Galloway's unwarranted fears are given a platform by the BBC, while working class Scots demonstrate in their thousands outside the offices of this very institution because they correctly perceive that their views are not being aired by the British establishment media.

Resorting to the same marriage-divorce analogy London Prime Minister David Cameron has trotted out for his emotionally bland appeals to Scottish people to remain under London's control (which Russell Brand hilariously trashed here), Galloway just glosses over everything evil about the UK with the promise that "things will get better". Worse than Cameron's vacuous appeals to emotion by referencing 'family break-ups', 'painful divorce', and 'hurt children', Galloway went one further by thinking it appropriate to compare his own real divorce with Scots' independence.

I'm not going to accuse Galloway of 'selling out' here. I've no doubt that he is sure of his beliefs, but that's the problem, the lack of doubt in his beliefs! Despite living through both the successes and failures of British socialism, he simply cannot countenance that, in the end, its tenets may be wrong, or at least wrong for this situation in this context.

The baseless self-assurance in his views of the world and his predictions as to how events will unfold is also evidenced by his certainty that Labour leader Ed Miliband will become the next British prime minster in 2015. Andrew Neil thankfully picked up on Galloway's ludicrous suggestion: did Galloway seriously expect Scottish working class people to vote 'No' based on a "feeling" George had that Labour would win the next election??

Here we again see the blindness (or madness?) of George. From 1997 to 2010, the Scottish 'working class' HAD a Labour government in London. The only reason today's referendum was even successfully tabled in the first place is because the Scottish working class has been so utterly betrayed by Labour in London. There is no representation of their interests in Westminster, Whitehall and the Foreign Office, to say nothing of those sickos at MI5, MI6 and GCHQ.

This is why they want out!

Galloway then says the only way for Scotland to get rid of London's nuclear weapons parked way up in Scotland, as well as London's foreign military entanglements, is by having a British government. Again, this has been repeatedly attempted by Scots for decades. The whole point of this referendum is that London doesn't listen! Most importantly, Scottish nationalist leader Alex Salmond has made the moral case against nuclear weapons, saying "possession of nuclear weapons is against basic decency."

"The world is interdependent," says Galloway. Yes indeed, so why should Scotland maintain its dependency on London? Many choices of alliances open up for a free(er) and more independent Scotland. "The world is riven with hatred, so this is the worst possible time to be opting out of the world," says Galloway. Scotland seceding from London is not "opting out of the world": such silly declarations have no basis in reality, where, as Galloway thankfully understands, the world is interdependent and isolationism thereby isn't an option for anyone. In any event, in the immediate future, little would change in Scotland and England's relationship: they would maintain close cultural and economic ties.

Image

Scots descended on London in their tens of thousands to protest the Iraq War, but it did nothing to prevent Galloway’s beloved Labour Party from involving Scots in the slaughter of up to 2 million Iraqis on behalf of the Western Empire.
Other reasons Galloway gives for voting against independence are that "the financial services industry in Scotland will be gravely damaged." Wait a minute! Since when does he care for financiers?! Sensible economists have rubbished this 'parade of horribles' concerning negative economic consequences for an independent Scotland. "Ministry of Defence jobs in Scotland will be lost," warns Galloway. Erm, would those be jobs in the very armed services Galloway has spent a lifetime criticising for their imperial adventures abroad? At best, this appeal to the loss of jobs is facetious; at worst, it's treacherous to the primary anti-war causes he has traditionally espoused. Yes, there'll no longer be UK armed forces in Scotland. Instead, there'll be a small Scottish military. More importantly, Scots will be taking moral responsibility for the actions of its own armed forces.

"Dicing with death... playing with fire... jumping off a roof... gambling all at a Las Vegas casino": this is the language of someone who is frightened by change because he innately believes that change is bad. It's also identical to the scaremongering of the Tory government, who could not have asked for a better representative for their 'Better-Together' campaign.

Galloway lives in the past and is unable to read the winds of change because he still believes that the utterly subverted and corrupted Labour party - in both Scotland and England - can be 'saved' from doing what is best for the City of London, the Israel Lobby, and the NeoCons in Washington. This is a pipe-dream, as anyone who understands ponerogenic unions infected by psychopaths and other pathological factors will know. These times we live in - where the disparity of wealth between the masses and elites widens exponentially, where the elites' warmongering ways spiral out of control in their desperate push back against ordinary people clamoring for basic justice - call for new institutions, new ideas, and new leaders. In the end, of course, without proper immunization via knowledge of psychopathy and the ponerization of organizations and societies, these too will come full circle and require drastic intervention, but for now Scottish independence and the demise of the UK's oligarch-friendly institutions is a healthy point of departure.

Galloway's take home message to Scots is: 'better the devil you know'. This is the classic calling card of oligarchs deeply interested in maintaining the status quo, so Galloway is by no means alone on this: the US government supports him, Killary Clinton supports him, the Tories support him, the Orange Order supports him, the Royal Bank of Scotland supports him, and Big Oil supports him.

Galloway is on the wrong side of history. He gets things right from time to time, but on this issue he is way out in left-field. For all these reasons, and more, Scotland's chance for independence is a glorious opportunity for Scots to take matters into their own hands, and - where this issue interests humanity at large - presenting a significant roadblock for the British establishment's historic (and ever-present), perfidious role on the world stage.

Image