The heart-attack sweepstakes
It’s commonplace for professional journalists these days to dismiss bloggers and social-media users as “internet bampots” – frothing, furious, abusive lunatics ranting at parked cars. But in fairness, some do tend to get a bit over-excited from time to time.
By way of example, let’s check out a couple of the wilder-eyed nationalists who’ve been allowed out by the nurses to air their rage in public this week.
“Down in the depths of the Natbunker, things are getting desperate, really desperate as they survey the harsh reality that their great project – to smash the United Kingdom – is fast collapsing around their ears. What’s happening in Scotland now is making Alastair Campbell’s so-called ‘reign of terror’ against the press in Tony Blair’s Downing Street seem like a vicarage tea-party.
Given what’s at stake in this prolonged referendum battle it was always inevitable that things would turn nasty. However, this bitter foretaste of what things might be like in a Nat-run independent Scotland is, I’m glad to say, proving to be a real eye-opener to any people still out there who believe Alex Salmond when he says that he values a free press.”
Crikey. HANDS OFF OUR BELOVED BBC, HATE-CRAZED CYBERNAT SCUM! But that piece – which poured outrage on the notion that the UK state broadcaster might demonstrate bias, and suggested that an independent Scottish government controlled by the SNP would introduce draconian censorship of the media – was restrained stuff next to this nutter, who held a somewhat conflicting view of Auntie Beeb:
“There is something morbidly mesmerising about watching a great nation in the grip of a power-crazed but incompetent charlatan.
Obama’s Second Coming was a less dramatic event than his coronation in January 2009. The BBC reported his speech as irenic and bipartisan, so one knew immediately – so quickly are British listeners developing the interpretative skills employed by East European helots listening to Moscow Radio circa 1951 – that it was violently partisan, aggressively ideological and sneeringly contemptuous of infidels who do not share the Frankfurt Marxist agenda.”
Yeah! Damn right! Barack Obama and the BBC are FILTHY PINKO MARXISTS!
We probably don’t need to point out that these two foaming-mouthed screeds were published by the Telegraph and Scotland on Sunday respectively, do we?
We’re not sure which of the two writers (Alan Cochrane and Gerald Warner, in case any small children reading hadn’t yet guessed) is most in danger of popping a blood vessel. But what we’ve definitely learned is that to these two Tory-leaning newspapers, the BBC is a cherished, saintly paragon of impeccable impartiality when it comes to Scottish independence, and a raving bunch of lesbian tree-hugging Communists when it comes to anything else. Phew, glad we cleared that up.
I like Cocher’s missus, Jenny Hjul, she’s completely hatstand.
If I’m not mistaken, it seems (bottom of the DT page) that no less a personage than Jim Murphy MP has highlighted Cockers article to an English audience as an example of how the SNP try to ‘push the media around’.
Not something New Labour would ever dream of doing, eh Jim? How is Mr Gilligan these days anyway?
It’s funny how these themes keep coming back – still, it fills in the time while they put the finishing touches to the postive case for the Unicorn, I mean Union (though let’s face it, seeing the former is more likely).
Mr Buchanan can clear the Irishgate matter up in 5 minutes by publishing the entire interview.
His silence is deafening. the beeb sticking to their version that Creighton is al iar and by definition Buchanan is correct.
That suggests to me I believe Creighton’s open letter before Buchanan unless new information is offered which proves Creighton to be wrong.
I suspect Murphy does as well. Time for Buchanan to show the copy, and justify why he made the comments he did.
I admit I fell for the BBC story on Friday. I was chatting on skype chat with a colleague in Dublin when they broadcast it and I then started asking him what sort of numpties they have in their Government if their EU minister seriously thought Scotland would need to spend years bringing its laws up to EU standard given that they’re supposed to have been EU compliant for the last 40 years.
Of course this morning I’ve had to retract all of that and explain that we’ve got a national broadcaster that seems to be using the Pravda model of journalism these days.
It’s embarrassing (for the UK let alone Scotland) to have foreign Ministers writing saying “your national broadcaster seems to have totally misrepresented what I said”.
I was laughing so hard at poor old cocher,s article that I have hurt my ribs . The way cocher,s is going he is likely to give himself a coronary or a stroke .
Is it me or has there been a wee bit of a change in the media recently , apart from the diehards like cocher,s etc I am sure I have detected a more moderate tone from some reporters . If cocher,s rant is anything to go bye I would say that there is a bit of a panic within the unionist ranks .
O/T but
According to the Guardian the UK is now the most unequal country in the West with levels of extremes in wealth equal to Nigeria and greater than Ethiopia. Remember this is relative internally.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk-most-unequal-country-in-the-west-1329614.html
The wee disgraceful cracker in the article is that the poor in Britain have about the same income as those in Hungary and S Korea.
Vote NO in 2014 and see proud Britannia reach the top of the World league in all possible measures of poverty. You know the Union makes sense!
OT once again…
Interesting the results of the recent EU issue polls. On balance, I’d suggest the UK is knife edge on in or out. Scotland is up to 10% more pro-EU than the UK as a whole. Very clear difference across the border anyway.
If it came to it, I think you’d see a comfortable but not huge Yes to remain in the EU from Scotland with a potential narrow win for an exit in England. Ergo, Britain could well leave.
The interesting thing is that the obvious Tory support for leaving the EU may well encourage support for Scotland remaining in it. After all, if the Tories want out, then the EU must have some positives (in terms of protecting workers rights etc)….
I don’t believe Cochers believes a word he writes. It’s a comedy script for a comedy audience and he gets well paid for it. Just like Alf Garnett and Johnny Speight
I’m starting to get quite narked with the SNP to be honest. I’ve been a member for just over a year now – celebrated my first anniversary last week. And not once has the central HQ bunker sent me details of cybernat training, far less offered the tantalising possibility of being trained in the skill of oppressing my neighbours. Yet I read day in day out on the Herald comments, and now even in the “serious” press that I am part of a movement hell bent on dictatorship, literally making businessmen and public servants quake and cry in fear of daring to challenge our ideas.
Where is my invite to be on my local “committee in defense of the revolution” or “committee of public safety” board designed to spy on, and oppress my local community? Is it just poor organisation, or does one have to be a special category of member to be allowed into the dictatorshipping part?
Erm that independent article on Britain being unequal comes from 1996.
Although it’s probably still true.
Why is the BBC still reporting what Creighton may or may not have said to Buchanan http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-21195630 , but not her absolutely clear subsequent statement of her position – that she in fact agrees with the SNP? http://www.scotreferendum.com/2013/01/26/irelands-minister-for-european-affairs/
Regarding ‘Cochers’….
The Telegraph were pretty outraged at the BBC ‘shoddy reporting’ when Panorama investigated the Barclays Brothers dubious Tax returns…..so does the Telegraph now endorse BBC reporting standards ?
And it might be me but having watched the entire Fiona Hyslop interview and I can’t see or hear her make any ‘attack’ on the BBC….
The relevant package starts about 40 minutes in……
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01q43p3/Sunday_Politics_Scotland_27_01_2013/
Hi Cath
Unfortunately, you have to have been a member of the SNP for two years before you get entered into the Cybernat Training Programmes. This is to ensure that you can be trusted with our ancient methods of re-educating the populace to brainwa… sorry, GUIDE people towards the correct way of thinking, and not have them fall into the hands of the evil Conspiracy of Unionist Naysaying Traitors (North Britain branch).
However, the good news is that you’re eligible for a red armband with our REAL insignia on it, as well as a pair of custom-made jackboots.
@Dave McEwan Hill
re Cochrane, couldn’t agree more, what can I do to light blue touch paper type of writing.
On the Creighton interview, I know I’m sounding like a broken record, but she gifted the topline, she chose to give the interview before NS had even spoken, let her deny she said the business about applying for membership, but I think we all know she did say it.
@Cath
You missed the ritual burning of the St. George’s Cross flag after SNP branch meetings, and the lynching of English people by SNP style KKK death squads…
By the way folks, the BBC are asking for questions to put to Bliar McDoofus.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-21195624
Here’s what I’ve sent:
1. There is a clear appetite for the Scottish Parliament to be in full control of taxation and welfare. We recently had the Calman Commission looking into further devolution, and the resulting Scotland Act didn’t come close to devolving the powers people want. Why should we believe the parties of BetterTogether are suddenly serious about giving Scotland the powers people want when they have a history of falling short?
2. In light of David Cameron’s pledge to hold an EU referendum in five years time, will Blair accept that scare stories about the independence referendum leading to uncertainty for investment and about Scotland’s position in the EU were nonsense, and that the real threat to Scotland’s place in the EU is from the parties of BetterTogether, who will almost certainly all go into the 2015 election offering a referendum on the EU?
3. Several members of the BetterTogether campaign have stated that we don’t need a referendum to devolve further powers, and used this as an excuse to stop Devo Max from being an option on the ballot. If this is the case, why aren’t the BetterTogether parties working to devolve the further powers we want NOW?
4. Does Blair accept that, in the event of a NO vote, Scotland will have lost its main bargaining chip for getting more powers devolved, and that post-2015 Westminster will be obsessing over the EU and conveniently “forget” about devolving further powers to Scotland?
5. Will Blair get a cast iron guarantee from the Tory members of BetterTogether that, in the event of a NO vote, we will not see powers being reserved back to Westminster, and that the Barnett Formula will not be radically changed to Scotland’s detriment?
6. What does Blair think about BBC Scotland cynically taking Lucinda Creighton’s words out of context to imply that Scotland will enter many years of lengthy EU negotiations, and completely ignoring her letter to the Deputy First Minister that clarified that the timescale she referred to was in line with that proposed by the Scottish Government, namely 2014 to 2016?
7. Will Blair tell us what the positive case for the union is, without trying to tell us that it’s a big bad world, like Alistair Darling always does?
8. Will Blair confirm what he means by “stronger” when he says we’re “stronger in the UK”, as I suspect he is talking about being able to invade foreign countries, which is actually one of the reasons I want independence from the imperialist UK.
@Rev Stu
I see Bella Caledonia have a new member in their editorial team. Can you guess who it is?
Predict tomorrows headlines today competeition…..
“1pm: Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish deputy first minister, gives evidence to the Commons foreign affairs committee in Edinburgh about the foreign policy implications of Scottish independence. David Lidington, the Foreign Office minister, gives evidence at 3pm.”
‘Scotland will become as isolated as North Korea says Foreign Office Minister‘ The Scotsman
”Alex Salmond ate my hamster’ Alan Cochrane Daily Telegraph
‘Princess Diana dies in Paris Car Crash‘ Scottish Daily Express
Any more ?
Muttley
Is it Duncan H?
No, it is Kate Higgins…
@muttley79
Feel rather like an inncocent abroad when it comes to the politics of the blogosphere, what’s behind it all?
@Albalha
There is a bit of tension there I think…
“Conspiracy of Unionist Naysaying Traitors (North Britain branch)”
Surely “Conspiracy of Unionist Naysaying Traitors (Scotland)”
Completely O/T,
This morning, further proof, if proof were needed of why this union with England is of no benefit whatsoever to Scotland or Scottish taxpayers. Time and again on the BBC and sky news reports today, we were told by reporters with straight faces that that route for the NORTHERN part of HS2 has been announced. This NORTHERN part goes as far North as Leeds and Manchester. It barely reaches the North of England, never mind the UK.
If ever you needed proof of what London really thinks of the UK, you need only look at the plans for HS2. It doesn’t even reach Newcastle upon Tyne, FFS!!!
How can anybody in Scotland try to pretend we benefit from being run by a bunch of Eton toffs in London, who think Manchester is a very far away place. Yet another union ‘benefit’.
Better together??? I don’t freaking think so.
“There is a bit of tension there I think…”
Kate thinks I’m a misogynist – entirely without basis in reality – and a liability to the independence campaign, and I think she’s an idiot, largely because she thinks I’m a misogynist. It also seems to me that for someone regularly introduced on the BBC as an “SNP blogger”, she spends remarkably little time blogging anything in support of independence and a lot of time criticising the SNP and other independence supporters, while cuddling up to some really unpleasant Unionists.
But, y’know, diff’rent strokes for diff’rent folks. If Bella think she’ll be an asset to their site, good luck to them. They and we are emphatically on the same side.
@Muttley79
Is it a certain someone who currently posesses a pair of custom-made jackboots?
Nice one DougD , I always look for your posts hither an thither , I’ll be looking out for them on BellaC too.
@R Louis.
Aye, saw that too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21227157
Will HS2 ‘heal north/south divide’?
Apparently the ‘North’ is just half way up the British isles. Scotland must be like the far, far, far, far, far north and a bit further on. Not on maps etc.
If you ask me, it’ll open the divide even further between ‘North Britain’ and the ‘glorious’ south.
D D, Shouldn’t that be custom made Jockboots?
🙂
@ Cath
@ Doug
Doug, you omitted to mention the electronic chip embedded in the membership card detecting body temp to ensure card is carried at all times showing member fully comitted to the cause.
Chip also records conversations which are automatically uploaded to Edinburgh Centre whenever member is in vicinity of a shopping centre.
Rev
Re Kate, I tried to read her article but gave up.
Far too much navel gazing and attaching of labels.
Not my bag, I’m afraid.
@Doug
The BBC states that “The two sides are already developing their ideas on the big issues, including Europe, Nato, defence, pensions and welfare”.
I must have missed Better McDougall’s development of his ideas on the big issues including Europe, Nato, defence, pensions and welfare. Anyone got any idea what they are?
@Rev Stu
It also seems to me that for someone regularly introduced on the BBC as an “SNP blogger”, she spends remarkably little time blogging anything in support of independence and a lot of time criticising the SNP and other independence supporters, while cuddling up to some really unpleasant Unionists.
Her latest article on Bella C will not exactly put your fears at rest…
@Training Day
The BBC have gone native in a big way.
@ DD.
Shouldn’t that be custom made Jockboots?
🙂
gp
@Rev -Couldn’t agree more. First spotted her problem when she went off on one saying Alex Neil had lost us the Referendum, because he said something she disagreed with on abortion time limits. Nothing at all to do with independence, but she either wanted her name in lights or she wanted to damage the cause of self determination. Also not impressed with her frequent TV appearances, especially on News Night Scotland. She has very poor presentation and communication skills. I am also not convinced of her committment to the cause of independence.
Alex Salmond steals blankets from old age pensioner lying in a hospital corridor.
See Jackie Baillie column inside Daily Record
“the good news is that you’re eligible for a red armband with our REAL insignia on it, as well as a pair of custom-made jackboots.”
Now that would suit me just lovely. I’ll make sure my card is carried with me at all times henceforth and kept at body temperature. I was concerned it may have been distrust due to the possession of a Better Together pen and key-ring, which I’ve had ever since the launch of the NHS Scotland patient experience programme and don’t know what to do with now…
Since Kate Higgin’s article on Bella has been raised, I’ll have my say on it. I started reading it, and gave up initially, because as others have said, it just seems like a long-winded piece of navel-gazing, and to be honest I’m tired of hearing people protesting that they’re “not a nationalist”, like it’s a bad thing to want independence for the fundamental principle of self-determination.
When it comes to folk like Patrick Harvie and Dennis Canavan, I don’t mind it. Clearly, they want to emphasise the fact that they consider independence to be a stepping stone towards their main goals, and it’s handy to have these people to show that independence isn’t just about constitutional navel-gazing, or whatever. The fact is, if these folk wanted independence for the same reasons as most of us, they’d be in the SNP rather than the Greens and (formerly?) Labour. In fact, this is reason alone to want to distance themselves from the term, since “nationalist” is pretty much shorthand for “SNP member”.
But when you start having long-term SNP members trying to distance themselves from the term “nationalist”, it grates a bit. It’s bad enough having unionists making derogatory comments about “Scottish Nazi Party” or “nationalist socialists” or whatever without having folk on our own side trying to distance themselves from the term. This bit in particular pissed me off (when I eventually went back and read it in full):
“So, please stop already. You might be a nationalist, and that’s fine. You might all want to conduct the debate in such emotionally charged but ultimately vacuous, polarising terms. But leave me out of it.”
I’m a nationalist because I have never understood why Scotland should not run its own affairs. There’s nothing “emotionally charged” or “vacuous” about that. It’s just basic common sense. If Kate wants to go along with the unionist definition of “nationalist” as some sort of beardy-weirdy Bannockburn obsessive with a William Wallace tattoo on their chest, then fine. But leave me out of it.
As I shall be starting my 5th decade as a member of the SNP, I am still waiting for ‘cybernat training’. Suppose it didn’t work as well in the past with gestetner machines and and the wax stencils churning out newsletters getting ink on our poor mitts.
“But when you start having long-term SNP members trying to distance themselves from the term “nationalist”, it grates a bit. It’s bad enough having unionists making derogatory comments about “Scottish Nazi Party” or “nationalist socialists” or whatever without having folk on our own side trying to distance themselves from the term.”
In absolute fairness – as is the Wings Over Scotland way – from a journalistic point of view I hate people describing the SNP as “the Nationalists” with a capital ‘N’, because while they may be nationalists with a small ‘n’, they’re NOT the Scottish Nationalist Party. They’re the Scottish National Party. The two words aren’t interchangeable – if you want to get a bus from Birmingham to London you don’t hop on a Nationalist Express. Yet far too often, despite the party having existed for most of a century, journalists and commentators, especially English ones, still FAR too often “accidentally” write “Scottish Nationalist Party”.
All that said, I also hate to see supporters of independence conspire in the sullying of the n-word. In the context of the civic nationalism 99.9% of us aspire to, it’s a perfectly honourable and respectable term, and treating it like it means something horrible serves only our opponents.
cath said:
Where is my invite to be on my local “committee in defense of the revolution” or “committee of public safety” board designed to spy on, and oppress my local community?
I’m jealous cath, you must have been given a special mission trusted to but few. Infiltration so deep you don’t remember your mission yourself until the code word is uttered….
“If Kate wants to go along with the unionist definition of “nationalist” as some sort of beardy-weirdy Bannockburn obsessive with a William Wallace tattoo on their chest, then fine.”
I think that hits the nail on the head in terms of the problem with a lot of her pieces. She tends to write through the prism of the unionist media spin as if it is fact. The Alex Neil piece mentioned above, took as a staring point an utterly biased, clearly spun SOS headline, treated it as factual and reacted in a hysterical way to it.
This was particularly galling as the SOS piece seemed to be timed to coincide with the launch of Woman for Independence, so any brief mention of that was overshadowed by “and by the way the SNP are going to…” whatever it was they said about abortion; I can’t even remember now. But it was written in a way that would worry women, and of course it was a man saying making the pronouncement.
This piece and the Higgins were then run on the WFI group with many people falling right into what seemed to be an obvious unionist-set trap, exactly the kind that such a group should be astute enough to have recognised as such and able to counter, rather than escalate.
@Rev – All that said, I also hate to see supporters of independence conspire in the sullying of the n-word. In the context of the civic nationalism 99.9% of us aspire to, it’s a perfectly honourable and respectable term, and treating it like it means something horrible serves only our opponents.”
Amen to that!
@Doug Daniel
I’m a nationalist because I have never understood why Scotland should not run its own affairs. There’s nothing “emotionally charged” or “vacuous” about that. It’s just basic common sense. If Kate wants to go along with the unionist definition of “nationalist” as some sort of beardy-weirdy Bannockburn obsessive with a William Wallace tattoo on their chest, then fine. But leave me out of it.
Nail, hammer, head.
Re. Kate Higgins, I lose interest in articles when I see the term ‘Braveheart’ in them; they’re almost always written by Unionists trying to corral the multiplicity of independence support into their own narrow enclosure (which almost always ends in Godwinism).
For someone who appears to want to distance herself from SNP machinations and politicking, Ms Higgins seems rather interested in, and knowledgeable about, them.
Have just read the Kate Higgins piece over on Bella. Ohhh! ma heid hurts. So, to paraphrase, She is not a Nationalist but believes in Independence only it is not with her heart or any Braveheartism ? but because she loves the people but not just the Scots but all the people in England, Wales and N, I. (time to look out the furry slippers and read books about Unicorns)
BTW Cath. I see you have been complaining about lack of training. Report to Number 1 Bunker forthwith. Room 101 for re-education, bring own whip.
I think Kate Higgins is Jeff Breslin in drag, or is it the other way round?
Anyone seen them together, at the same time in Space?
@Rev Stu
In absolute fairness – as is the Wings Over Scotland way – from a journalistic point of view I hate people describing the SNP as “the Nationalists” with a capital ‘N’, because while they may be nationalists with a small ‘n’, they’re NOT the Scottish Nationalist Party. They’re the Scottish National Party. The two words aren’t interchangeable – if you want to get a bus from Birmingham to London you don’t hop on a Nationalist Express. Yet far too often, despite the party having existed for most of a century, journalists and commentators, especially English ones, still FAR too often “accidentally” write “Scottish Nationalist Party”.
This might surprise people but Glenn Campbell always calls the SNP “the Nationalists.“…It has been a staple favourite of the Labour Party for ages to say the “Scottish Nationalist Party”, and Brit Nat journalists as well. There is no accident that they do this.
All that said, I also hate to see supporters of independence conspire in the sullying of the n-word. In the context of the civic nationalism 99.9% of us aspire to, it’s a perfectly honourable and respectable term, and treating it like it means something horrible serves only our opponents.
Particularly when opponents are quite often British Nationalists, who invariably never admit to being one.
Australia has a National Party (formerly the National Country Party and before that the Country Party). They don’t seem to be referred to as Nationalists, even by accident, although they are called Nats.
When they were the Country Party, on the other hand, they weren’t called Countryists or Counts. Well, not in newspaper headlines anyway. But Joh Bielke-Peterson was definitely a Count. I’ll bet Gerald Warner loved him.
Regards Cochers and B.B.BC. Scotland,= a perfect partnership!.( condoned and
encouraged by Westmonster! ).
@Angus McLellan
When they were the Country Party, on the other hand, they weren’t called Countryists or Counts.
Are you sure it was definitely “Counts.” 😀
A ‘national’ party is only a concern when the country it is promoting is already independent.
Hence The ‘National’ Front, the British ‘National’ Party, the One ‘Nation(al)’ Labour Party and the [British National/Unionist] Conservative Party are very troubling, what with all their union flaggery, but the SNP, Plaid etc are not.
The moment the Lib dems start waving Union flags you can add them to the ‘dodgy’ list.
@s_s
The moment the Lib dems start waving Union flags you can add them to the ‘dodgy’ list.
It will not be long till Willie Rennie, Tavish Scott do just that...
Those who bang on about Braveheart all the time. Might as well bang on about Thatcher in The Iron Lady.
On the term nationalist, I see your points re its being sullied, misappropriated but isn’t it fair to say that, for YES and NO voters, it has, lazily, become shorthand for SNP members?
This ridiculous phrase, ”I believe in independence but I am not a nationalist; I am an internationalist” has been getting pedalled around the street for years.
I’ts baloney.
You can’t have internationalism without nations.
People who cackle this ”I am not a nationalist, I’m an internationalist” nonsense leave me cold.
It’s like a married man saying that he doesn’t like the idea of batchelors, but wants a divorce so he can become one.
Well folks, I AM a nationalist, and I AM an internationalist and I’m proud to say it.
muttley79 says:
28 January, 2013 at 2:34 pm
@s_s
The moment the Lib dems start waving Union flags you can add them to the ‘dodgy’ list.
It will not be long till Willie Rennie, Tavish Scott do just that..
During the olympics, i was under the impression that wee Britnat Willie was getting his knickers in a knot at the opposition to the olympic rings adorning our iconic Forth Road Bridge that he bleated he’d have them on the outside of his house and so incensed was he that he aimed to fly the Union flag from there! You see its the Union and everything British first last and always for him with Scotland somewhere off the radar. Thing is, are all his constituents aware of this…
O/t – Wasn’t it Raymond Buchanan who was involved in some way with the snowgate hooha and ultimate resignation of SNP Minister Stewart Stevenson…I cant recall if he was the one who read out the initial ‘wrong” weather forecast on BBC Scotland radio show or that he actually interviewed Stevenson. If so then this is a good dose of him getting way too big for his boots and i for one am glad to see the heat turned up on him for what seems like him on behalf of his employer, playing a very active role in the dangerous game of trying to trip up Ministers of foreign Governments. Its a good case of what goes round comes round and he deserves all he gets. He should be remembered for his deeds just like the Bliar one is remembered for Iraq.
Once Scotland becomes an independent country, national identity will probably no longer be a factor given that it will be taken for granted. The reason it has become such a factor is because internationally we are not recognised as having a national identity. It never fails to amuse me however the hypocrisy that exists in the No campaign and there allegations of Nationalism etc by their own logic, and definition they are BRITISH NATIONALISTS.
In Scotland 72-80% consider themselves Scottish, 14-19% British since 2000. Obviously many will see themselves as both but we can only have one national identity. http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/06/survey-uk-identity
National identity doesn’t mean a whole lot to me. By Dennis Canavan’s and Patrick Harvie’s definition of Nationalism, I am not a nationalist. But by the strict definition of national identity I am a Scottish Nationalist like 72-80% of my countrymen and women. I cheer on Scottish sports stars and also want the best government for the country that I live in. Does this make me parochial or a Nazi, I don’t think so and i would assume the vast vast majority of Yes voters feel the same.
The word has been hijacked to mean something dirty when its a term that could apply to almost everyone.
muttley79
Rev Stu
Kate’s attitude frequently reminds me of Jim Sillars.
Many Scots (and I include myself) would like to see more radical change than is currently proposed by the SNP but, unless we achieve independence, all of it will come to naught.
None of the questions on the monarchy, NATO, WMD, currency etc will ever be put to the Scottish people while we are within the UK.
Under current leadership the SNP are within sight of the winning post. We must keep the blinkers on until we get there.
Disagreeable as that may be, distracting the national horse at this stage in the race would be risky,
As Rev Stu has pointed out, defeat in the Independence Stakes will not lead to a re-run or being put out to graze on sunlit pasture but pulling the Westminster rag and bone cart.
Enough of the equine metaphor – flogged it to death.
@ Embradon
Neh point (sorry).
I couldn’t agree more. We have one task in front of us, that of gaining our independence. Everything else flows from there.
Today and on Friday, I was in a meeting (both lasting all day) with 14 complete strangers from a very wide range in backgrounds. During lunch today (6 at my table, including me) the subject of independence came up (not a very appropriate time or place due to nature of meeting IMHO). Of the 6 of us, apart from myself, all were against independence and the reasons were:
One guy was English (who ironically said he lived in Scotland because of the different and “better” feel of community up here – he might want to ask himself why that is?) and believed it was not necessary for Scotland to be independent and that was all. Seemed to be listening to my points though and think he might be one to do delve deeper. A thinking Unionist? Is that an oxy-ma-whotsit?
Two older ladies (pension age): one (she was also the loudest) wouldn’t shut up about Braveheart and how she was a very Scottish Scottish person but …. and how Alex Salmond was only wanting the 16 year-olds to get the vote because they are “very impressionable at that age”; and the other just said she wasn’t into raking up old coals. Another younger woman didn’t vote ever so could be discounted and an older, Scottish guy didn’t say anything but was nodding when Braveheart wifie was speaking.
During the course of the day and with other topics being talked about by the wider group, (eg the benefits cap) I was honestly left thinking I was surrounded by a bunch of Tories who get their thinking from the daily mail – apart from 2 young lads, one older bloke and another woman I would put in her 40’s. Can’t really extrapolate the others stance on independence from that but their general comments didn’t fill me with hope.
It’s left me a bit depressed and thinking that without at least some MSM being balanced on independence, we are fighting an honorable, but, ultimately, losing battle. It is the scale of the misinformation and propaganda. I always thought of Scotland as a left sympathising country as well but after today, I am beginning to wonder. I think what depressed me the most is that the arguments I was getting back were arguments as portrayed by the MSM and no-one seemed to be questioning deeper. It seems that some people really do believe everything they read in the papers.
Am away to open the wine early tonight.
RE:Kate Higgins Article…
So if not a nationalist, then what?
Two things have helped crystallise this for me recently
First, a conversation with a colleague who regaled me with tales of his family and community history
And the second? Irvine Welsh’s essay for this here blog – and also Stephen Noon’s piece a few weeks ago in Scotland on Sunday.
By my count thats three… just saying
[Knock Knock… – Door swings open]
Yes? Can I help you.
“Hello I’m Kate Higgins and I’m here to speak to you on behalf of Yes Scotland about why I want independence. I’m a political, utilitarian evolutionary revolutionary; an anti-establishment dis-establishmentarian; who will forever be a sceptical idealist; who believes in independence for Scotland and the art of the possible; who looks around Scotland and thinks that this is absolutely not the best we can be, here or elsewhere in these islands; and who is willing to put their shoulder to the wheel to turn dream into reality.”
[Silence – Door swings shut]
Robin Fae Torry
Calm doon quine – they’ll see sense soon enough 🙂
Vote YES and see your lot improve.
Vote NO and lose a lot of what we have gained with Devolution.
There will be NO standing still.
You can come out with as much Braveheart shi*e as you want but its not going to save you from Westminster.
Come the big day minds will be a lot more focused.
I have often found that people that come out with the type of points you make are often the easiest to point in the right direction as their arguments are made of straw.
Vote YES for a better future.
Ok, I read that article again and can I just say that she has totally lumbered people like me, who want independence a s a practical solution to the needs of Scotland, in with Bannockburn and braveheart…
This is not the independence movement I see before me. I see people who are enthused about regaining control over democracy, control over the resources of Scotland. People who are enthused about the opportunities for our children and who at the same time are terrified of what Westminster has in store if we lose.
I certainly dont see a backward looking ethnic nationalism at all!!!
[This and the fact she lumbers all online independence supporters to gether as “Cybernats” without ever explaining why 1) Cybernats are bad OR 2) How she can lumber all online activists in the same group]
As she is so often on the TV as an “SNP blogger”, doesn’t that make her a Cybernat by her own definition?
@Scott
Ok, I read that article again and can I just say that she has totally lumbered people like me, who want independence a s a practical solution to the needs of Scotland, in with Bannockburn and braveheart…
This is not the independence movement I see before me. I see people who are enthused about regaining control over democracy, control over the resources of Scotland. People who are enthused about the opportunities for our children and who at the same time are terrified of what Westminster has in store if we lose.
I certainly dont see a backward looking ethnic nationalism at all!!!
[This and the fact she lumbers all online independence supporters to gether as “Cybernats” without ever explaining why 1) Cybernats are bad OR 2) How she can lumber all online activists in the same group]
Although I support the SNP, I would not support independence unless I thought it would improve the lives of the people of Scotland. To be honest, I am more interested in left-wing politics than I am in national identity. I think Kate Higgins takes too much of an interest in what the media say, and is influenced by them. I think people like her really need to make their mind up about what they are trying to achieve. I don’t get any indication that she realises either the opposition, or the forces we are up against. It is worrying if she has started to go on about Braveheart and Cybernats, as that is the language of the No parties.
Oh well I’ll wade in here. In the BC article there’s no reference to Cybernats, that I can see. My concern relates more to the Quine Fae Torry. This is not an easy win, I don’t know how many people I’ve spoken to that have a visceral reaction to the SNP, and see that as the only face of the YES vote.
I’ve convinced a few, perhaps, hopefully, made others begin to think.
Today I was made aware of the political nonsense, imo, that pervades the prominent pro YES blogs. Personally I find it tiresome. I made my points about the KH article as I saw it. I only care about a YES vote wherever that vote comes from. To imply there’s a hierarchy of thought goes against the spirit of the Scotland I want to live in.
KH does raise the spectre of Braveheart, I remember the first screenings and the SNP handouts. Not my bag BUT I’m not interested in criticising for the sake of it. It’s well in the past.
This is a multi generational chance, for the love of whoever it is you raise a glass to of an evening, spare me the ‘I know best’ commentators……get out there and convince people to vote YES.
Maybe she’s aware of the forces we are up against only too well… we all know they have “assets” planted in the independence movement and one of their main tasks is to sow dissension and discord. A lot of Kate’s writing and TV appearances seem to fulfil that remit.
Where did I leave that tinfoil hat?
@Albalha
Yes, people need to be persuaded that a Yes vote is the best thing to do. However, is there any real need for a self-confessed SNP supporter to bring up Braveheart? What good is it supposed to do for the Yes side?
@muttley79
I raised the Braveheart point on BC, as I say above it has no place, crap film anyway. You know the inside world of the SNP is not my interest. I know a bloody decent SNP councillor in Dundee, have recently conversed with a decent SNP MSP on my specialist subject the BBC, that’s as far as it goes. I’m not interested in blog politics, I am interested in securing a YES vote.
Alison Balharry
@Albaha,
I agree that as long as we all work towards independence then alls fine and dandy…
BUT…
I dont like people making out like there are worthy online commentators and unworthy “nationalist” comentators.
Who says who’s worthy and unworthy? And who is it who said they get to decide?
Its a horses for courses campaign. Different things work on different people.
Just because someone is motivated by pride in their country doesnt make their motivations any less valid than someone like myself who looks at it from the point of view of democracy, resources and opportunities.
I dont mind people having different opinions, but when they start saying that other people arent entitled to their opinions or that their motivatins arent valid then thats different.
@Scott
I asked for evidence about the claim made by Kate Higgins (about Stephen Noon getting abuse from either senior SNP people or SNP supporters) and I was told that I should be patient. That would be okay, but there were some fairly robust comments from someone at B.C. throughout the day…
I’m wearing your tin-foil hat Holebender.
@ Scott Minto aka SneekyBoy
Yes but didn’t you mention KH talked about Cybernats? I made many of the same points you make on BC re a hierarchy of thinking. It’s just tiresome.
I realise I’m coming to the online debate here rather late, I’m neither aware nor interested in the politics of the YES blogosphere.
@Muttley79
Give Kevin and Mike a break, for goodness sake.
I was talking to someone the other day who is of the Braveheart persuasion. He isn’t in the slightest bit interested in Shengen or WMDs or constitutional reform as a way to make things better. He will vote yes in the referendum.
It takes all sorts to build a broad rainbow alliance.
@Albalha
I specifically mentioned that they were not involved in it. Why do you feel the need to get involved?
@muttley 79
I suppose because I’ve no interest in the machinations over S Noon and the apparent fallout. Who are you, btw? I’m open about who I am, Alison Balharry, age 50, resident Scotland, not easily confused with anyone else.
“Yes but didn’t you mention KH talked about Cybernats? I made many of the same points you make on BC re a hierarchy of thinking. It’s just tiresome.”
Unfortunately Kate Higgins is one of the prime movers of that thinking. I remember very early in WingsLand history I made a VERY mild criticism of something she said on her own blog, though I haven’t the faintest recollection of what the subject was. Her reply was, as close as I can recall it, “I’ve been in the SNP 20 years and I’ve seen hundreds like you come and go, so bugger off”. If you haven’t done your time tramping the streets with leaflets and chapping doors, your opinion isn’t worth a damn to her.
@Albalha
If you have no interest in the subject why did you need to comment on my posts on Bella Caledonia?
@Muttley79
Simply, I think BC is doing a decent job and okay maybe I’ve no place in your discussion but who are you?
Nationality: The status of belonging to a particular nation.
Nationalism: patriotic feeling; a policy of national independence.
As defined by my Oxford dictionary.
So why on earth do any of us feel it necessary to explain being a Nationalist?
Nationalism aside, Me, I’m a bit of a miserly old soul, and calling upon my mostly forgotten formal Economics qualifications. i want independence because independence will protect my wealth! And my childrens’ welfare, and my grandchildrens’ welfare.
i must hasten to add that my weaith is little more than my home and importantly my children, who are able to work and live in Scotland thanks to free university education that enabled them to find good employment in Scotland.
i do admit to frustrated angry concern over the plight of those who are less able to…survive(?)…in today’s UK and noting the policies of the SNP I do think that there are better prospects for all in an independent Scotland.
I do remember the joy as a child, of having coupons to use for 2 ounce of sweeties following WW2. I never ever thought that today we would have food banks, a bedroom tax, and Russian billionaires in London paying less income tax than their house cleaners.
Back to topic. Kate Higgins needs to step up to the mark or shutup.
My current assessment, she is an airhead. Prove me wrong Kate.
@Rev Stu
I’ve done no street tramping and I really don’t give a flyer what KH thinks of me, I only care about securing a YES vote for Scotland. Hopefully it can be realised. I’ll do my bit as best I can.
Alison Balharry
@Albalha
I have already said in a post on Bella Caledonia that my points were criticism of the authors’ article, not the website and certainly not Kevin and Mike. I am not really familiar with you as a poster here. I don’t know what you mean by asking me who am I? This is because I have no idea who you are.
@ Seasick Dave and Albalha
I have calmed down. Went for a run rather than opening the wine as well, wouldn’t have been wise on a school night!
I think I must have just been unlucky to have been surrounded by such negative people. Don’t think I have ever had the misfortune of such negative company before and the Braveheart wifie at the meeting really just was a loud mouth and had no substance to any point she made (as you rightly said Seasick, if it had been a more appropriate place it would not have been difficult to dismantle her “arguments”).
I have felt fairly positive about the way the Yes camp is conducting itself and I was a gradualist to independence (after Devo Max was taken off the table). I just wonder if we need to step it up a bit (and I know that the MSM have a lot to answer for by burying/omitting/re-writing good news to somehow =bad). I think the message we need to really focus on is that Yes does not = Alex Salmond and SNP alone. It seems to be escaping the wider public.
And as an aside, I wrote my first comment in response to Cath’s article “Into the Arms of Yes” I think it was called. I had just recently sent a letter similar to Cath’s article, to Anne Begg, MP (Labour and the local MP for where I live). I was a Labour voter for a long time and come from a Labour family. It was after Anas Sarwar’s performance in the HoC. I still haven’t had a reply and, having previously written to her about other issues, I know she is usually prompt and has always written back.
@muttley 79
I may not have earned my stripes here. So my name is Alison Balharry, worked BBC Scotland, BBC Radio 4, Aljazeera, BBC World Service, before all that Community Education/Mental Health in Tayside, eh have an Uncle who’s into conservation, an Aunt who was prominent in the Bothy Nichts,a grandfather who drove chain wheeled lorries, and you?
@Robyn – Quine fae Torry
Good post. I think there is a fair number of Labour supporters in Scotland who are coming around to the idea of independence.
P.S. Are you an Aberdeen supporter?
@Robyn
I think the message we need to really focus on is that Yes does not = Alex Salmond and SNP alone. It seems to be escaping the wider public
That’s my focus, those who are paid up supporters don’t need to be convinced, the don’t knows need to be convinced.
Impressed by the run not the wine route! .
@ Muttley, I hope more Labour voters do see what I see regarding the decline of the party and I am not solely judging that decline by the way certain individuals conduct themselves. For me it is about policy and the fact is, I have no idea what Labour means anymore or what they stand for. The impression I get is that they make it up as they go along (or rather say white if the SNP say black).
PS I am an East Fife supporter by birth, but generally don’t follow football these days apart from looking at the scores. I do like Pittodrie however as it is a wee gem of a stadium (seen some rugby games there).
@ Albalha, I am impressed too!! As for your comments:
those who are paid up supporters don’t need to be convinced, the don’t knows need to be convinced.
Nail on head.
Torry Quine, I have zero respect for or expectation of Anne Begg MP. When a neighbour of mine who has cerebral palsy and is a wheelchair user wrote to Ms Begg a few years ago about something related to her disabilities the only reply she got was a you’re not a constituent so fuck off (I paraphrase slightly). My young impressionable neighbour was crushed.
@Albalha – Cybernat thing is from elsewhere hence why I bracketed it. Apologies if that was not clear.
I’m afraid the “othering” of nationalists is something I cannot abide. We are all people and although we may differ in our worldly outlooks, we all aspire to independence.
You dont need to earn any “stripes” here. All views are welcome, but that also means you come across counter views.
I am wondering however if you are Albalha on CiF?
If that is you then I read your posts often. They are very well made.
@RevStu – “Unfortunately Kate Higgins is one of the prime movers of that thinking. I remember very early in WingsLand history I made a VERY mild criticism of something she said on her own blog, though I haven’t the faintest recollection of what the subject was. Her reply was, as close as I can recall it, “I’ve been in the SNP 20 years and I’ve seen hundreds like you come and go, so bugger off”. If you haven’t done your time tramping the streets with leaflets and chapping doors, your opinion isn’t worth a damn to her.”
Yep, I’ve had that as well. She blogged about Angus Robertson’s NATO amendment last year and I said I couldn’t find anything to fault the way it was set out, that it was pragmatic while remaining true to core values, and here was her response:
“Doug, how long have you been a member? How can you possibly know what core values are? I get a little fed up of the sanctimonious, slavish adherence to everything the leadership says and does that is trotted out by some who have been around for five minutes and cannot possibly appreciate what an issue of conscience this creates for those who paved the way to get to this point.”
Charming, eh?
I always try to give folk the benefit of the doubt if they’ve not wronged me. That was the moment I decided that her critics were right about her.
@Scott Minto (aka Sneekyboy)
Yes I’m the same Albalha on Cif, wherever I comment I use it. I read various sites expressly to see different points of view, and like you say, we all differ, though will be putting our cross in the same box.
Yesterday was a lesson in the personal politics of the blogosphere I, until then, had been blissfully unaware of.
I probably got too involved in it, I’ll watch that in future!
“Yesterday was a lesson in the personal politics of the blogosphere I, until then, had been blissfully unaware of.”
I don’t think the issue should be overstated. There’s one particular very small group of people who seem to have a rather inflated sense of their own importance, but by and large everyone else pulls in the same direction even when they disagree over the method.
For a “revolutionary” movement the independence one actually seems to be remarkably free of internal bickering despite the huge political gulfs between some of the factions.
Even a couple of insignificant footsoldiers like Kate Higgins and I, who I suspect dislike each other about as much as any two people in the Yes camp do, mostly just keep out of each other’s way. I still retweet her blog posts occasionally, because the message is more important than the idiot carrying it.
This is completely O/T, but:
Anyone who’s been following the stushie on BellaC re Kate Higgins’ inaugural article may have noticed that, after 135 posts, the discussion seems to have ended, although there is no indication that the thread has been closed.
I don’t want to misuse WoS space to carry on that discussion – I know that many readers cross-over from here to t’other place, and that’s got to be a good thing. However, I’m one of a few posters who haven’t been long visiting Bellac/WoS/NNS etc, and I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in saying that that thread has left a very nasty taste.
(Rev Stu has been right up-front about his relationship with Ms Higgins, so I know where I stand before writing this – if it’s out-of-order, so be it, but it has to be said by someone.)
There’s no need to name names, but those who went onto that thread intending to cause mischief know who they are – they might now want to have a long hard think about what they did.
It’s one thing to have a legitimate beef with someone whose views you disagree with. And it’s another thing to have a personal dislike of someone.
Fair do’s, both.
But to conflate the two, and hijack a ‘discussion’ in order to have a dig at someone?
That’s out of order. It’s a form of bullying – worse: it’s a fundamentally dishonest and sneaky form of bullying. It also places those who don’t know the ins/outs and nuances of past dealing between various folk in the impossible position of trying to take part in what is, ostensibly, a ‘normal’ discussion, but is in fact a coded slanging-match involving folk who daren’t expose their true feelings, resorting to semantics and cheap point-scoring masquerading as ‘debate’.
I’m not defending Kate Higgins. And I’m not saying I agree with what she wrote. So far as I can tell, she could’ve written nothing more than ‘Hiya’ and that would’ve been enough to summon an angry mob.
If Mike Small and Kevin Williamson had announced that the new ‘voluntary’ editor was, say, George Galloway or Eric Joyce, would we be having the same rammy over it? I want to believe that some commenters were upset by Kate’s language-use, but it seems to go deeper than that. And if it is, for some, a more ‘personal’ issue? They need to air their grievances honestly and fully. If they want Kate bagged they should say so outright, not hide behind convoluted objection to her stated perception of what ‘nationalism’ means.
In my final post to that thread before it inexplicably dried-up, I said that the discussion had become ‘unedifying and damaging’. I stand by that, and would ask that those stoking the flames take some time to reflect on what they’ve ‘achieved’ over the past couple of days.
It wasn’t clever, and it wasn’t pretty, and it certainly wasn’t a ‘discussion’ – there was a nasty undertone to it, and any fair-minded individual reading it from start to finish (?) will surely take away a firmer caricature of whatever ‘cybernat’ they had in mind beforehand.
To be clear – I’m no cheerleader for Kate Higgins, BellaCaledonia or anyone else. I want to see ‘honest, open, transparent debate’. Those words have been cheapened in our lifetimes by an endless succession of opportunist careerists who thought nothing of trotting out soaring permutations as when told to do so, without ever, apparently, understanding or believing any of them.
The most serious opportunity any of us will ever have to transform our country, and out lives, is imminent – the time will fly in. Just one more Christmas and New Year. One more birthday for many of us. This event demands that we raise standards in every way. Sites like this and BellaC and Newsnetscotland are already doing it in strictly journalistic terms, and everyone knows that. But there are other ways, just as important, where we can, must improve.
It’s not for me to say what needs attention, but all – all – those involved in the thread I’ve referred to might benefit from reading the entire thing.
(No rush right enough – it’s there now, and it’ll be there forever.)
Slainte.
Ian: I couldn’t disagree with you more. I openly admit my personal dislike of Kate Higgins, but as I noted above I still retweet her posts occasionally if they’re any good. This was not one of those times. It was an absolutely fucking appalling post, sneery and condescending and arrogant and egotistical and divisive in almost every paragraph.
To be honest I think it’s pretty offensive of you to suggest that people would have attacked it had she just said “Hiya”. On what grounds do you make that assumption? Many of the people who posted in it post here also, and are not noted for irrational hatred, so what’s the basis for your insulting them by claiming they’re motivated by anything other than honest opinion?
She was most CERTAINLY not “bullied”, however. She wrote what Bella described as a “polemical” piece, and as someone in the thread noted, the entire point of polemic is to be controversial. She sought controversy and got it, and got it in much more measured and polite tones than it deserved – or would have got if I’d replied. I didn’t trust myself, frankly, and as I’ve already said above the last thing I want is Wings and Bella having a barney.
Your assessment of what’s happened is making me almost as angry as reading her post did, but because I’m not like her you won’t be banned or intimidated into silence for dissenting from the site owner’s view. You have your opinion, I don’t agree with it, but I respect your right to hold it and you can argue it as much as you like.
One request, though – and it IS a request, not any sort of veiled threat – just ask yourself what you’ll be achieving. Kate Higgins has caused enough utterly needless bad feeling among allies on Bella already without spreading the contagion over here.
DISCLAIMER: I’ve been dealing with HMRC today, and as a result I’m very very cranky indeed. I’d really rather people didn’t piss me off any more for a few hours until my blood pressure falls a bit, if that’s at all possible. Thanks.
@ianbrotherhood
I was not intending to cause mischief. My posts on Bella Caledonia were my own opinions of the article. I don’t rate the article at all. I agreed with people like Doug Daniel, Peter Bell, and others who similarly criticized it.
Fair-do’s.
Time-out.
Peace?
Cheers.
[gangsta fist-bump]
Hi Ian – as one of the folk who posted on her article, I hope my responses didn’t come across as attempts to cause mischief. As I stated in one of them, I actually tried not to respond to it, because it pissed me off something rotten and I didn’t want to start a stushie. But when I saw her responses this morning, I felt I had to say my bit because she completely ignored what people were saying – and I simply couldn’t believe she had the gall to say she didn’t see Braveheart as “relevant to the debate” when she was the one who brought it up in her article!
The Yes campaign is about trying to embrace people of varying backgrounds who have all arrived at the same destination, via different routes. Kevin brought up the point about the left falling out over the word “socialist”, but I imagine that was about fighting over who the true socialists were. This seems to be the opposite, where everyone is fighting to get AWAY from a certain label!
It just smacked of insincerity to me. Here’s someone who has been an SNP member for years (oh how we all know that she was chapping doors before many of us were even members), who has presumably had no problem self-identifying herself with the term which, ignoring the dark connotations certain unionists try to imply, is generally accepted to be shorthand for “Scottish National Party member”, and until now – by extension – independence supporter. All of a sudden, we have a wave of new folk joining the party (or at least going “hey, we’re here too!”) who like to say that they’re “not a nationalist”, partly to emphasise (not always correctly) that they’ve had a different journey to supporting independence, but also partly to avoid being clumped together with the SNP as one homogeneous group.
Now Kate decides “ooh, actually I’m not a nationalist either, because nationalists are just idiots who only want independence because they’ve watched Braveheart too many times, and couldn’t give a toss about improving the lives of other folk. I’m better than these folk, so don’t tar me with the same brush!” It reminds me a lot of a guy I was mates with at school, who would suddenly ditch you in favour of someone else he had inexplicably put up on some sort of pedestal as The Best Person Ever.
As Stu has said, there is a group of folk in the Twitterati or whatever who seem to have decided that they’re somehow above the rest of us bloggers and commenters. This is an unfortunate side-effect of internet-based discourse which I’ve seen countless times, where someone comes along that a few folk bewilderingly start idolising, who they then play up to in order to receive their praise, and suddenly they’ve formed an elitist group of back-slappers, saying to each other “ooh, great article – so much more balanced than the normal separatist/unionist blogs.” The problem is made ten times worse when some of those same people start being picked up by the media, and suddenly they think they’re some sort of premier bloggers or something, wanking each other off about how brilliantly non-partisan they all are and congratulating themselves for how much they slag off their own side – “oooh, people don’t like it when I criticise my own party, but I just tell it like it is” or whatever. Fuck all that nonsense.
I would suggest Kate is one of these folk. And her “I’m not a nationalist” declaration just makes me think of some teenager trying to pretend to his new “cool” mates that he has no idea who the kid waving at him is – even though they’ve been best friends since nursery school.
Kate’s the kind of person who thinks there is a hierarchy of independence supporter. Not just because of why you support it, but also by how long you’ve done so and how much you’ve “earned your dues” as they say. Stu and I both highlighted examples of her doing just that if you check a few comments up. Considering the Yes campaign needs to embrace as many new faces as possible, I find such an attitude completely non-constructive I couldn’t give a fuck if someone has delivered leaflets every day for the past 40 years, or if they’ve only just joined the club. We all have one vote, and hopefully at least 50% of us will vote Yes.
Hmmm, that turned into a bit of a rant… Clearly I’ve been needing to get some of that off my chest for a while. Anyway, onwards and upwards, let’s get that Yes vote!
The public he said she said is frankly quite disturbing. It is fast turning me off WOS. I’m sure the whole issue could have been let go before now.
Don’t worry Keef – I suspect this thread is the last anyone will say on the matter. It was just a very, very strange article that a few of us felt couldn’t go unchallenged. And a teeny bit of fall-out on here!
Such stushies are but the nature of the internet!
“It is fast turning me off WOS. I’m sure the whole issue could have been let go before now.”
Then let it go, rather than bumping it up to the top of the Recent Comments box with more posts. Or, y’know, stop reading this thread. Nobody’s got a gun to your head.
Cup of coffee anyone?