The Cummings-Johnson showdown looks likely to play out like Holyrood’s own high noon. Revelations and accusations will titillate the political class; and some authentically scandalous insights into state power will be uncovered. But the wider public may look the other way.
There are two inferences that almost everybody agrees on: firstly, that the Taliban has won and will likely exploit the power vacuum for their own barbaric purposes; secondly, that America’s decision to leave is nonetheless the best for all concerned.
We should oppose the monarchy because it symbolises state power as fundamentally divorced from popular control and reduced to meaningless gestures, a truth that applies whether we have a dyspeptic colonialist monarchy or an Atlanticist “people’s princess”.
There were further resignations from Boris Johnson’s “Union unit” last week. As with the ongoing SNP soap opera, personality clashes masked a deeper crisis of purpose. Nobody seems capable of telling a story of what Britain is about.
“Little to nothing hinted at in Starmer’s speech – or more concretely asserted by Conservative leaders – could even be countenanced by a new state without its own central bank or control over monetary policy. These are ideas for the wrong century, and the gulf is widening.”
The UK passed a grim milestone yesterday, as Boris Johnson announced that officially recorded coronavirus deaths have passed 100,000. Only five countries have crossed this number: ourselves aside, there is the US, Brazil, India and Mexico.
ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda never denied there was “reasonable basis to believe that members of the British armed forces committed the war crimes of wilful killing, torture, inhuman/cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity, and rape and/or other forms of sexual violence”.