Rise launched their
manifesto wish list this afternoon, and, predictably, an absolute comedy shambles.
Predictably, because the party has repelled almost all of its members and activists with experience of realpolitik and fighting elections and referendums in favour of replacing them with noisy, yet empty, student activists and swivel-eyed nuts who have failed to grasp the nuances between feminism - a goal for which all on the Left must strive as part of the class struggle - and all-men-are-bastardsism.
Shambles, because the document was line after line of hilarity.
The document gives the date of the referendum as 14th September, 2014. The referendum - which, remember, was apparently the seminal moment in the lives of the Risers, according to the hagiography - was, in fact, four days later.
That's not terribly important, albeit it does betray a certain - unsurprising - amateurism on behalf of the cult.
Far more serious is the economic illiteracy shown in their finances.
They call for a rise (geddit?) in income tax from £0,45 in the Pound to £0,60 in the Pound for high earners. It is a policy which which few on the Left will have any argument. They then go on to explain this as a 15% raise in the tax.
From 45 to 60 is a rise of 15 from 45 - or 33,33%. It is a raise of fifteen pence, and over thirty per cent.
Their income tax sums aren't just one per cent out, nor two per cent. Not even ten per cent or fifteen per cent out. Not twenty, or fifty, nor even one hundred per cent out. They didn't even manage to keep their sums to within two hundred per cent of reality - they managed to miscalculate their income tax rise by an astonishing two hundred and twenty per cent. This is a party which asks to be taken seriously, and has the audacity to ask working people for their votes.
The struggling SWP-led cult also breathlessly declaimed that the £0,40 income tax rate started at a per annum income of £32.000. In fact, this rate kicks into force at £43.000 per annum. This time, they were a scant 34,4% out from the actual number which - in the clown-shoes, blundering world of Rise - perhaps represents something of a triumph.
It looks very much as though the document wasn't proof-read, nor checked by any economist.
It also looks as though the document was put together by committee, working separately, and only patched together at the end.
At one point, the Hyndland Soviet calls for an absolute maximum wage of £100.000 per annum. Further down the text, (presumably) another author inserts their demand for a special tax band for people earning more than .... £100.000 per annum!
Their tax policy claims that the income tax liability would be based on the place of work. This is flatly contradicted by the legislation, which is abundantly clear that it is based on the place of residency.
The litany of incompetence continues when it emerged that Rise is to be the only party in the upcoming general election not to have their logo (stolen from an American rock band) featured on the ballot paper. This is, mais naturellement, the fault of the Electoral Commission, for reasons unspecified. Furthermore, despite assurances from the SWP at the time of the hostile takeover of the SSP, there is no mention on the ballot paper that Rise is an electoral alliance, not a party.
Perhaps, when given the benefit of a free, world-class university education, the student activists would be better advised to spend less time screeching at bemused diners at McDonald's and more time in the libraries and lecture theatres learning basic arithmetic, history and economics.
This would be the funniest suicide note in history. But the working class in Scotland, who desperately need a party to represent their interests and have watched it being ripped away from them by the Merchant City socialists, aren't laughing
It's now clear that the Rise project has failed, and that the SSP need to get out of the toxic, voter-repelling "alliance" in time for the vital local elections in 13 months time.
I thought it might be interesting to explore how badly Rise has failed. They're not standing in any constituencies (there's neither the glamour, nor the ego trip, in that), just the provincial vote. So here is the worst-ever results in Holyrood in each province for a major party (a very loose definition of major as "standing at least one candidate in every province in at least one of the four general elections, and excluding Solidarity").
2011 SSP 1.362 votes 0,7%
2007 Ukip 405 votes 0,2%
2003 Ukip 552 votes 0,3%
1999 Green 10.159 votes 4,0%
2011 SSP 1.752 votes 0,6%
2007 Ukip 888 0,3%
2003 Ukip 1.662 0,6%
1994 SSP 5.944 1,9%
2011 SSP 820 votes 0,4%
2007 SSP 2.188 0,8%
2003 Ukip 1.009 0,4%
1999 SSP 5.739 1,7%
Highlands and Islands:
2011 SSP 509 votes 0,3%
2007 SSP 973 votes 0,5%
2003 Ukip 1947 votes 1,1%
1999 SSP 1.770 votes 0,9%
2011 SSP 1.183 votes 0,4%
2007 Ukip 834 votes 0,3%
2003 Ukip 1.057 votes 0,4%
1999 SSP 5.237 votes 1,6%
Mid Scotland, Even Though There Already Is a Central Scotland, And Fife:
2011 SSP 834 votes 0,3%
2007 SSP 1.116 votes 0,4%
2003 Ukip 2.355 votes 0,9%
1999 SSP 3.044 votes 1,0%
2011 SSP 1.115 votes 0,4%
2007 Ukip 1.045 votes 0,4%
2003 Ukip 1.498 votes 0,6%
1999 SSP 3.016 votes 1,1%
South of Scotland:
2011 SSP 697 votes 0,25%
2007 SSP 1.114 votes 0,4%
2003 Ukip 1.889 votes 0.7%
1999 Ukip 1.502 votes 0,5%
It'll be fascinating to see if Rise manage to avoid being the worst contestant ever.