Firstly I think this is not as rounded as it could be, but I very much appreciate critique. Hopefully comments and responses will build up a bigger picture.
I don't agree with the whole article but it points out some very important things about ISG. They are not being properly challenged by the rest of the Scottish Left - I seem to be one of the few voices up here willing to criticise them publicly. But their politics is dodgy and based on things they don't like, like Britain, rather than things they are for. They also have quite a Leninist approach to anti-imperialism, one that Luxemberg showed to be at best simplistic/banal and at worst destructive.
Britain, as the ISG and some others on the Scottish left would have it, is 'bad' (as the author points out here, so surely is every capitalist state?). Whereas Scotland is 'good' - despite having a shared colonial history with the rest of Britain (since the ruling classes in Scotland were collaborators and imperialists) and the SNP ditching a credible stance on human rights and undermining relations with Norway (a country the Scottish left want to emulate) to increase exports of salmon to China.
Regardless of anyone's opinion on independence, it's time the Scottish left stopped idealising Scotland. Nationalism of any form in my opinion is 'bad', there are no fundamental differences between nations and there is nothing inherently better about Scots than, say, the English or the Welsh. Even those who are pro-independence must acknowledge that Scots are just the same as any other bunch of human beings, but with different socialised and cultural influences which influence the difference in voting patterns - not that Scots are brave warriors against some imaginary evil England.