By closing our parliament Britain will be committing a crime against our democracy and our sovereignty. At that moment its claim to us and its claim to our civil obedience ends. Every law intended to safeguard the British state and dominate Scotland ceases to have effect. At the closure of the Scottish parliament we have every moral and legal right to defend our country and to assert our Claim of Right. No matter how hard it tries, Britain will never defeat us so long as we stay united and work together, bearing every blow it deals us with perfect resolve and unwavering determination...
Effective social and political campaigns, then, must be, by necessity, single-issue campaigns – or as near to single-issue campaigns as they can practicably be. This does not mean, as someone once suggested, that other important political causes are to be “sent to the back of the bus.” No one is saying other issues – like gender equality and the campaign to save the bees – are not important. Naturally, they are important – some crucially so. But the fact remains, that a campaign fighting every campaign is limited by finances, resources, and manpower (or people-power).
Westminster no longer benefits Scotland. Westminster never benefitted Scotland. What is meant here is that Westminster, so long as we remain there, functions to impede the further growth of the independence movement. The problem this causes us has become so glaring, so obvious, that it has become a source of shame. Independence presupposes a nation’s freedom, and Scotland can never and will never be free until it has rejected its slavish place in England’s parliament.
Understandably, many are frightened by the word and the language of revolution; seeing it only as a cataclysmic orgy of violence. This is the false image our unionist friends in the media will seek to exploit, but the truth is we have lived through more peaceful revolutions than we can count. Few regret the successes of the sexual revolution. That I am publishing this online to be shared over social media is a consequence of the communications and the internet revolutions.
Mere resistance to the state so far as such resistance does not become a threat to the life of the state will always be to some extent tolerated by the state. Any such resistance that does become a threat to the state will eventually be met with the full force of the state that is the monopoly of violence.