Having solved cat hunger in Greece, the tireless Holiday Boy has now turned his hand to addressing Scotland’s crippling golfing shortage, so we’ve got a different sort of cartoon again for you this weekend.
The clip below is from a 1981 arcade videogame called Venture, by Exidy, in which you play a cheerful character called Winky on a mission to loot treasure from a series of monster-infested dungeons.
For the purposes of this article the treasure in the room above, which takes the form of a castle tower, represents Scottish politics. The room itself is the Union.
Back in the 1980s there was a hit game for the ZX Spectrum home computer called Worse Things Happen At Sea. In it you play a robot whose job is to get a heavily-laden cargo ship safely to port, except that more and more disasters keep befalling it.
It springs leaks, it veers off course, the engine overheats and the robot’s power runs down, until eventually the catalogue of catastrophes overwhelms the harassed metallic custodian and the boat slides down into the murky depths.
We wonder if that feels familiar to anyone at the moment.
(We suspect this might become a regular series.) We try not to take any notice of the often-ludicrous propaganda churned out by the official “Better Together” campaign, but today’s was too utterly ridiculous to ignore. We’re not going to deface our nice pages with the image, though you can see it here if you want to without giving them any hits.
The graphic claimed, mind-bogglingly, that the award of £2.3bn in grants to good causes in Scotland by the National Lottery since its advent in 1993 was “another reason we are better together”, as if the figure represented some great largesse towards Scotland on the part of the UK. This, as any reader with an IQ higher than the number on a lottery ball will immediately realise, is such a monumental and obvious misrepresentation of how the lottery works that we can only concur with the Twitter user who enquired “When will the glue-sniffing stop at BT strategy HQ?”
When watching the Olympics over the coming couple of weeks, it’s probably not likely that you’ll be pondering the massive spending that goes into the defence and security industry as a result of such events. Yet in both superficial and deeper senses, it now represents the primary purpose of the Games, with sport merely the disguise under which the true agenda is smuggled past the unsuspecting public.
The precedent for this phenomenon was set over 70 years ago, by the event which would go on to become the template on which all subsequent Games were based. We refer, of course, to the 1936 Berlin Olympics in Nazi Germany.
On the 13th of May 1931, the International Olympic Committee awarded the 1936 Summer Olympics to Berlin. The choice was intended to signal Germany’s return to the world community and its rehabilitation after the defeat and humiliation of World War I. However, two years after the award was made Adolf Hitler seized power, and spurred on by his Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels he set about making the games a showcase for Nazi Germany.
The intention was simple – set up the games to portray the new Germany in the best light possible. The Games were to be a place to play down plans for territorial expansion, and would be exploited to instead bedazzle foreign spectators and journalists with an image of a peaceful, tolerant Germany. The opportunity to portray an image of how the Nazis wanted to be seen, with the world watching and listening, was too good to pass up, and so political will was deployed behind the Games, with Hitler himself becoming an ardent supporter.
Plans to boycott the Games in response to the maltreatment of Jews and non-whites already apparent under the regime were discussed in the United Kingdom, France, Sweden, Czechoslovakia, and the Netherlands, but were short-lived. The outcry was more vociferous in America, but the President of the American Olympic Committee at the time, Avery Brundage, declined to back a boycott, on the now-familiar grounds that “The Olympic Games belong to the athletes and not to the politicians”. Little did he know what the Nazis had in store.
There seems to be a disconnect for many Scots between how they feel about the London Olympics and how they’ll act when the Games are on. Many will bemoan the cost, lost opportunities, lack of access or significant national legacy, but will simultaneously be cheering on the athletes in Team GB. Is it a form of Olympic schizophrenia that we should despise the Games and yet love them at the same time?
Schizophrenia isn’t, of course, really the correct term to use for this phenomenon. It’s a mental disorder characterised by a breakdown of thought processes and by poor emotional responsiveness. Despite the etymology of the term from the Greek roots, schizophrenia does not imply a “split mind” and it is not the same as Dissociative Identity Disorder – also known as “multiple personality disorder” or “split personality” – despite often being confused with it in the public’s perception.
So perhaps it’s more accurate to say that myself, and many others, suffer from a form of Olympic split personality disorder. But what is it that causes this affliction? In order to find out, we need to look at the history of London 2012.
Readers of a spiritual or elderly bent may be aware of the parable of the Deck Of Cards. (You can listen to a splendidly reverby take of Wink Martindale’s definitive version by clicking this convenient link here.)
But you don’t have to go back to the 1950s for a similarly instructive metaphor for the contemporary age. Because the iOS game Coin Dozer serves, if you don’t want to carry around a bulky copy of Das Kapital, as a bible of the modern capitalist world. Shut up, it’s not bollocks.
Mark Beggan on How Far To Go, How Far: “That would be correct if ‘passionate opposition’ was against equality. Where as Linehan and Rowling are against perversion and intimidation…” Dec 13, 06:32
twathater on How Far To Go, How Far: “The fact that this supposed learned professional is receiving such criticism from his fellow legal professionals indicates that they can…” Dec 13, 04:26
Cynicus on How Far To Go, How Far: “Great work again, Geoff. I highlight the points below from the journey your link led me: 1) Anya Palmer, a…” Dec 13, 03:34
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Dan, I hear you, though obviously the ginger news is not read by myself, but the (war) word is fast…” Dec 13, 00:08
Alastair Ewen on How Far To Go, How Far: “Is Judge Kemp a heavy drinker??” Dec 13, 00:07
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “I will keep eye on war news to check wether propaganda or true over next few weeks, The tribunal judge…” Dec 12, 23:56
Lorncal on How Far To Go, How Far: “So, in order to let these men have everything their own way, we have to trample on women? That is…” Dec 12, 23:43
Lorncal on How Far To Go, How Far: “Yet, even ECHR agrees that men should not be in women’s spaces.” Dec 12, 23:30
Lorncal on How Far To Go, How Far: “Of course they do, Mark. That is not the point that Michael was making. The use of the words, hierarchy…” Dec 12, 23:27
Lorncal on How Far To Go, How Far: “Yes, AI does make mistakes, but all on one side? Methinks human intervention here.” Dec 12, 23:17
David McAdam on How Far To Go, How Far: “So the DG had to resign from the BBC when a programme was found to have “edited” a speech of…” Dec 12, 23:07
Geoff Anderson on How Far To Go, How Far: “Archived Times article https://archive.is/Myuvi” Dec 12, 21:39
Kate L on How Far To Go, How Far: “Much like the male judge Alexander Kemp I suppose you find women’s safety and dignity acceptable sacrifices to make on…” Dec 12, 21:37
Captain Caveman on Strike One: “Meh! Awesome Northy you made me laugh. Touche! 🙂” Dec 12, 21:18
DavidT on How Far To Go, How Far: “I have no personal stake in this matter, nor am I aware of any transgender individuals. However, Graham Linehan and…” Dec 12, 20:48
Dan on How Far To Go, How Far: “But James, according to polling in the recent Ginger Stepchild article; Only about 5% of Scots rate Defence and Security…” Dec 12, 20:33
Geoff Anderson on How Far To Go, How Far: ““Wouldn’t it be so much easier if we just did what the TransCult wanted” That is what the Judge concluded.” Dec 12, 20:31
Mark Beggan on How Far To Go, How Far: “‘Keep Rabies out of Britain’ Springs to mind, forgot about that one. What with all the other dangerous things coming…” Dec 12, 20:10
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Britain and France preparing for war, we have to wait and see whom the enemy is, but France informing its…” Dec 12, 20:05
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Public matters and private rights are entirely different laws in Scotland.” Dec 12, 19:55
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Tribunals in Scotland are funded by a consolidated fund by the Scottish government” Dec 12, 19:49
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Private Rights of biological Women to have private spaces regardless, is matter of Internal Scots law in Article XV111 and…” Dec 12, 19:39
Hatey McHateface on How Far To Go, How Far: “It’s lower in saturated fat, sure, but for Mammie’s authentic home baking, it has to be butter.” Dec 12, 19:29
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “He iis quite an interesting site on legal matters. There are a few other Barristers that I follow for points…” Dec 12, 19:29
Hatey McHateface on How Far To Go, How Far: “Could be rabies. The precautionary principle says put them down.” Dec 12, 19:24
James Cheyne on How Far To Go, How Far: “Stu, I presume you watch BlackBeltBarrister as he states more or less the same as you. If not then he…” Dec 12, 19:19
Mark Beggan on How Far To Go, How Far: “The politically correct voice of the chattering class is foaming at the mouth!” Dec 12, 19:09
Hatey McHateface on Strike One: “Channeling your inner hatstand there, Northy.” Dec 12, 18:58