(The next-biggest donator, author CJ Sansom, sent their £161,000 cheque from their home in Sussex, which we’re fairly sure also isn’t in Scotland.)
We’ve dropped Mr Sheridan a line asking if he finds non-Scottish-resident, tax-avoiding Ian Taylor’s huge donation to the No campaign “nauseating”. We’ll let you know his answer the minute it arrives, which surely won’t be long.
Glorying in the death of an individual is unseemly, especially one long past the time when they did their damage. Owen Jones put it well here. Today, though, with no shame whatsoever, we celebrate the death of an icon. Not the human being, but the values they stood for and their appalling toxic legacy of what was once a country one could be proud of being a part of.
That country died in 1979, and its corpse was dug up and desecrated in 1997. Nothing we could say, no matter how awful, would be a tenth as despicable as the changes wrought in Britain over those last 34 years. So we’re going to say nothing, and play a song with words that are impossible to make out. You might prefer some others.
Below is a Daily Record story about lots of people giving money to “Better Together” (although confusingly, apparently it’s for an “election” rather than a referendum), accompanied by a large picture of handsome “Trainspotting” star Kevin McKidd.
One might infer, not unreasonably, from the headline and picture that Mr McKidd was one of the No campaign’s “big-hitters”. There’s nothing at all in the article’s text which would dissuade readers from that view.
After all, there are plenty of well-documented links between the UK royal family and the Nazis. So presumably something as crass and offensive as the above image would be regarded as an acceptable illustration in a broadsheet Scottish newspaper, were it for some reason to be running a thinly-disguised smear against British nationalists.
On the 12th May 1916, a man born 48 years previously in Edinburgh’s Cowgate was strapped to a chair in Kilmainham Jail, Dublin and – after receiving the last rites – was shot by a firing squad. He was too weak to stand.
In 2002 a BBC poll for its presentation of the “100 Greatest Britons” had him in 64th place. Yet he is hardly known in Scotland. Virtually the only time his name impinges on public consciousness is when those who wish to honour his name by public march in Edinburgh have to be given police protection from violent Unionist bigots.
The Telegraph deserves some credit today. It runs a heartbreaking story about the reality of life on benefits, of the sort both the Conservative and Labour parties want to be “tough” on. It’s a piece of gripping, truthful and hard-hitting journalism, highly and properly critical of the party the paper steadfastly supports. Hats off to the author.
This site often reflects on the absence of real political choice available to the UK electorate, but it has rarely been more clearly illustrated than it was on this morning’s BBC breakfast news in an interview with Labour’s shadow chancellor Ed Balls.
Interviewed by presenter Charlie Stayt, Balls first clarified Labour’s position on the top-rate tax cut taking effect this week. Refusing to commit Labour to restoring the 50p rate if elected in 2015, Balls nevertheless made the meaningless pledge that if an election were to be held tomorrow it would be in Labour’s manifesto.
(An interesting distinction from “We would actually do it”, of course.)
We’re a bit puzzled by this. Either a 50p tax rate brings in more money or it doesn’t (and it does – even George Osborne’s own budget statement noted that it raised an extra £1bn for the Treasury compared to the 40p rate that preceded it), so what does it matter what the country’s general economic condition is? Shouldn’t Labour be committed as a matter of principle to wealth redistribution by taxing the rich?
Instead, Balls said that reducing the rate to 45p was “not my priority” (rather than, say,“I think it’s wrong”), suggesting that it was nevertheless something he’d want to do. But it was on welfare reform that he was most revealing.
When we started this site we never imagined we’d find ourselves citing Aleister Crowley for anything, but it looks as though that strange and disturbing day has come.
We’ve had a theory for a while now that the expenses scandal of 2009 was a watershed moment in British politics, in the worst possible way. Practically the whole of the Westminster parliament was found to have perpetrated frauds against the taxpayer on a scale that would have seen benefit claimants given substantial prison terms, yet almost none were ever put in front of a court.
And despite the huge public outcry at duck houses and moat-cleaning and house-flipping and all the rest of it, when a General Election was called in 2010, the electorate trooped meekly into polling stations and re-elected almost every politician that had been caught with their greedy hands in the voters’ pockets.
Is it any wonder that those same politicians now think – probably correctly – that they can literally get away with just about anything? If we were them, we might be the same. After all, if sheep keep walking up to you when you’ve got shears in your hand, even if you keep gouging their eyes out with them, what else are you going to do?
The Prime Minister made a rare appearance in Scotland this afternoon, showing up at defence contractors Thales in Govan to answer questions from what the BBC described as “the public”, but looked in fact to have been exclusively employees of the company and who appeared to have been briefed not to ask anything difficult, instead serving up softballs like “What is the government doing to encourage business?” and other similar blandities that we’ve already forgotten five minutes later.
Much has been and will be written about David Cameron’s visit to Scotland today, during which he’s expected to vigorously advocate the continuation and renewal of the UK’s nuclear “deterrent”. Which didn’t deter Iraq from invading Kuwait, or Argentina from invading UK territory in the Falklands, but never mind.
(We’re also not clear on why North Korea or Iran would have any sort of beef with an independent Scotland anyway, as opposed to the UK. It seems to this website that the surest way for Scotland to avoid even the microscopically minuscule future prospect of an attack from either nation is to disentangle ourselves from Westminster’s much-hated foreign policy with all possible haste.)
But none of it will be as telling as a single line in the Telegraph today:
Could he have made it any clearer? The savage, failing austerity and welfare “reform” programme designed to annihilate the last remnants of civilised British society is explicitly contrasted with the “bargain” we’re getting by spending our money on a useless weapon system designed solely to murder millions in vengeance after we’re already dead. That’s what the United Kingdom stands for, Labour and Tory together.
The argument that Cameron is stealthily trying to sabotage the No campaign in order to shore up the Conservatives’ powerbase in England gets more convincing daily.
Confused on Anything But That: “the english are all about the UN and international law and the international community and the rules based order -…” Sep 8, 12:21
Confused on Anything But That: “Been thinking … the England Pakistan Union is a no brainer and I hope GCHQ will forward this to the…” Sep 8, 12:19
Hatey McHateface on Anything But That: ““180 degrees off-topic” There’s a topic? Nobody bothers about that after the first dozen or so comments.” Sep 8, 12:16
Hatey McHateface on Anything But That: “Aye, Xaracen, that link gives us the names we sorely need. Perhaps we could desecrate their graves, or, even better,…” Sep 8, 12:11
James Che on Anything But That: “If the 1707 treaty of union is spent, then the foundation of the Great Britain parliament also ceases, As its…” Sep 8, 12:08
Aidan on Anything But That: “That does not accord with the records provided for when the estates and parliaments sat, for example: “In the period…” Sep 8, 12:07
Spartan 117 on Anything But That: “460-odd posts, the vast majority of which are by the same 4 or 5 individuals boring the tits off everybody…” Sep 8, 12:00
James Che on Anything But That: “If independence negotiations ever happen, they would bore the arse of of English diplomats, Surely the diplomats would be British…” Sep 8, 11:50
Hatey McHateface on Anything But That: “I’m too old to become literate in what would be a new language for me, Alf. Given its minority status,…” Sep 8, 11:50
Xaracen on Anything But That: “Aidan said; “I think it is extraordinarily unlikely that in pre-1707 Scotland an act of Parliament passed by the Scottish…” Sep 8, 11:47
William Smith on Anything But That: “Don’t underestimate them, Chas. If independence negotiations ever happen, they will be deployed to bore the arse off of the…” Sep 8, 11:27
Chas on Anything But That: “Alfie Boy I NEVER open any links posted on an open forum. To do so is inviting all sorts of…” Sep 8, 10:56
Alf Baird on Anything But That: “““The rise of an independence movement reflects the ethnic solidarity of indigenous (Scots) language speakers”” That’s Prof Hechter (and others)…” Sep 8, 10:53
Hatey McHateface on Anything But That: “6 consecutive posts! Perhaps more to come! Could be a personal best. From what I can gather about the capabilities…” Sep 8, 10:42
Aidan on Anything But That: “Aside from the historical records, I think it is extraordinarily unlikely that in pre-1707 Scotland an act of Parliament passed…” Sep 8, 10:34
Alf Baird on Anything But That: “This may be easier for you to understand: www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cGi7Q-EcyU” Sep 8, 10:25
James Che on Anything But That: “If there is one persistent record that Westminster parliament continue to state through out time in as many ways as…” Sep 8, 10:02
Hatey McHateface on Anything But That: “What did I predict about Xaracen? Sunk costs. I’m far more concerned about the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. Not only…” Sep 8, 09:58
Chas on Anything But That: “A genuine question Che. What do you hope to achieve by writing the same shite, every day, umpteen times?” Sep 8, 09:53
James Che on Anything But That: “Every Scot that whom enters Westminster parliament past or present enters the Westminster parliament of Englands Great Britain parliament for…” Sep 8, 09:42
Oneliner on Anything But That: “I would not follow you MB. Confused is the centre of his own counter-cultural universe. Ignore him at your peril…” Sep 8, 09:38
Xaracen on Anything But That: “I have to confess to an error re the Salvo session. Yes, it was a mandatory requirement after the end…” Sep 8, 09:28
James Che on Anything But That: “The old English parliament of Westminster is also one and the same as the Great Britain parliament of Westminster, Not…” Sep 8, 09:28
James Che on Anything But That: “The recorded facts of the non – union between Scotland and England. The old parliament of England did not cease,…” Sep 8, 09:22
factchecker on Anything But That: “Great job NC – keep it up!” Sep 8, 09:19
Captain Caveman on Anything But That: “““Well hold on there Bald Eagle!” ? Meh! Always makes me laugh, that. 😀 But yeah. I do take your…” Sep 8, 09:03
James Che on Anything But That: “Westminster parliament for Great Britain,…note: with the parliament of England resting in the Westminster parliament Union with Scotland ( Amendment…” Sep 8, 08:59
Hatey McHateface on Anything But That: “Cheers, Alf! As I may have indicated before, I see little congruence between most of what you write and reality.…” Sep 8, 08:50
Aidan on Anything But That: “Absolutely Northcode – there is nothing anti-independence about recognising these eccentric and almost entirely meritless legal theories do nothing to…” Sep 8, 08:45
James Che on Anything But That: “North code, May I enquire how you missed the records that the parliament of England did not cease to be,…” Sep 8, 08:34