BC UK

Just finished reading an article by Iain MacWhirter that is so full of demonstrable falsehoods & logical fallacies that it requires a firm response: So seeing as I’ve done one nuclear thread this week already, I might as well do another... 🧵☢️🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇺🇳

Iain is able to correctly identify that the submission that @SNP_SITW group made to the UK #IntegratedReview - and therefore wasn’t policy about an independent Scotland - but that’s where his grip on reality ends.
We called for unilateral disarmament, as I pointed out on Monday: https://t.co/DwHt9knqHh https://t.co/OdRfSXlaNM
Iain chooses to elide the fact that our submission was clearly not about policy in an independent Scotland, and therefore seeks to portray our request to the UK Government to be serious about its own commitments to multilateral arms control treaties — like the NPT — as SNP policy
Despite revealing that he knows a thing or two about internal SNP procedures, he then goes on to conflate two unconnected things — our submission, and a putative conference motion that the democratically-elected conferences committee (not the Leadership) decided not to accept
This just makes him look silly, because the First Minister expressed her support for the @nuclearban *this week*, and the @SNP_SITW submission expressed support for it *in the next paragraph* to the one MacWhirter objected to, but I guess he needs a hook for thefalsehoods. 👇
https://t.co/LTF9ss1ryi https://t.co/FbDbyED0jX
Now, there are good faith debates to be had about nuclear policy, & the efficacy of multilateral arms control, but we can’t escape one point: Scotland can only Unilaterally disarm once — what should our policy be then? Do we join North Korea and Israel in not signing the NPT?
There’s also a disingenuous dichotomy being presented between Unilateral and Multilateral disarmament: they are not mutually exclusive. I don’t think Vitamin D is going to stop me from getting Covid, but I still take it as a prophylactic.
Finally, Iain’s article is a perfect example of the anglo-centric worldview many of his generation have which holds, among other things, that everything @theSNP does must be seen through the paradigm of New Labour. There is no ‘third way’ on nukes in the party
So, given all that, it’s hard to accept that he’s too lazy to have read the whole @SNP_SITW submission; or that he doesn’t understand concepts around unilateral and multilateral disarmament; or of how decisions are made in a party he obviously has much knowledge and experience of
Instead, I’ve reluctantly come to the conclusion that this is a mendacious attempt to peddle falsehoods designed to divide supporters of independence and of @theSNP. It’s sad that this is what has become of someone who I’d always enjoyed reading — but we can’t let this divide us.
I’ll try and not do make any more nuclear threads — I’ll soon have enough to knit masel a glow-in-the-dark jumper. If you want to know more, here’s a piece I wrote about how watering down our unilateral commitment just ain’t gonna happen https://t.co/W4K8SnUcRM

More from Uk

A short thread on why I am dubious that the government can lawfully impose charges on travellers entering the UK for quarantine and testing (proposed at £1,750 and £210)

1/

The UK has signed up to the International Health Regulations (IHA) 2005. These therefore create binding international legal obligations on the UK.

The IHA explicitly prevent charging for travellers' quarantine or medical examinations.

https://t.co/n4oWE8x5Vg /2


International law is not actionable in a UK court unless it has been implemented in law.

But it can be used as an aide to interpretation where a statute isn't clear as to what powers it grants.

See e.g. Lord Bingham in A v SSHD https://t.co/RXmib1qGYD

/3


The Quarantine regulations will, I assume, be made under section 45B of the Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984

https://t.co/54L4lHGMEr

/4


That gives pretty broad powers but I can't see any power to charge for quarantine. Perhaps it will be inferred from somewhere else in Part 2A?

But...

You May Also Like

1/ Some initial thoughts on personal moats:

Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.

Characteristics of a personal moat below:


2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.

As Andrew Chen noted:


3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized

Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than


4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.

After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.

5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.

In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.