There’s been considerable mirth in nationalist circles ever since Jim Murphy became leader of the Scottish Labour branch office late last year. Announcing that he wanted to “reach out” to Yes voters, his idea of an olive branch was to hire three of the most divisive and obnoxious figures to be found anywhere in his party’s entire hinterland, in a move about as conciliatory and unifying as when Rangers signed Mo Johnston.
Counter-intuitively, the link-up with Blair McDougall (who headed Murphy’s successful leadership bid) is the one that makes the most sense. After all, as “Better Together” campaign director McDougall was responsible for turning a 30-point lead for No into a 10-point one, so he clearly knows something about how to appeal to Yes people.
One of the main strengths of the No campaign in the independence referendum was that it had an efficient production line for “truthiness”. Best known as a concept from the US satirical TV show The Colbert Report, the term means things that SOUND as if they’re true, and which people will therefore be inclined to believe, even though they fall apart under any factual scrutiny.
One good example is shown above. The facts on the graphic are individually true, and convey – without ever actually saying so explicitly – the message that Scotland is subsidised by the UK to the tune of £7.6bn a year.
But that message, despite being implied through exclusively true facts, ISN’T true, because the extra “spending” on Scotland is actually borrowing, which Scotland has to pay back. The real truth is that the figures on the left are accurate, and that Scotland heavily subsidises the rest of the UK.
But to walk someone through even the basic explanation of that is quite complicated and involved, whereas the original message is punchy and SOUNDS true. The simpler something is the more people want to believe it, so the implicit lie on the graphic is difficult to dislodge from their minds once it’s in there.
(It works especially well if the media is overwhelmingly on the side of those creating the misleading impression, because they can count on the fact that the mainstream press won’t run any analysis pointing out the flaws in the argument, and the only people who’ll ever encounter the explanation are those who actively seek it out.)
Do you remember the old days, readers? We’re talking about the far-off era of ancient history when Labour insisted that the worst, most evil, most right-wing thing that any government could do was to cut Corporation Tax, and that it was vital Scotland didn’t become independent in case that catastrophe occurred:
We’re feeling a bit stupid right now, readers. Earlier on today we sarcastically dubbed Scottish Labour “geniuses” over their plans to reintroduce alcohol (and sectarian singing) back to Scottish football at exactly the point when Scotland seemed to have finally turned the corner in its dysfunctional relationship with alcohol.
Indeed, for days now Labour have been carrying out a two-pronged stunt-photocall strategy, touring the country standing outside hospital casualty departments looking concerned about an almost entirely imaginary “A&E crisis”, while also leafleting every major football ground promising to let fans get smashed at games again.
Seeking a cheap laugh, we tweeted that we hoped they didn’t get confused and start handing out their “MOAR BOOZE!” literature outside the A&E wards, but then an alert reader pointed out that we were idiots and Jim Murphy was in fact an evil mastermind.
In September 2011, a group of US state employees took a man called Troy Davis from his prison cell in Atlanta, Georgia to a small room and strapped him to a gurney. They inserted a needle into one of his veins, hooked it up to some tubes connected to a machine and pressed a button on the machine, knowing that it would cause lethal chemicals to be pumped into his bloodstream until he died of asphyxiation.
These people – every one of whom doubtless considered themselves an ordinary, decent, caring member of society – participated willingly in the killing despite knowing that there was an enormous degree of doubt as to whether Davis was in any way responsible for the death of the man in whose name he was being executed.
Bafflingly, very few people found this behaviour at all odd.
One of the compensations of living in England (from the perspective of editing a website about Scottish politics) is that you get a much clearer picture of how English people – who make up 85% of the UK electorate, and as such in practice determine who the government is – see the country’s political leaders.
For those of you who don’t, here’s Charlie Brooker – a man who’s no fan of the Tories by any stretch of the imagination – casting a weary and exasperated eye over Ed “these strikes are wrong” Miliband on last night’s Weekly Wipe.
In our experience it’s a pretty accurate snapshot of how the hapless Labour leader is regarded by most left-leaning people down on this side of the border. You’ll need to have seen the rest of the episode to get the “Schofield!” joke.
There’s a very strange article on the front page of the Herald website this morning. It’s an interview with Nigel Farage in which the UKIP leader insists that his party, not the SNP, will hold the balance of power in the UK parliament after May’s election.
It’s a bold assertion given that current projections put the SNP on anywhere from 30 to 56 seats with UKIP expected to struggle to get 5 to 10. But Farage’s rationale for the statement is an interesting one.
The abusive Facebook comments recently directed at Labour MP Margaret Curran and highlighted in a piece on the STV website today make us sigh. Not only are they horrible but they’re counter-productive, in every sense of the term – they’re not going to change Curran’s mind about anything by yelling at her, and they feed a narrative about “vile cybernats” that the media is all too eager to gleefully perpetuate.
So let’s make something clear from the off: shut up, idiots. You’re not helping.
Mark Beggan on How Far To Go, How Far: “Even money that judge will be allowed to crawl away without facing the consequences of his actions. Due to the…” Dec 14, 08:27
Cynicus on How Far To Go, How Far: “Mark Beggan says: 13 December, 2025 at 6:26 pm “I reckon 3-1 to St Mirren tomorrow.” ======== Is that a…” Dec 14, 00:21
Lorncal on How Far To Go, How Far: “No, Hatey, I get it completely because I’m a woman, and my survival as a woman depends on my getting…” Dec 13, 23:37
william G Walker on How Far To Go, How Far: “Saffron Robe is right in his forensic analysis as led by Stuart. He is also right in “objective reality” and…” Dec 13, 22:30
McDuff on How Far To Go, How Far: “Rev you are worth your weight in gold!” Dec 13, 21:34
Saffron Robe on How Far To Go, How Far: “Forensic analysis of the highest order, Stuart, of immense benefit to all those interested in the pursuit of justice which…” Dec 13, 21:00
Hatey McHateface on How Far To Go, How Far: “Far more importantly, if the pattern on the carpet has left an indelible mark, what tartan is it? That’s the…” Dec 13, 20:26
Hatey McHateface on How Far To Go, How Far: “@Alf Baird When you write that the need for decolonisation is “absolute and urgent” I wonder how it is that…” Dec 13, 20:22
Hatey McHateface on How Far To Go, How Far: “You missed one, Northy, phallusy.” Dec 13, 20:06
Hatey McHateface on The ginger stepchild: “Multiple accounts, Bilbo? How you must wish that was true. My “stalking” of you was me pointing out the quite…” Dec 13, 19:58
Northcode on How Far To Go, How Far: “I meant to do this earlier, but forgot. Here it is now, better late than never. Correction: “through-away” in paragraph…” Dec 13, 19:05
Mark Beggan on How Far To Go, How Far: “I reckon 3-1 to St Mirren tomorrow.” Dec 13, 18:26
Andy Wiltshire on How Far To Go, How Far: “Mistakes tending to both sides of a controversial question roughly equally may well be just mistakes. If they all point…” Dec 13, 16:49
James Barr Gardner on How Far To Go, How Far: “The real problem is ye jist cannae git the staff these days !” Dec 13, 15:40
Sven on How Far To Go, How Far: “You’d know, I’m sure, I wish you well “James Cheyne”; were every independence minded Scot as single minded, determined and…” Dec 13, 14:56
Northcode on How Far To Go, How Far: “Nae bother, James. The longer you stay around here the better as far as I’m concerned. And thanks for the…” Dec 13, 14:55
Northcode on How Far To Go, How Far: ““But that flame still burns.” I’ll tell you what ‘burns’… YOUR SHITTY RHETORIC! BOOM!!! Northcode drops the “Ad Hominem”, arm…” Dec 13, 14:46
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “robertkknight, Better together, as the prime ministers statement once said. Why not have the upper ruling class grouped with the…” Dec 13, 14:36
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “North code. Thank for those kind words, It would appear that I could be here for as long as the…” Dec 13, 14:23
robertkknight on How Far To Go, How Far: “I don’t think that there are any depths left to which the NuSNP Govt. won’t stoop. For years they’ve been…” Dec 13, 13:55
Stu on How Far To Go, How Far: “Lomcal, I don’t think there is. Like I said, if a judge was hypothetically going to go for a specific…” Dec 13, 13:17
Rob on How Far To Go, How Far: “I normally don’t normally give much credence to conspiracy theories, basic incompetence usually explains most of the screw up. However…” Dec 13, 13:16
Jill on How Far To Go, How Far: “The most generous reading of this debacle is that the judge is incompetent. I’m inclined to be less generous. Trans…” Dec 13, 13:09
Northcode on How Far To Go, How Far: “I for one will be sorry to see you leave this place, James. Your stoical perseverance in acquiring and presenting…” Dec 13, 12:58
Mark Beggan on How Far To Go, How Far: “Is that carpet burns on Swinney’s face?” Dec 13, 12:50
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Thoughts for today, I will retire and make way for others after the two year long wait from DWP and…” Dec 13, 12:36
Northcode on How Far To Go, How Far: ““…I write, as always, to educate the readers on the world’s most-read Indy website.” We uneducated plebians here on “the…” Dec 13, 12:22