Standing up for your own side
Sir Alex Ferguson (no relation) resigned as manager of Manchester United this week. The resulting deluge of newspaper articles covered a wide range of opinions, both gushingly complimentary and rather less so, but one characteristic of the man was uniformly (and approvingly) agreed on – that he always defended his players.
And it was hard not to contrast that unwavering loyalty (a trait described by Ferguson himself as “the anchor of my life”) with events in the independence debate last week.
Firstly, let me make clear I don’t disagree with Shona Robison, Mark McDonald or Stephen Noon, who’ve all issued various calls for civility and calm in recent days. There is no place for abuse towards those who disagree with you. Aside from anything else it doesn’t help your cause: I should know because the No campaign turned me off with abuse and aggression early on in the campaign.
And increasingly it does seem there are a few on the pro-independence side who are too quick to take to Twitter and create or prolong unnecessary battles which can never further the cause. Twitter spats are the kind of thing that can only ever do more harm than good. Ignoring or blocking a Twitter troll will never make you look bad; prolonging an argument with one is a waste of time and energy that usually does.
There’s also a growing divide now between the debate online and the debate on the streets, on doorsteps and in pubs. In real life in Scotland there are not “nationalists” and “unionists” but mothers, fathers, builders, office workers, musicians, whatever – normal people at different stages of political engagement. Many are completely disconnected from the debate, others are just beginning to give it some thought. These are the people we need to convince to vote Yes next year, and it won’t be done by creating enmities now.
I often find after a day at work, with one eye on Facebook, Twitter etc, I come away feeling pessimistic and depressed about the state of the debate. Getting out onto the streets and doorsteps is often a far more positive experience; it’s a different world out there to the one online. And that’s where the debate will ultimately be won and lost.
In this respect, Yes Scotland has one huge advantage: it is genuinely grass-roots. The No campaign is not, and appears to be directed (and funded) in significant part from outside Scotland. That is possibly why is has so little to offer that it has turned so dramatically negative since the dawn of 2013 (even compared to its previous negativity). And on this, I find myself increasingly frustrated with the SNP and Yes campaign and their reaction to it.
The “cybernat” tag is a term of abuse used to try to scare people away from the debate. From the moment of the SNP’s victory in 2011 making the referendum a reality, the pattern in below-the-line comments and on social media was clear: those arguing for independence were generally well-informed, articulate, factual and polite; while in return insults and denigration were hurled back at us.
It was, and is, off-putting. As someone who entered the debate despite such abuse, but frequently finds it upsetting, it has long bothered me. Regardless of how respectful and polite you are, if you are arguing pro-independence you’re demonized simply for holding a view and arguing it.
Just as real-life Scotland is not a country of “nationalists” and “unionists”, people who argue for independence on the internet are not “cybernats”. They too are fathers, mothers, builders, whatever. I’m a fairly middle-class librarian in real life, rapidly approaching middle age. I object to being abused simply for stating my opinion, as I object to anyone being abused for stating an opinion.
Yet while SNP and Yes people are very quick to come out and condemn any perceived abuse – regardless of the evidence for it – I can’t recall ever hearing them defend their own supporters from this kind of attack. Stories like the Susan Calman ones, which seek to conflate independence supporters with abuse and perpetuate the “cybernat” narrative, are an attack on those of us who argue for independence.
They are themselves a form of abuse, an attempt to shut down the debate by creating the impression that independence supporters are all wild-eyed, ranting lunatics hurling abuse at the other side. In fact the reality is very different, with most of us remaining calm and maintaining a sense of humour despite non-stop provocation.
When SNP and Yes people come out with condemnation, they play into the hands of this narrative, making it seem as if even our own side believes that myth. There will always be people on social media (just like there are in real life) who will be abusive: that can’t be stopped or controlled.
If there was not a single genuinely abusive independence supporter you can bet your last Scots pound the No campaign would invent them – who knows, perhaps they already are? The internet is (largely) anonymous. Neither side can possibly prevent random people or false-flaggers making them look bad, no matter how many would-be Internet Police they employ.
So surely it’s time for those involved at a high level in this debate – the politicians and leaders of it on both sides – to either condemn ALL abuse or stay silent. Because while I don’t disagree with what Robison, McDonald and Noon are saying, I also don’t see any support from them, the SNP or the wider Yes campaign for the vast majority of people who are arguing for independence responsibly and politely, yet being constantly vilified for it.
I don’t see them challenging the implied narrative of stories like the Calman ones, based on no evidence whatsoever. I don’t even see them challenging Ian Smart’s casual claims of racism among pro-independence elements, despite those being mere assertion not supported with the slightest sliver of proof either.
(The idea that racists might exist who happen to support Scottish independence is rather quaint when set against the certain knowledge that all of Britain’s highest-profile racists – the BNP and their ilk – are devout and devoted Unionists. Yet for some reason Blair McDougall is never called upon to take responsibility for the BNP in the way it’s demanded Alex Salmond “control” renegade independence supporters.)
In that failure they’re letting down their own supporters, but also failing to help deal with the issue, because I see no similar denunciations coming from Alistair Darling or Johann Lamont even for the likes of Smart – known, identifiable Labour members – let alone the hordes of anonymous poisoners on the No side.
The “cybernat” tag and such stories are deliberately designed to tar all independence supporters with the same brush. So let’s, just for a change, see leaders on our own side standing up for those of us who they’ll rely on to get their message out through social media, doorsteps, and pub conversations. Let’s hear them condemn abuse and attempts to stifle debate in the round. And demand the same of their opponents.
Cath,
Agree with what you’re saying but it’s not going to happen anytime soon.
I’ll restate my suggestion from some days ago. All so called ‘CyberNats’, anyone who supports independence and comments on social media, should throw a coming out bash, high profile, and make sure it’s widely publicised. Invite high profile YES backers.
We’re a very diverse bunch just on this site; all classes, ages, political beliefs, location.
It would be a positive statement and challenge the anonymity charge.
Are there any nationalist who are not anti-English?
The vast majority I would guess on the Independence side but I cannot vouchsafe the BritNats side.
Great article Cath! Hopefully the campaign leadership will take note.
I agree that the Yes campaign not supporting people on the internet who argue for independence. You are right to make the contrast with the No campaign. Nicola Sturgeon accepted that Susan Calman had been abused without demanding to see the evidence. By contrast, Alastair Darling is never questioned when the likes of Smart and Foulkes make offensive comments.
I could agree to much of this except that I can find no reaction to this in most of the population who couldn’t care less, so I wouldn’t worry about it.
Cath,
The use of cybernat as a derogatary term has been heavily promoted by the MSM. We will not be able to prevent them from continuing to try to use it as a word-stick to beat down online pro-independence output. However, I believe we can neutralise its negative connotations, and even turn the word around on them. I already mentioned this idea a previous thread, but there were no takers. So, I’m trying again here:
A Comparitive Study: Cybernat and the N-Word
African Americans took possession of the derogatory word “nigger” (Huckleberry Finn), now referred to in the public forums of america as the N-word. By doing so, they not only neutralised its negative connotations, but indeed used it
“to convey a range of attitudinal stances related to its basic meaning, including solidarity, censure, and a proactive stance that seeks to bring about positive change”
This is how we should approach the term CYBERNAT. I have tried to bring this idea to bear already in previous threads. One simply has to start embue the word with meaning which convey
“attitudinal stances, including solidarity, censure, and a proactive stance that seeks to bring about positive change”
Example: CYBERNAT as an Acronym (see “A Cybernat Writes“)
“Countering Your British Establishments Relentless Negativity and Tripe
I would be grateful for any thoughts or ideas in this direction.
@Albalha
Just spotted your post. I like the idea!
Yes some people who are from the hierarchy from the Yes side give credence to the Myth that “Cybernats” are a bunch to be avoided at all costs. They do not come out and condemn the pretty blatant and in plain sight abuse from all sides in the NO camp. Pandering and not holding No to account while helping perpetuate the myth that your own side is abusive to me is sometimes infuriating.
I can understand that YesScot is trying to walk a fine line and not get dragged into a negative brawl with the NO camp (because No strategy is to provoke YesScot and drag it down with it) For me the SNP needs to come out where YesScot cannot. Moreover people out there the many tens of thousands who are taking the positive arguments to the doorsteps are being systematically tarred before they even reach the door. That cannot and should not continue!
Muttley 79
That does worry me too. I am willing to give the benefit of the doubt to those who say it is a tactic to draw the fire out of the No side and set all their arguments up for rebuttal in the immediate run up to the Referendum when the BBC will have to abide by its fairness charter.
However by not taking on the No side’s bile and vomit, they could be allowing a proportion of the undecided/maybe NO voters to become sold on NO.
Albalha, perhaps we should all upload videos of ourselves “confessing” to youtube. Something along these lines:
Hi, I’m Matt. I’m a student at Strathclyde University and I work part-time in a casino. I’m a big football fan and I support Ayr Utd. I am here today to confess that I am a cybernat. In recent weeks I have been known to make such vile, abusive comments as
“Hi John, welcome to the debate. What is your positive case for remaining in the union?”
“1 in 4 children in Scotland live in poverty. If the UK regards that as a success then I really don’t trust it to look after my interests, or the interests of my children.”
I know many of you will be disgusted at this point, but you’re just going to have to learn to live with it. This is who I am, and I’m not going to apologise for it.
@Matt
Like it.
To be honest I don’t tweet despite having an account, I don’t engage with unionists on their own sites ( I am not allowed to comment for some reason unknown to me on the Better Together fb page) but I have pro-union friends and I have debated with them on my own fb page and contributed to debate with questions/statements from don’t know/no strangers on pro-independence pages and I have only experienced measured argument and respect. I agree that the debate should demand evidence for abusive behaviour on both sides but I don’t think the abuse is misunderstood by ordinary Scots as anything more than the kind of thing that happens on the Internet anyway.
I agree with Cath’s sentiments but those sentiments are very much part of an overall context of the Yes campaign upping its game and getting on to the front foot. The Yes campaign may be grass roots but at the moment it is nigh on invisible. We comfort each other on WoS with assurances that the Yes campaign are drawing the sting from BT, and are awaiting their moment to strike; and that the polls are skewed and there is a groundswell of support waiting to kick in for us.
The reality is that the average punter in the pub has no idea that the Yes campaign even exists, and that situation needs to be addressed now.
I think the YES leaders are right to mostly ignore online slagging matches. Cybernats too should brush it off and continue being positive and polite.
“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”
– George Bernard Shaw
Matt- I admire your confession to supporting Ayr United 🙂 A good idea and it’s an idea the YES campaign could run with via ads as well in the MSM and normalise YES supporters. I would hope nearer the time this would happen as not everyoner gets online. I’d like to see more meetings in the schemes (including voter registration) and not just stalls in the city centres(as valuable they are) But plenty of time.
@Matt
And the rest of the post ……..
I think it’s about diffusing the real/manufactured rancour in the debate. In the main, I see independence supporters online as a fairly positive bunch, who really believe we’ll better off taking our chances in an independent Scotland. On that we agree, perhaps one of the few things, we agree on.
We don’t , and won’t know all the answers before the vote, that needs to get out more. Perhaps as loud and proud ‘CyberNats’, not constrained by either the broad YES campaign or the SNP, we’re independent minded enough to assuage the concerns of the many, many fearties out there.
GP Walrus,
“Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience.”
…. don’t really know exactly what implications that has for our strategy though.
Cybernat is an abusive term, just like Jock is an abusive term.
We should all recognise that and deal with that accordingly every-time it is used,
Thank you Cath for writing this. You have articulated well my similar feelings. It is really not okay at this stage for the leaders on the Yes to kowtow to the extent we have seen over the past few weeks. It is demoralising. We might well be the masses making taking the argument to the streets, but we still need leaders who inspire us and provide a voice to your thoughts on a national level.
@ Albalha and others …
I would love your idea of a sudden pan-Scottish ‘ta-da‘ as we all rid ourselves of our pen names and avatars. I’ve thought of ‘coming clean’ myself in recent days (even though I am deeply attached to my late father’s nickname for me … and a few folk on here know who I am anyway).
The problem is, as some have said before, being a public supporter of independence (incredibly) can cause real difficulties for some folk in their workplace. Would we not then risk drawing too much attention to those who simply cannot afford to nail their colours to the mast?
And is not one of the pillars of the new media democracy the ability to contribute and argue without fear of reprisal?
It’s tricky one!
Freddie,
We don’t all need to “come out”, and I appreciate some people might have difficulties at work. But I think that if we had a video with a selection of real people speaking to the camera, saying a little bit about who they are and then saying “I am a cybernat”, then I think it could be a really good message to put out there.
@FreddieT
I’ve often used my name on the site but I don’t think it’s really about that. If we did have an event, do, then people wouldn’t be compelled to come out, they could wear fancy dress. (It’s never floated my boat but I’ve a sneeky suspicion quite a few on here may rather enjoy dressing up).
I think there would be enough of us from all walks of life who would feel okay about it to make an impact. For me it’s about being outside the political machine. It’s going to take a multitude of approaches to pull this off.
An event, do with enough to make it newsworthy, that too can be managed.
Plus it’d be fun.
Well said, cath. I agree with every word. Online abuse is not unique to independence debates either, take a wee peek at the pages of the guardian or Telegraph comments, and you’ll see the vilest abuse. For example, the woman on death row in Bali, was described in various online comments as a chav or a pikey, and so on. The online abuse of Alex Salmond is of course now legendary. So, let’s stop buying into this unionist narrative, that it is all about nats, and unique to Scotland and independence, as it simply isn’t. I wholly agree, it is high time our leaders started defending those who argue the case online in a civilised manner, instead of just rolling over, and follishly muttering ‘mea culpa’.
As regards Twitter – with the emphasis on twit, I coudn’t agree more. Recitations of endless night long inane arguments on twitter are simply moronic. Frankly, to quote Ian davidson, ‘who cares’. In my opinion, twitter is merely a good waste of monthly data allowance, no more, no less. Importantly, it is a tool of the unionist cabal, who, lacking sensible arguments, take to twitter to engage otherwise good people from the YES camp. It is a distraction, a means of ensuring good people cannot direct their energies towards the YES campaign, because they stay up all night arguing utter bollocks with the likes of ian davidson, or worse the truly vacuous Ian Smart. I am astonished so many good people get suckered into it and cannot see how they are being manipulated.
Anyway, good article.
Freddie Threepwood,
Exactly! Anonymous protects the minority among the majority.
Since when has anonymity been seen as negative anyway? Every important pamphleteer of the past with uncomfortable and dangerous truths to speak at establishment has had a pen name, (nom de plume and nom de guerre).
Why was (and is) that do you think?
What’s next, open and recorded voting? Why not, ‘if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear’ (and other trite stupidities forwarded as argument against the historically proven necessary protections against abuse of power).
@Matt
We could combine the do, event with an option to do a video, a ‘CyberNat’ launch as it were.
Could raise cash too.
I can hear the voiceover now ……..
Your son, mother father, sister, colleague may be a CyberNat …….YES they really are people just like you, (well most of them!) etc etc
@Matt
I think the strategy should be to proactively make positive arguments: Scotland’s wealth, Nordic / Common Weal society, control of our own social policy, control of all our resources and expenditure, our own culture and broadcasting; rather than spend much of our time and effort reacting to shallow negativity. If attacked, no need to get bogged down in refutation, simply re-enforce the positivity.
I don’t think “coming out” as cybernats is very central to the independence debate.
@Max,
“Cybernat is an abusive term, just like Jock is an abusive term.
We should all recognise that and deal with that accordingly every-time it is used”.
Agreed, and it’s how we deal with it that counts. As AmadeusMinkowski pointed out earlier on in this thread, in recent decades many young black Americans started to adopt the ‘N’ word. Understandably, they faced a lot of opposition to this from America’s black community itself, particularly its more conservative elements.
But those who did adopt the word, did so as a means of subverting white racists’ use of the term and as part of a strategy to subvert racism. It didn’t stop white racists using the term, of course, but that wasn’t the point. The point was for black Americans to claim the term and, in so doing, neutralise racists’ pejorative meaning of the term so that even the most dim-witted racist would understand that the word had lost much of its previous meaning.
Short of all of us going out to get ‘Cybernats Are Cool’ (or whatever) t-shirts made up, we do need to get smart and creative here and devise ways to neutralise unionists’ pejorative use of the term cybernats. Claim the word, change its meaning, that would be one way to deal with it.
Excellent article, Cath. I feel it too. We’re subjected to the most appalling abuse from union supporters both sides of the border, and then blamed as the abusers on national TV. Then our own leaders turn on us by agreeing that we’re vile abusers and telling us to stop it.
Never mind, listen to Hazel.
“We comfort each other on WoS with assurances that the Yes campaign are drawing the sting from BT, and are awaiting their moment to strike; and that the polls are skewed and there is a groundswell of support waiting to kick in for us.
The reality is that the average punter in the pub has no idea that the Yes campaign even exists, and that situation needs to be addressed now. “
I’m really not sure about the “now” part of that. I think it’s tough to hold off at this point, but we really do need to come to terms with the fact that this isn’t the time to fire all our guns. This is the time to prepare and to arm, to marshal our facts and arguments, to know our gameplan for when the real battle starts.
People simply aren’t that interested yet. We need to be recruiting and training, not launching offensives.
@Robert louis
“As regards Twitter – with the emphasis on twit, I coudn’t agree more. Recitations of endless night long inane arguments on twitter are simply moronic. Frankly, to quote Ian davidson, ‘who cares’. In my opinion, twitter is merely a good waste of monthly data allowance, no more, no less.”
Sorry, but I disagree with that very much. The Yes campaign places a great feel of justifiable faith in Twitter and Facebook to disseminate accurate information that the MSM aren’t publishing to the younger population. If they can convince the young, the young will convince their elders. And Twitter is a powerful and effective weapon in that arsenal.
I’m really not sure about the “now” part of that. I think it’s tough to hold off at this point,
I’m reminded of a scene from a film in which a small infantry army is being charged by cavalry and have to hold their nerve until the last minute, when they raise their sharpened stakes, leaving the cavalry in disarray and easy pickings for the infantry.
Damned if I can remember what film it was, though. 🙂
“I’m reminded of a scene from a film in which a small infantry army is being charged by cavalry and have to hold their nerve until the last minute, when they raise their sharpened stakes, leaving the cavalry in disarray and easy pickings for the infantry.
Damned if I can remember what film it was, though. :)”
Precisely. I linked to the clip once before, but I don’t want to make a habit of it 😀
“The Cybernats Ball” I like it,
could be a fundraiser, would need to be in Glasgow to get any media there though. Not that we’ve had any joy so far getting any old media to cover our rallies. I wonder why that is?
http://www.bard2014.com
link to facebook.com
“Precisely. I linked to the clip once before, but I don’t want to make a habit of it”
Was that the one where the tactic of ‘holding’ led to fleeting success but had the enemy ultimately redoubling its efforts to crush the protagonist, who ended up bloodied, beaten and eviscerated? 😉
I seem to recall he ended up with Sophie Marceau before that though, so swings and roundabouts..
“I seem to recall he ended up with Sophie Marceau before that though, so swings and roundabouts..”
And also, just after the “eviscerated” bit his side won for 400 years 😀
Good post Cath. I have to say that in my opinion the YES campaign and SNP officials should stay out of it. To state the obvious the NO controlled MSM would love it if they got involved as they would report them as desperate paranoids.
I completely agree that we can (and will) win at local level. Also agree that tweeters should block all unionists who are not prepared to debate reasonably. They want to create trouble-that’s their objective.
On a positive note I’m finding people more receptive to Independence. Anybody else finding the same?
Ach to hell with it …
I’m Danny Alexander and I don’t care what my boss thinks!
Keep telling the truth. Those who tell untruths will eventually doubt themselves. Doubt works both ways. There may well be many travellers on the road to Damascus…. foot soldiers who eventually see themselves as used by those who have much to lose when we are free.
Be of good heart. Hail Alba.
“Sorry, but I disagree with that very much. The Yes campaign places a great feel of justifiable faith in Twitter and Facebook to disseminate accurate information that the MSM aren’t publishing to the younger population. If they can convince the young, the young will convince their elders. And Twitter is a powerful and effective weapon in that arsenal.”
Yes, it would appear that many grandparents are anti-independence. Will they go against the wishes of their grandchildren, though?
“Yes, it would appear that many grandparents are anti-independence. Will they go against the wishes of their grandchildren, though?”
If they can be convinced it’s for the benefit of those grandchildren, even if it scares them? Yup, I think so.
@Freddie T
Soooo, riddle me this. How do you explain that you and Hamish are never seen in the room together at the same time, eh?
Excellent article Cath. We were discussing this at a meeting last night. The words used about the Yes/SNP leadership were “too nicey nicey” and “time they put the tackety boots on”.
Next time Newsnight or whoever ask for a yes spokesperson, maybe they should be told that their chosen person is not available, but they can choose from Alex Neil, Kenneth Gibson or Dennis Canavan.
@Fairliered
That is absolutely in their gift. Usually a ‘bid’ for an interviewee will not be a specifically named person if it’s on a general point of debate.
And it’s even more baffling, to me, given the head of the YES campaign knows BBC Scotland inside out.
@Matt
I think that’s a great idea, takes the sting out of ‘cybernat’ with a bit of humour, but with a serious message!
Good article as usual, Cath.
I think a mistake was made the very moment someone from the SNP decided it was time to try and sort out people’s behaviour online. This should never have happened, because as soon as they did, they were implicitly taking responsibility for what random people on the internet were saying. All along, the line should have been “we can’t control what people are saying online. As long as people are not breaking any laws, they are entitled to express themselves however they like on the internet, regardless of how much we may disapprove of what they’re saying. It’s called ‘freedom of speech’, and it’s a cornerstone of democracy.” I don’t know who it was that decided to suddenly start trying to interfere – whether it was someone who didn’t really understand the nature of internet discourse, or a press officer who kept getting annoyed at other people “ruining their good work” – but it was a mistake.
That said, a lot of us could do worse than to take a step back sometimes and decide if it’s really worth getting into an argument with a unionist online. On a recent Scottish Independence Podcast, Stuart Braithwaite from Mogwai said something about the futility of definite Yes voters arguing with definite No voters, and I felt he had a point. I think we all feel aggrieved when we see someone spouting absolute pish online, and feel they need to be corrected. But there comes a point where it’s better to just let it go. Hothersall is a good example, as any time spent arguing with him is just a waste of your time (unless you just fancy a bit of a rammy, then it’s guaranteed entertainment). The idiot pictured above saying we’re all anti-English is another one. Ian Smart is another.
Arguing with these folk isn’t going to put off any voters, because the only folk reading these Twitter spats are people who are already pretty much decided how they’re voting. But it IS a waste of our time. Same goes for when someone like Grahamski starts arguing on here – if no one pays any attention to them, they get bored. Well, that’s the theory anyway…
But we do need a bit of Alex Ferguson defending from those at the top. Every time someone from our side writes a blog telling the world that indy supporters need to rein things in a bit, they’re essentially agreeing that there’s a problem to sort out. Speak out against personal attacks etc by all means, but make it very clear that it’s a general comment, and not focused on one side in particular. Or better yet, damn the behaviour of unionists, try to put the onus on THEM for a change.
We may be described as ‘cybernats’, when in truth it is cyber-democracy. Where would we be without the opportunities afforded us to debate matters without the internet? That I think is the issue, and certain sections of the media, politicians and those who would seek to close down debate don’t like it. We should not and will not be silenced!
@ Major
He … ah, eh … ooh look, a squirrel!
Perhaps Stewart Whyte could put his question, ‘Are there any Nationalists who are not anti-English racists’ to all the Commonwealth athletes and their representatives, who are coming to Scotland next year. I’m sure their are many Nationalists and they feel Nationalistic when they compete for their countries.
Ian Davidson MP said no Nationalist Politicians should be allowed near the Commonwealth Games. Excludes every country in the Commonwealth.
Cybernat doesn’t bother me, in fact I quite like it. I am a nationalist and I am on the computer. I have been called far worse things. Whta matters to me is that I honestly represent my views without recourse to lies and partisan reading of the facts (aka lies).
Yes, there is a softly softly approach by the SNP and the Yes campaign which too readily takes on board the criticism from the MSM about independence supporters and which in its turn gives the other side a pretty easy ride. However, there will come a point in the not so distant future when sleeves will have to be rolled up and a slugfest take place. The SNP left it quite late in 2011 but once they got going they rolled over Labour like T34s on the Kursk salient.
If someone behaves badly and issues death threats or stalks someone then they should be held to account. What isn’t acceptable is a MSM that dances to the BT tune and lambasts YS over events that never happened while ignoring genuine abuse from the BT side. In that respect I am glad that Smart’s “better 100 years of Tory rule than ever Scots should look after their own affairs” received support from Foulkes and McConnell. It shows he spoke not just as an off the wall BT supporter (both sides have one or two well screwed together members) but as a mainstream, heart of BT, supporter. This is something we should make sure everyone in Scotland hears.
Hear, hear, Stu. I was totally disgusted by some of those leading the YES campaign jumping in more or less immediately to condemn the Cybernats over the Calman nonsense when all the evidence shows that the NO supporters are by far the vilest of the abusers. I posted a comment stating this on Noone’s site and even pointed out the paper by Dr Mark Shephard of Strathclyde University at the House of Commons – Discourse on Scottish Independence – Politicians versus Publics” Published 8th May 2012 but to no avail. My post did not appear.
The YES people need to get their head out from wherever it is stuck and find out what is actually being written on the Internet, because with their antics and their apparent uselessness in producing any momentum in the YES campaign I am slowly becoming disillusioned with them. There is a great deal of useful information on the blog sites and comments which the YES people should be utilising but they are not.
I actually prefer the version
cyber-gnat
The thought of a mass “coming out” hhmmm?
I personally use my real name but don’t for a minute think the better no brigade don’t have backroom assistance from mi5 and while they would find it easy to get every name and address on here ,the thought of doing their job for them is not something I think is in the yes campaigns interests
One of the comments either made by Alex Ferguson or about him is that … “nobody wins anything without having some fire in their belly”, and I believe that too. Unfortunately the YES campaign and apparently the SNP don’t have any.
Sorry Cath Ferguson! I have credited the article wrongly to the Rev Stu. But it is still a great article.
Ive been a proud Cybernat since the start of this debate! I once ” came out” and was abused and threatened by orange-rangers-thugs. I closed the account down and prefer destroying unionist arguments with facts and figures. I have a strong word with them but never abuse, threaten or troll them. A recent spat with a Luke D Coffey on my twitter Anon_Sailor demonstrates the rudeness that BetterTogether can throw at us! Luke is an American Britnat Unionist who worked for No.10
I will fight this my way and keep to facts and figures which as we all know they dont like!
Dave McEwan Hill says:9 May, 2013 at 2:48 pm
“I could agree to much of this except that I can find no reaction to this in most of the population who couldn’t care less, so I wouldn’t worry about it.”
They couldn’t care less because there is no )*^%& Yes campaign. And your quote also belies all the good work that is supposedly being done at ‘grass roots level’.
@johnking
What’s the fear? We’re talking about a YES vote in a referendum that around 35% of people, currently living in Scotland, support.
Like I say there are many different ways to get the message across, we’re not a homogeneous group, there’s no one size fits all.
AmadeusMinkowski says:9 May, 2013 at 2:49 pm
I’m a proud Cybernat and have been saying so on most forums I visit. And there are very many more out there. Unfortunately there are still some of us who take it as an insult. And worse the leaders of the YES campaign still think it is an insult.
“My brother Ian Smart is not a racist. He is worse than that.
A racist is normally someone with a grievance, who out of ignorance, and fueled by urban and media myths, wrongly blames ethic minorities who have absolutely nothing to do with whatever their problem might be. My brother Ian has few problems, is rather well healed, well educated and mixes amongst the very highest echelons of the Scottish establishment. So when he asserts that there will be some sort of pogrom against the Polish and Pakistani communities (and presumably others) in a post independence Scotland, he is not doing this out of ignorance or prejudice, but out of political calculation. The calculation that if he asserts it loudly and often enough Scotland’s ethnic communities and others can be scared into voting No.
This is called playing the race card. It is one of the most dangerous things an individual can do in any context, and of course normally done by politicians of the far right. But for a Labour blogger to do it in Scotland, where there is a hard worked for and commendable cross-party and cross-society consensus against racial prejudice, and inject it into the highly charge debate on independence is despicable.”
So lets assume Ian smart is for real for a minute and is espousing a belief driven by experience, so we have to ask do you know anyone who is a racist? indie or otherwise? I dont, , so where did he acquire this opinion?
could the clue be in the statement above made by his own brother
“My brother Ian has few problems, is rather well healed, well educated and mixes amongst the very highest echelons of the Scottish establishment.”
nuff said
Danny Alexander,
your lucky, I am Jackie Baillie! Like you though, I don’t care who knows it now (except for Ianbrotherhood obviously).
One of the good things i think has come out of the latest stories on ‘Calman’, ‘Ian Taylor donorgate’ and ‘Ian Smart tweets’ is that us so called Cybernats have forced the narrative in that it us the Independence side that is now holding them to account for their actions and that must be worrying the Unionists. Changed days. Its very refreshing and vital for the YES campaign not to be always responding to the Unionist narrative when most of the time it has the appearance of a being a set up by certain parties working in tandem with no foundation to the story whatsoever. We dont want to be bogged down with that for the next year and a half. So this is welcome change and i think its thanks to Wings, Neswnet, NC and all the other bloggers and sites on the YES side.
With that in mind, i also was a bit peeved with the SNP and YES for accepting the bait over Susan Calman and a wee slap on our wrists for us children. That was hard to swallow and they took some of the sting out of our argument in so doing. It was a mistake on their part not to ask them for the evidence for this abuse which wouldve kept the heat on them. To be thrown to the wolves like that by our own side wasnt nice. Solidarity will win us a YES vote.
By the way Cath, very well put.
Albalha says:
9 May, 2013 at 5:12 pm
@johnking
If you think the better no campaign are playing dirty, I think they haven’t even started there is MUCH worse to come
I would say to those who feel abused, prove it or shut up!
All claims of abuse should not be taken as reality,unless accompanied with the details and proof of the actual abuse. Otherwise who can you believe? The Bitter Together crowd,ah well, that will be a no then!
“I’m reminded of a scene from a film in which a small infantry army is being charged by cavalry and have to hold their nerve until the last minute, when they raise their sharpened stakes, leaving the cavalry in disarray and easy pickings for the infantry.
Damned if I can remember what film it was, though. ”
You need a wee lie doon with some o yon McGonnagal stuff.
link to bit.ly
@johnking
What, you think, they’re going to be sending round Thought Police to reprogramme us? Clearly at a campaign level it’ll continue as it is already going, no surprise there.
But I’m still not clear what you fear at a personal level from the BT/NO campaign.
HandandShrimp says: 9 May, 2013 at 4:57 pm
“The SNP left it quite late in 2011 but once they got going they rolled over Labour like T34s on the Kursk salient.”
That was then when Labour thought it had it in the bag and relaxed. I am sure the NO mob won’t let that happen again. We don’t need to use our big guns yet, but we sure as hell need to be doing something to get some momentum going if only for the sake of morale. And the hierarchy as a minimum must start to defend its Internet troops.
The complacency on this site is unbelieveable. Do any of you know that the latest poll published today shows YES down 3% and NO up 4%?
“And the hierarchy as a minimum must start to defend its Internet troops.
The complacency on this site is unbelieveable. Do any of you know that the latest poll published today shows YES down 3% and NO up 4%?”
Accusing people of “complacency” when they’re miles behind in the polls is a bit daft. We’re not complacent, we’re calm. I really can’t say it enough – polls right now DO NOT MATTER A DAMN, and if we get into a panic about them we’ll only hurt ourselves.
Completely agree that the hierarchy should be defending their troops better, which is why I ran this piece.
Stu = dude. Argumentative at times, but I think he’s got it. Stay calm and then work like hell during the last few months. Joe Public is fed up with the No campaign already
Thanks to Morag for posting that wee youtube link to The Cybernat Song .. I’ve just reposted it to my Facebook page. 🙂 I’m just recovering from the shock of seeing my picture here on Wings .. I’m in the YES campaign picture in the high visable jacket next to the YES sign!
@a supporter
Exceptionally poor trolling
I have to agree with the view that Yes / SNP are not pushing hard enough against the smears. Sitting around the campfire singing Kum Ba Ya while unionist thugs lurk in the shadows provided by the BBC / MSM ready to pounce.
I can’t see why we can’t have a positive campaign and stand up for ourselves at the same time. Yes need someone on their side that is not afraid to speak out and can take one for the team now and again. Don’t ask me who or from where. Such people tend to rise to the occasion and not be manufactured.
And there is absolutely nothing wrong with being called a cybernat it is something that we should be proud of. That we will stand up to the British state and its lackeys and do whatever little bit that we can to defend and liberate our country is something to aspire to.
Anyone who is debating online whether on social media, blogs or newspaper comments knows there are abusive comments coming from both sides, There are loads of folk that haven’t a clue what’s going on and still not interested. So let’s not get too worked up about it.
Can’t for the life of me see why any Scot would get worked up about being called a ‘Jock’ by the way. (the sting is usually in what follows)
Instead of getting in a state about being called a cybernat, get off you arse and get out to the man in the street that is where the debate will be won,
Strange as it may seem to most of us here, but there are loads of folk that still don’t use the internet much: busy lives/no interest or simply poor broadband speeds
@HeatherMcLean
Is that Dundee’s Murraygate?
I do think the YES people can be a bit naive when they send out YES stickers for the car. Would you park your car somewhere with a YES sticker.
On the other hand I would be quite happy to march behind a Cybernat banner. You might think that’s illogical but there is strength in numbers and I don’t look anything like a raving loony. I agree with ALBALHA that is the message we need to get across.
“Albalha says:
9 May, 2013 at 5:30 pm
@johnkingWhat, you think, they’re going to be sending round Thought Police to reprogramme us? ”
link to en.wikipedia.org
Cath,
really interesting article that touches on so much of this stupidly self imposed positive vs negative campaign definitions being pushed by our ‘elders and betters’ at the moment.
Rather than positive and negative, I would see it more in terms of reasonable and unreasonable. The electorate instinctively know the difference and which side they see themselves on.
I would say it was the obvious unreasonableness of all opposition parties since 2007 and not their negativity that resulted in the landslide of 2011 and the happy position we find ourselves in now.
It was the SNP’s focus on conventional political campaigning theory, positive vs negative, that meant that even they were taken by surprise at the vehemence of the electorates reaction to such obviously toxic and unreasonable behaviour among their elected representatives.
I see no change in our oppositions behaviour, either strategically or tactically, so can see no reason for a change in the electorates response and final judgement of it.
Thanks again for taking the time to write it, get it published and out there for debate. It really was a great read.
The man who unfailingly defended those from his own team who crippled opponents and attacked supporters is a vile bigot and a craven.
Inherited a winning Aberdeen team then ran like the labour lickspittle he is when Souness turned up at Ipox.
Winning when you have every referee in the league either in your pocket or terrified of you is no achievement. Does every Ran-Tic manager deserve an honour for similar assisted success.
1983 was a rainy fluke nothing more.
Thanks for sharing, Pete!
a supporter
“They couldn’t care less because there is no )*^%& Yes campaign.”
There is a big and growing YES campaign going on and building all the time – but you surely don’t expect tosee it on the telly or in the papers,do you.. We’ve got a YES centre manned and open five days a week going up to six and leafletting going on. We’ve had four well attended YES meetings and another seven already planned. Where are you writing about?
We’ve even got frustrated NO supporters sticking leaflets on our YES centre windows – and would love to welcome them in for a chat!
@YesYesYes @Max @cath @Albalha @tartanpigsy
Cybernats: Claim the word, change its meaning
Accumulating here a number of ideas put forward so far.
CYBERNAT: “Countering Your British Establishments Relentless Negativity and Tripe
“The Cybernats Ball: Publicity and Fund Raiser
‘Cybernats Are Cool’ (or whatever) t-shirts etc
Great! Keep the ideas coming!
Um. Right, Peter.
You do realise that was just a lead-in to Cath’s actual article, don’t you?
What we need to get across to our fellow Scots is that mostly the supporters of indepèndence believe that we are capable of running our affairs and that the No campaigners don’t.The No supporters have a very poor opinion of our fellow Scots and by extension,probably themselves.
@Joybell
See your point about the stickers, can think of a few places in Greater Glasgow where it wouldn’t go down well. Not sure about a march, bit too traditional maybe. It’s trying to do something that rises above the bollocks of twitter spats etc, that, also, as has been said previously, normalises a YES position, that demonstrates the breadth and range of the support.
And, although, I’m sure the YES campaign grassroots work is doing well it’s not for everyone.
Cheese and wine soiree?
Have a friend who was discussing the referendum with an acquaintance who he was surprised to find out was voting “Tory” (or “no” as it was then explained to him). My friend was making very little headway when, in exasperation, he exclaimed “So,you’re a wanker then”
This clinched it.
Therein lies the key. It’s all about national and personal self esteem in the final analysis
Albalha,
‘And, although, I’m sure the YES campaign grassroots work is doing well it’s not for everyone.’
Surely that’s the point. It’s for everyone to find a role that suits them in the grass roots campaign (or make their own). Take responsibility for the talents you have and find a way to donate them. That will, in the end, easily overwhelm this pretty basic propaganda that YES is two weirdos with 60 thousand twitter and web accounts each.
Rev. Stuart Campbell says: 9 May, 2013 at 5:45 pm
“Accusing people of “complacency” when they’re miles behind in the polls is a bit daft. We’re not complacent, we’re calm. I really can’t say it enough – polls right now DO NOT MATTER A DAMN, and if we get into a panic about them we’ll only hurt ourselves.”
Well that may be your OPINION but it is not mine nor a lot of others’ either. We are “miles behind in the polls” but according to you and many others on here that “DOESN’T MATTER A DAMN” everything will be allright in 490+ days. Well I thought you at least had more sense. Talk about ostriches. If that isn’t complacency what is it? Polls now do matter regardless of your opinion and we are miles behind in them because the YES campaign so far is inneffective, and the sooner this is accepted and changed the better. If the ‘grass roots’ work was doing good, we would now be showing some movement upwards. And polls always matter, if for nothing else, to show the troops what is the effect of their work. I don’t want to rock the boat but it is better to get this sorted out now when there is still a long way to go.
“Polls now do matter regardless of your opinion”
No they don’t. That’s not an opinion, it’s a fact. The only poll that counts is the one in September 2014. Ipsos-Mori will not determine whether Scotland is independent or not.
Opinions of the competency of the Yes Scotland campaign are a separate issue. Criticism is entirely valid. But their job is NOT to win opinion polls now, it’s to win the referendum in 16 months.
@Braco
Exactly what I’m saying, isn’t it?
Dave McEwan Hill,
I have tried that one so many times Dave. It never seems to work for me though! (winkysmile)
Incidentally, I’ve had a nice email back from Dr Mark Shephard at Strathclyde University. His study into the online debate won’t be fully completed until next February, but will have some early findings in September this year.
Albalha,
What, where…….who? Sorry (veryweaksmile)
‘@ a supporter , just so we know where you are coming from, how many campaigns have you been involved with over the years?
There are many people who use facebook just to keep in touch with friends and relatives but who dont read blogs or visit twitter. By posting on your page eye catching graphics giving a few facts about independence, and some of the Scottish good news stories which go unreported in the media it is possible to open people’s minds to a different future. Even the fact that you yourself are an independence supporter may well cause your friends to think twice. We have time to use gentle persuasion.
A Supporter,
I have spent a lot of time forming reasoned argument against your assertions. I have given evidence for reasons that the polls are not registering and won’t register the work being undertaken at the moment by the YES campaign.
You have persisted in these negative assertions without forwarding any evidence and have even admitted that you have none, but as things appear so bad (to you) for the YES campaign at the moment, in your opinion, it would be better to try anything than continue on this path.
Unless you can show me any evidence for your assertions I would have to say that you are panicking. Not a helpful emotion with 15 months or so to go.
Are there any Scotch who are not anti-Scottish racists?
Jeez it was only an outlier from a pollster that’s using outdated methodologies and has been predicting doom and gloom since they started measuring.
MORI are way out on their own.
Even with that, tables show only 45% were saying they were sure they’d vote no if they voted in 2015. 55% not definitely up for the union.
I’m quite comfortable within things as they are. No is soft – you can even see it in more no-biased polls.
the SNP and YES for accepting the bait over Susan Calman
Aye, and it was such an open goal.
“Could you show us some evidence for this abuse?”
“What? There isn’t any?”
“You’re surely not making it up, are you?”
“Why is the BBC repeating this BetterTogether invented nonsense?”
Braco says: 9 May, 2013 at 6:41 pm
“I have spent a lot of time forming reasoned argument against your assertions. I have given evidence for reasons that the polls are not registering and won’t register the work being undertaken at the moment by the YES campaign.”
I see. You have reasoned arguments but I have only assertions. Come off it. Give me a link to your ‘evidence’. I would like to read that.
“it would be better to try anything than continue on this path.”
I did not say it would be better to try anything I said we needed to change to a more positive and vigorous campaign.
“Unless you can show me any evidence for your assertions I would have to say that you are panicking. Not a helpful emotion with 15 months or so to go.”
That is a silly statement to make. I am not panicking about anything what I am doing is suggesting a change of strategy while there is still a long time to go.
Anyway I’m not going to comment any more on this subject since it seems to upset too many people.
@Peter
The man who unfailingly defended those from his own team who crippled opponents and attacked supporters is a vile bigot and a craven.
Alex Ferguson, a Protestant who played for Rangers, and married a Catholic lady from Glasgow, is a vile bigot is he?
Inherited a winning Aberdeen team then ran like the labour lickspittle he is when Souness turned up at Ipox.
Are you seriously claiming that Ferguson ran away from Souness? He had won everything at Aberdeen, with the exception of the European Cup. What happened when he came up against Souness in England?
Winning when you have every referee in the league either in your pocket or terrified of you is no achievement. Does every Ran-Tic manager deserve an honour for similar assisted success.
Yes, you win that number of trophies by only being able to bully referees…
1983 was a rainy fluke nothing more.
Sure it was. The fact that we beat Bayern Munich and Real Madrid fairly and squarely had nothing to do with it….
I guess there will be a fast-track Lordship now so he can more overtly join Foulkes and co on the No Scotland campaign.
@ Albert Herring
I too am more than a little disappointed with the Yes/SNP response to Susan Calman’s farcical allegation of possible abuse, and the apparently coordinated and biased reporting of the issue by the MSM. Ian Smart’s open goal was also a sitter left to go begging, IMO. In fact, Yes/SNP failure to effectively support their own online supporters is very perplexing.
Although there is a lot to be said against wrestling with pigs, I am concerned that the unionist bullshit will sink in, if left unchallenged for much longer. After all, it is the undecideds that will determine the outcome in 2014.
Perhaps I might be accused of pancaking, but then I could assert that those accusing me are themselves being overly confident. Then again, I’m just a punter an not a political tactician. I know the Scots electorate appears to be smart enough to not take things at face value, but I am not entirely comfortable relying on this.
Just twigged, ‘a supporter’ is ‘yeah one’ or something like that from the Scotsman. Please don’t feed it
@CameronB
It’s a wee bit late for “pancaking” this year 🙂
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that the SNP (and Yes) strategists are the very people who have put us in a position few of us would have dreamed possible while stuffing leaflets through doors in the seventies, eighties, nineties and yes even the (I hate this word) noughties.
We are campainging IN a REFERENDUM for an INDEPENDENT SCOTLAND!
We’re just foot soldiers but we’re not Kitchener’s lions being led by donkeys. We are a disparate group but we have the knowledge that those people who have led us so far will not fail us now. They are as passionate about this cause as we are, have invested just as much as we have and will guide and instruct us when they judge the moment to be right for the final push to achieve a country fit for our descendents.
However, like most on here I wish they would stop being apologists and DEMAND proof of any threats etc that Yes supporters are accused of and use the full force of the law to pursue and prosecute any such perpetrators, be they Yes supporters or false flag merchants.
Apologies for rant.
Albert Herring says:
9 May, 2013 at 8:06 pm
@CameronB
It’s a wee bit late for “pancaking” this year
Not so sure, didn’t we see a ‘flapjack’ earlier this week (in support of some smart comment or other)? 🙂
@Albert Herring
🙂 🙂 doh!
@ Boorach
Good point about where we are, I just wish I was a bit more in the know I suppose.
@ Chic
Ouch! 🙂
Yesterday, and another pub conversation on the referendum initiated by a unionist friend with a bee in his bunnet about independence. Previously I have always factually rebutted his claims of racism, Anglophobia, etc, to little apparent effect. Yesterday I had had enough and ridiculed his claims, exaggerated them and threw them back in his face. Cue gales of laughter from our friends and I don’t think he will raise the subject again in company. Maybe I will though 🙂
It might not be obvious but Better Together are in the process of jumping the shark, any more gifts like 100 years of Tories or 507 questions and we will be able to rip the pish all the way to indy.
@ Laura
I absolutly hate being called ‘jock’ firstly it is s not my name, secondly I find it offensive as its said in the same tone as ‘sambo’ would have been. My way of dealing with it is to explain the above to the person uttering the word. It always worked for me. People use it without thinking about it, much like the language for minorities in the 70’s .I refuse to be labelled by anyone. What if I called all women , whereever and whoever a perjorative name? Naw not recognising a person as an individual and a human is dehumanisation and the sign of an idiot. Mind you happy to be called early for dinner 🙂
Great article by the way Cath
a supporter says:
7 May, 2013 at 2:43 pm
Braco says: 7 May, 2013 at 1:47 pm
………. And your final comment … “Where is the evidence that your alternative, more aggressive, proposed strategy would work? Has it ever before?”. I don’t have any evidence but it seems to me that the current YES campaign’s approach isn’t working anyway, so what’s to lose?
A Supporter,
I understand that I paraphrased, but is that not pretty much what you said above during our last discussion on this?
You and I both know that when I ask for evidence from you, I am not asking for some killer link or smoking gun. We both know these things are subjective and open to interpretation.
What I am asking for and have always asked for is for some of the reasons behind your concerns and not simply the statement of your concerns and your proposed solutions to them.
For example what are your reasons to believe that the raw numbers reported by the current polls accurately represent current thought in the Scots electorate? I have given my reasons to doubt that assumption and backed those reasons up with counter evidence. Evidence such as all the polls showing the Scots electorate’s attitudes to such things as where powers should lie, belief in the possibility of further devolution following a NO vote and attitudes to the rise of UKIP in Westminster etc. etc.
I am only asking for the same kind of background information that has so obviously swayed you towards a different conclusion to myself. How else do you expect me to re assess my own considered and fairly well researched personal conclusions if you won’t share with me what (I am very happy to acknowledge) might be new information that I have not seen yet.
I am entirely earnest in this, as it is for the gathering of information on this subject that I and I assume the other readers of WOS read, comment and in my case spend far too much of my productive time engaging (financially and personally at least. wink).
So please don’t think that I am upset with you raising the issue and somehow trying to silence you. I would just like the conversation to go a little deeper. That to me seems quite the opposite to what you seem to think I am saying.
I am looking for information and am happy to be proven wrong with any of my beliefs, theories and assertions if I am inadvertently damaging the cause in any way. But I am also proud and experienced enough to know that info and awarenesses like that generally only comes to light during strong, heart felt and honest debate amongst friends.
Sorry for the length of this post, but I would not want you to develop the wrong impression of where I am coming from. After all we are both Supporters, only with differing views of the way forward. That’s all.
A fine piece, Cath!
Though I may juss be a wee Wild Hairy Haggis, I ken that thon Big Yins have their social an’ political considerations tae accomodate, hence why ye have handles lik Thon Mon in ‘e Jar an’ Albaha. As fer masel, Ah was an occasional commentator oan this vera site, but because ahm keekin’ tae get mair intae political matters, ah took ‘e “Batman approach.” In times past, Ah’ve been attacked on a personal level from those wha’ve disagreed with mah opinions. People kin be hurt, or ridiculed, or threatened. But an idea, a symbol, that cannae be hurt.
So my true identiy shallnae be kent tae the waurld, though ah’ll nae greet if it is revealed in due course – because if all ye ken aboot me is that ahm a Wild Hairy Haggis, there’s no that much to criticize, only the ideas. An’ ideas are untouchable, an’ whit’s more, that’s whaur ‘e battle kin tak place. Nae mudslingin’ aboot somebdies’ nem, nae ad hominem or ither argumental fallacies, juss eh arguments emsels.
Alex Ferguson – loved by many, hated by just as many.
Not sure I want a ‘unionist type’ bully boy sticking up for me in blind faith regardless of my actions. Why lower ourselves to their level ?
Also not sure it would actually win any votes either, which, at the end of the day, in a game of two halves, is precisely what it’s about.
Long way to go before the referendum date.
The Wild Hairy Haggis,
have you ever been sinbinned?
Braco, well, if ah answer in ‘e affirmative or ‘e positive, wid tha’ naw be a clue? In ony case, it’s naw due to onywan on this site tha’ ahm takkin these measures: if onything, it’s due to the glamour of a secret internet identity in general! Though ah’ve no really posted tha’ much onyway, so yer naw missin’ much!
@thewildhairyhaggis
??
@ TWHH
Is this and its likes, what you are on about?
link to thedailymash.co.uk
Here’s a question to ask the NO folk and maybe get the undecideds thinking.
Given that we have so many celebrations each year, if the Union of 1707 was/is that great, why don’t we have a day each year celebrating the bloody thing?
Nobody’s interested!
The Wild Hairy Haggis,
Ahhh…….. the glamour of the outlaw life.
I envy you your internet youth. (Just don’t involve me!)
(pullsneckin)
Thought a wee bit light-heartedness might not go amiss on the subject of cybernattery. I’ve borrowed shamelessly from Monty Python – Sing along to the tune of The Lumberjack Song:
The Cyber-Jack song
I’m a Cybernat and I’m ok
I blog all night and I post all day
I cut and paste, I see off trolls
I swear at the BBC
I share Wings links on Facebook
and tweet till half past three
I’m a Cybernat and I’m ok
I blog all night and I post all day
I don’t like Marcus Gardham or AM753
I read Newsnet and Bella
and fight with Grahamski
I’m a Cybernat and I’m ok
I blog all night and I post all day
I’m not in moderation, I sometimes SHOUT and cuss
I love Wings over Scotland
where Cybernats R Us
I’m a Cybernat and I’m ok
I blog all night and I post all day
Alltogether now……..:-)
Chic McGregor says:
9 May, 2013 at 7:49 pm
I guess there will be a fast-track Lordship now so he can more overtly join Foulkes and co on the No Scotland campaign.
I’m not a footie, but that was my first thought too! – must be something to do with me being a cybernat
Sneddon – sorry, if it offends you so much. Perhaps I grew up with too many Jock & Paddy jokes.
@ Jeannie
Someone has to do a proper version of that and get it on youtube. I’m sure you could have a real go at the lyrics and there are lots of musicians here. Collaborative effort perhaps?
@ Laura
I think Sneddon is correct in his attitude. It is pretty much the same as calling someone a nigger, note not an ‘N’ but a nigger, in that it contains an apparent inference of power and authority that is not equal. I used to cause huge offense if responding in this manner when I lived in London, but I was much younger then. If given the opportunity to explain my choice of language, the target of my racial abuse would normally get the point.
I love the article Cath. Read it today at work but unfortunately didn’t have the opportunity to comment. I completely agree with everything you’ve said and I’ve been saying much the same thing for years! We seriously need to start confronting the Bitters, rather than waiting for the next question and batting it away. It’s like being on the other side of the net from Federer. Except every single argument they have can either be disproved or scoffed at. They have nothing.
I phoned Call Kaye the other day and look at the reaction? What if we all phoned up Kaye and got her on-topic? What if we all got together and didn’t pay our TV license fees? What’s a “class action” or whatever it’s called? We need to project this referendum debate to the public. Use the BBC because surely it’s ours to be used. This is way too important to get wrong. Maybe the high heid yin’s have a plan. I personally can’t see it. We shouldn’t be in this situation anyway. If we remember back a couple of years we were on top I’d say. SNP won the election by a landslide. To be honest that was enough for me. A party elected on a ticket that had independence loud and proud? Who in the UK doesn’t know what the SNP stands for? They could have declared independence right there for me.
It seems in hindsight that we were naive to expect a reasoned, rational debate, so we could all come to a fair-minded conclusion which would allow us all to rub along together, whatever the outcome of the referendum. Sadly the Bitters just can’t raise their game. They seem intent in creating a climate in which rubbing along together will be nigh on impossible. Is this what they really want? Can they live with themselves, sleep easy at night? I couldn’t.
Hail Alba!
Will Mr. Smart now be relegated to BBC Englandshire, as it would appear Ms. Wark has after her heroic “interview” with Mr. Salmond.
Jennie – loved your wee post. Gave me a wee smile.
As a YES supporter I think we need to get the message across that a YES vote is nothing to do with Alex Salmond or the SNP but a vote for a better and fairer Scotland.This is all about a better and prosperous future for our children and their grandchildren and those long well after. That fact is being obscured by the NO mob – we know better
Jeanne, that is just fall-down funny! Right up there with Hazel’s Cybernat Song.
@Jim Mitchell – that’s a good point. The government wants us to ‘celebrate’ the start of WWI next year, so why did no-one celebrate the Treaty of Union in 2007?
I have reclaimed Cybernat by changing my Twitter name to Sadie Cybernat, but if someone wants to set up a Youtube channel, I don’t mind uploading a wee film saying who I am and what I do!
If we put lots of tags on the films, they could be seen by people who are not yet part of the debate, especially as the films would be short, so they’d be more likely to take the time to watch it.
Twitter tactics as I see them:
1) There’s absolutely no point in trying to debate anything with NO types. They are not going to change their minds. Follow a few to see what they are thinking, but simply don’t engage
2) Also don’t waste too much energy on groupthink with Yes supporters. Instead, push out the useful articles and blogs; get them passed on.
3) The target is the undecided or the uncommitted, especially those who might be curious enough to follow you and learn more. Follow local business, organisations, 3rd sector set ups, charities, random indivduals.
4) Retweet stuff from the above. You are a) being helpful. b) encouraging them to take note that you are friendly, and maybe worth following. Start sending some of the best links & comments in their direction
IMO, going round in circles responding to offensive comment is playing right into their hands. It’s the anithesis of the grass roots stuff we need to be doing.
That’s what I think.
“Twitter tactics as I see them:
1) There’s absolutely no point in trying to debate anything with NO types. They are not going to change their minds. Follow a few to see what they are thinking, but simply don’t engage
2) Also don’t waste too much energy on groupthink with Yes supporters. Instead, push out the useful articles and blogs; get them passed on.
3) The target is the undecided or the uncommitted, especially those who might be curious enough to follow you and learn more. Follow local business, organisations, 3rd sector set ups, charities, random indivduals.
4) Retweet stuff from the above. You are a) being helpful. b) encouraging them to take note that you are friendly, and maybe worth following. Start sending some of the best links & comments in their direction
IMO, going round in circles responding to offensive comment is playing right into their hands. It’s the anithesis of the grass roots stuff we need to be doing.
That’s what I think.”
Can’t fault that. Especially (1). I used to, and have given up on almost every one now. Get pulled in sometimes when someone retweets them into my timeline, otherwise not. And (2) also.
Cameron,
I’m a Jock and a Cybernat and don’t have a problem with either, clearly some of you do and I respect that, just can’t see it myself.
If you called me a scrounging Jock or any of the other derogatory remarks often made I would take offence but the use of Jock in isolation does not offend me in the least.
I’m perhaps a little thicker skinned than most – being in my silver years!
CameronB: Naw, it’s actually more like Jeannie’s lovely wee post: a wee bit of whimsy and fun. Ah’ll be leavin’ the stark criticism and bashin’ tae the Guid Rev an’ ithers, but ne’er underestimate the power of gentility.
Albaha: Och, Ah profusely apologise, Ah didnae intend tae insinuate tha’ you used a handle oot of fear, an’ it was most improper of me to do so. Ah’m juss sayin’ some o’ Jock Tamson’s Bairns dinnae want tae be targeted by undesirables, which is mah ain reason (e’en if the only undesirables that’d waste thur time on me wud be wee trolls or sommun).
If onyone’s bothered by mah phonetic pronunciation, mah ain wee way o’ payn tribute tae Rabbie Burns an’ Wallie Scott, Ah’ll stop it: Ah juss hae a great fondness fur my Scots patter, an ah figure it functions as a velvet glove fur an iron fist, as it wur.
AnneDon said:
The government wants us to ‘celebrate’ the start of WWI next year, so why did no-one celebrate the Treaty of Union in 2007?
I remember the 300th anniversary of the union in 2007, vividly. It’s a day I’ll never forget. It’s the day my flitting finally made it up from Sussex and these nice English removal men carried my furniture into my dream home.
They had to tramp over election leaflets lying on the doormat, because this was TWO DAYS before the third general election for the Scottish parliament. Two days later I dragged myself away from the box-emptying and cycled to the polling station to vote SNP.
You know how that turned out.
It was much, much later that I checked the dates and realised that my moving-in day had actually been the very day of the 300th anniversary. That’s how important it was.
Which begs the question, if the Union was so popular why was there no real celebrations of the 300th anniversary in 2007? Over to you MSM and No campaign..
@ Laura
I’m already half silver myself and sorry for just jumping in to your conversation like that. Its just that I had personal experience of exactly what sneddon was suggesting at 8.23pm. I don’t approach the issue head on now, but that’s possibly because I can’t run as fast as I could back in the day :). I am still aware of the intent though, even if those using the pejorative aren’t themselves. Not that I am implying that you are anawre of how loaded the tag is, or that I meant to doubt your position on our primary goal, obtaining a Yes. Just adding my 1.7p worth.
@TWHH
Dinnae fash yersel ower postin in Scots, it’s yin o oor ain national lieds efter aa.
Yes that was in Dundee’s Murraygate – Saturday 27th April 🙂
Polls are totally useless right now, imo. The only thing they are good for is the unionist narrative that independence is unpopular, and that’s why the no side and MSM are so keen on them. The published ones are not necessarily wrong or biased, but what they don’t do is take any account of the highly complex psychology going on behind them. Canvassing throws up some interesting and bizarre results which I’m sure the Yes campaign are delving into much deeper, regarding how to play the campaign.
I’m also sure there’s a lot of work going on we don’t, and can’t see gently turning people around, lining stuff up. I wouldn’t underestimate the Yes campaign at all. Similarly though, I hope they’re not underestimating the No camp. However daft and funny they seem to us, fear and relentlessly beating people down works. They know that. Many people who support independence quietly are not in the campaign because they don’t think it’ll ever happen. I do believe Yes is holding back, letting the no side lie, smear and chuck everything it has now in the hope people will become bored of it all, then they’ll clear up with positivity. But equally I’m sure the no lot are holding back a lot too, and they have a whole lot more resources to throw at it.
So…cybernat parties though? I like that idea 🙂
Did anyone see Scotland Tonight last night on STV? It was, basically, a eulogy to Alex Ferguson and his achievements in football. Fair enough. Then, to round of proceedings, the hostess mentioned Ferguson’s socialist and Labour leanings and asked the three football-related guests if he would be working for Better Together now that he was out of management. One of the guests, Archie MacPherson (remember him?) got very excited by the prospect, declaring, and I paraphrase, ‘Oh, I do hope so, he would be marvellous for it!’.
What is it with that lot when they get to work with or represent the Scottish media? [sigh]
Yip noticed that Dal Riata although I was still trying to make the connection between Alex Ferguson being Labour and socialist, then thought maybe Archie was still going on about the ‘old days’.
He made a quip the othernight as well about ‘this administration’ but was’nt sure if he was talking about the SFA or SG then realised what does it matter what Archie Mcpherson thinks, it never did before.
Re being a jock, only heard someone being called it once and that was when we were visiting Family in Bognor. Hubby was asked if he” had the time jock ?” Being very proud of hailing from Wigan my husband was rather bemused !
Cath,
I am unfortunately, to my shame, a Cyberclat! (as explained elsewhere).
Could I ask you, would I be fully welcomed at our Cybernat Ball?
Or would I, like my good pal ‘Skid’ Smart says, be seated by the lavies all night, then ridiculed and finally ritually abused, before getting the smelly devil beaten out of me by a righteous group of very clean Cybernat fundamentalists under a burning Saltire outside our chosen venue? (how about the beach Ball room at a pinch, by the way).
I would love to attend, even in my manky state, so could we please invite enough English in order to distract the majority drunken marauding Cybernat KKK members at the end of the night? At least long enough to give us true Scot’s (although smelly, granted) a chance to get some chips, a pie and a taxi home.
That’s Skid’s advice anyway and he knows what he’s talking about. He was President of the Grand Lodge and Master of the Savvy Glasgow Tim’s Legal Aid Society, so you can see that he knows his stuff and shouldn’t be ignored.
I really, really want to come though, but I am not sure now whether I can afford to take the risk.
Can any one please reassure me with some absolute rock solid, bet your mortgage on it, money from home, don’t worry about it son there are still plenty of English out there to hunt down mercilessly and horribly murder before we have to turn on the likes of your poor wee smellyness for our insatiable bloodthirsty pleasures, type advice?
Many thanks.
P.S. The KKK wouldn’t let me join cause they said I was too clatty. (sadsmellyweeleftouthingy)
Do you think DC Thomson would be interested in a series of cybernat cartoon, identifying all the different types of cybernat? I remember they did one for haggis in the Beano or Dandy, a long time a go. It could even be expanded to a series similar to the Mr. Men, with each of them having an adventure on the way to 2014.
Have I taken that too far? 🙂
Cameron
No worries.
Kininvie has it pretty much spot on.
Laura/CameromB
I think you’ve nailed it regarding the use of the word ‘jock’. Its a generational thing. Certainly I’ve heard my gran and her pals use it and when they say it or describe a story where its used to describe them there is no negative meaning. However I think the meaning of it has morphed due in no small part to the ‘subsidy junkie’ rubbish in the media. During my time working in the south but never in the north of England, I never heard it used by folk younger than 60 except as a negative term usually preceded by terms like ‘sweaty’, ‘scrounging’ and ‘porridge wog’. Words do change meaning ‘wicked’ is a good example 🙂 .
Oh well roll on 2014
@Dal Riata
Our national broadcaster has already picked up on that exclusive, so they say, not seen it discussed anywhere else!
link to bbc.scotlandshire.co.uk
Re. Ray’s link;
“The SNP’s aim of winning the separation referendum has spontaneously combusted after the greatest manager in the world was lined up to save the Union”.
Fare and impartial?
What about an alternative opinion on the greatest manager.
link to dailymail.co.uk
Doh. Just noticed it was BBC Scotlanshire. It does get confusing these days. (embarrassedsmiley)