Who to believe?
Posted on
March 07, 2013 by
Rev. Stuart Campbell
From the Luxembourg newspaper Wort.lu on Tuesday:
From today’s Scottish Daily Mail:
Hmm, that’s a tricky one.
The world's most-read Scottish politics website
-
About
Wings Over Scotland is a (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)
-
Recent Posts
- 12-12
- 12-09
- 12-07
- 12-03
- 11-28
- 11-25
- 11-23
- 11-22
- 11-18
- 11-17
- 11-12
- 11-09
- 11-06
- 11-04
- 11-03
- 11-02
- 10-29
- 10-26
- 10-26
- 10-21
A tall tale
Wee Books
Video
Probably a robbery
Transphobia
That tweet from Stewart Stevenson that they quote is right – this is enemy action (and he would know, having been at the receiving end himself in the past). And it’s time the SNP and Yes campaign as a whole stopped pussy-footing around. I suspect they’ve always held back on calling a spade a spade, for fear of giving the unionist media a stick to beat us with. But if they’re going to hit us with whatever we give them anyway, we might as well make it worthwhile.
I’ve always told my son never to hit anyone first. But I’ve also told him if *he* gets hit, then *he* should hit back – preferably harder – and he’ll have my full support. I think its a guiding principle in life and one that Yes Scotland should adopt. No-one respects a punchbag.
@ Doug Daniel
Doug, here and on Twitter I sense your growing frustration. But I think we need to bring timing into the equation. We are eighteen months’ distance from the referendum; if we unleash the attack dogs now it is too soon. To take up a battlefield metaphor, this is Waterloo, not Balaclava – ‘Hard pounding, gentlemen’, said the Duke of Wellington, who knew he had to soak up all Napoleon could throw at him until the time was right. Do you maybe not sense the growing weariness over the scare stories? The small cracks in the line with every ‘Why I am voting Yes’ blog?
If you’ll allow the Napoleonic metaphor a last outing – cybernats are the skirmishers. Our job is to keep up the constant harassing; to assist in that process of wearing down, of disheartening the opposition, of giving the undecided reason to join our side. It takes time. We have time.
As said by Col William Prescott dueing the American war of independence “wait until you can see the whites of their eyes!”
We must do the same. When it comes, the Better No camp will have no powder left and we will win the argument.
The magics coming!!
Never interupt your enemy when he is making a mistake [Napoleon]
Plenty time left for a street brawl, guys. We don’t need to go there yet.
All the stuff about the long game is fine, and I’ve always felt that this is what the Yes campaign are doing. But Rope-A-Dope doesn’t consist of taking 12 rounds of punching and finishing with one single knock-out blow, your only punch in the whole match. You’ve got to land punches throughout the whole match as well, and it’s no good allowing your opponent to throw as many punches as they can if you’re not going to defend yourself.
Letting them tell lies to the point of exhaustion doesn’t preclude us from fighting back in the meantime. It certainly doesn’t do the morale of campaigners any good.
@ Doug. Take your point. OK, so who is the on-form attack dog we put up for media interviews? Alex Neill is the only one as springs to mind. The Dear Leader prefers irony, & everyone else is just too reasonable. Mind you, the brief needs to be to attack the question & questioner, not try to answer it. Goes a bit against received media-training wisdom. But it would be good to see a bit of a brawl on Newsnicht for a change, I agree.
Alex Neil comes to mind for me too. That interview on BBC GMS was fantastic, whereas Fiona Hyslop’s attempt to do similar over Lucinda Creighton’s comments failed to get a similar result, and that was against Andrew Kerr, who is a bit of a wet fish.
I think the whole SNP cabinet needs some lessons in how to take an interviewer to task, though. Humza is usually good but came unstuck against Gordon Brewer last time he was on Newsnicht. Derek MacKay can be good too but, as some of us have noted already elsewhere, spent too long on the defensive last night. I mean, I came away from that interview thinking that Derek MacKay was being a bit shifty about the “year old figures” thing because Brewer kept saying they were from December – but now Stu and the Sun have both confirmed that they were indeed well out of date.
Basically, I think people are getting sucked into playing the unionist game a bit too much. Rather than trying to answer questions that are designed to get folk unstuck, we should simply be saying “your question is completely flawed/you’ve not done your research properly/you’re speaking utter pish.” That last one is perhaps not for use by government ministers…
“I mean, I came away from that interview thinking that Derek MacKay was being a bit shifty about the “year old figures” thing because Brewer kept saying they were from December – but now Stu and the Sun have both confirmed that they were indeed well out of date.”
In fairness, Brewer was saying the December figures were different to the ones in the Better Together decoy pamphlet, and Mackay WAS a bit shifty on them, possibly because he just wasn’t briefed on them.
We don’t need to wait until round 12, Doug.
However, I do believe that we should stay cool, at least until the White paper is published, later this year. Then all hell breaks lose, and then we will need a small army of Alex Neils to keep the unionist bloodhounds at bay!
@Doug Daniel
All the stuff about the long game is fine, and I’ve always felt that this is what the Yes campaign are doing. But Rope-A-Dope doesn’t consist of taking 12 rounds of punching and finishing with one single knock-out blow, your only punch in the whole match. You’ve got to land punches throughout the whole match as well, and it’s no good allowing your opponent to throw as many punches as they can if you’re not going to defend yourself.
No, I think the whole point of Rope-A-Dope was for Ali to let Foreman completely exhaust himself, have no energy left, and then he countered viciously. Ali did punch Foreman but it was not sustained at all. He deliberately stayed on the ropes in Zaire and waited for his chance.
No, I think the whole point of Rope-A-Dope was for Ali to let Foreman completely exhaust himself, have no energy left, and then he countered viciously. Ali did punch Foreman but it was not sustained at all. He deliberately stayed on the ropes in Zaire and waited for his chance.
That was only part of it; Ali was constantly countering with some tremendous punches as he would spring back off the ropes and catch Foreman coming in; Foreman was pretty cut up and had taken a lot of punishment before that final round. It’s true it came in bursts and wasn’t sustained but the technique is NOT completely passive; you have to counter when the opportunity presents itself. 😉
@Brian Ritchie
Yes, but Ali was on the ropes inviting Foreman to hit him. Ali took a hell of a beating himself. Of course Ali hit Foreman as well but it was Foreman who was attacking Ali almost constantly. He wore himself out so much with all the hits he was taking at Ali’s stomach.
I tell you what concerns me, and that is that the Yes HQ is strategising for a grass-roots Obama-style ‘Yes we can’ campaign, which is all very well in its way, but does not take into account the viciousness of an ancient nation-state faced with losing a bit of territory it thought it had long assimilated. I’m not suggesting the UK govt. will descend into a France/Algeria or even a Spain/Catalonia confrontation, but I don’t think it does to underestimate the mindset. So I think Yes HQ has to at least plan the counter-attack, even if now is not the time for it. I hope it is doing so.
Don’t agree with this passive pish. For the last two years the MSM lies have been getting worse and worse and more outrageous. But only to those of us who care to read and investigate further. What about the switched off doughy don’t knows? or the bigoted opinionated probably ‘no voters’?. The former ones are basically feart and the latter are the ones that tell me that AS is a liar and we cant afford blah blah etc…The complacent ones in the cybernat community have over the past two years counselled patience telling those doubters amongst us that the uncommitted and unknowing Scottish masses will see the light and realise that the msm are unregenerate liars. I don’t agree. All I hear is Joe McPublic mouthing the same crap headlined on Disreporting Scotland; the (broken )Record and all the other Unionist bumwipe ‘Papers’. What we need is robust attacks on the BBC alleged veracity and on the yellow rags propaganda. We need a streetfighter like Kenneth Gibson, who is articulate and sussed. Alex Neil: too pompous;Humza: too much party machine man; Hyslop: too dense. We need someone like Gibson to refute and attack this dire deluge of disinformation, someone who is game for all their bloody lies. Also the SNP and Yes campaign must galvanise and mobilise the general ‘YES’ population to demonstrate against the msm. It must be officially sanctioned and not left to odds and sods (no offence!) to hold the flag high in risible numbers that invite ridicule and feelings of defeat even before we’ve started. What revolution has not had huge public demonstrations of support? Arab Spring anybody? Nothing worth having was gained by whispering in corners and being reasonable about disgraceful attacks on your integrity. Let’s get intae them!
I’m worried that we might underestimate the enemy’s resources and ruthless amorality. We might look in the BT shop window and see Lamont, Darling, Davidson – hardly the intellectual equivalent of the Pontypool front row. But the power and intelligence (in both senses of the word) stacked behind them is vast. Financially they have the open faults of the UK treasury, intellectually they have a crew of academics who are paid to whore for them, they have deep market research and PR expertise, and they have the secret services with their bags of dirty tricks.
What we are seeing now, their utter possession of all of the media, is merely phase one, we need to be thinking what phase two and three might be, because you can be sure they are already planned. They will be hoping that we all get our knickers in a twist about those front pages today – give ’em something to deny, as Nixon said. Let’s not fret so much over the uppercut that we don’t see the right hook coming. They can’t continue war by front page headline for a year, the nation would collapse in mirth. So what’s phase two? My guess: it will be personal.
@Vronsky –
Aye. Manufactured dirt on AS.
Phase Three? False flags blamed on militant Nationalist ‘Ultras’ secretly funded by the same sources the PIRA used. etc etc etc.
We should remember that, post 9/11, the Whitehouse called in prominent novelists to give their most fantastic imaginings on what might happen next.
There’s nothing they won’t countenance to stop the break-up of the UK.
Nothing.
And we’re kidding ourselves if we don’t acknowledge what they’re capable of – let’s just hope AS and his closest people are way ahead of the rest of us.
Stop paying the license fee and organise a march on Pacific Quay.
Phase 2 will be ‘what happens afterwards’. We’ll go back to the ‘extinguished Scotland’ scenario and the claim that everything will be in the gift of rUK. Currently we get vague scare stories. These will turn to more direct threats viz: Indy Scotland has no right to oil; UK Govt plans to erect border posts; UK Govt will supervise Scottish budget; UK govt will not support IndyScotland membership of EU etc.
Phase 3 will be the extremist threat posed by indy supporters. That’s when things get tough.
ianbrotherhood and kinnivie,
I could suppose a whole lot of worse scenarios that the ones you have suggested, which would end up with the SNP becoming a proscribed organisation.
IMHO this is not as easy a thing for any government to do as it might have been even five years ago.
I do not think I am alone in giving more credence to the remarks of some commentators here than I am to a talking head on the box.
The blogs such as this one are our samizdat.
Slightly off topic. I have noticed several comments recently across these blogs from folk I haven’t recognised, suggesting that this might all have to end in violence. Like NI.
I am unconvinced by that and find it so alien to the sort of nationalism I subscribe to that I wonder if they are agents provocateurs? If not, they are bloody idiots.
@ianbrotherhood
Just posted this over at Craig Murray;
How the Scots fare in and after the 2014 referendum will be a highly informative experience for all those posting here, whether Scots or not. If a No vote appears it will certainly have been forced by the media, most especially the BBC. Most nationalists expect this to lead to a quick removal of powers from Holyrood, perhaps its complete abolition (note the advance of UKIP, for whom this is public policy). It’s impossible to guess what the Scottish reaction to this would be, but there would be one.
If there is a Yes vote then I fear Cryptonym is right – there will be military intervention. First step by Westminster would be to declare that they do not recognise the result (stuff the Section 30), pushing the ball into Salmond’s court. Alex won’t, can’t shrink from UDI. Then you will see at close hand exactly what sort of government you have. Sectarian false-flags à la Omagh will be first up, followed by <strike>tanks on the street</strike> a peace-keeping force.
Vronsky,
OTOH Cameron might be so drunk celebrating the Conservatives glorious future as the majority party at Westminster for a very, very long time, that he wouldn’t bother.
3rd try I am being told I am posting comments too quickly??
Tanks on the street like this
link to urbanglasgow.co.uk
“Cameron might be so drunk celebrating the Conservatives glorious future as the majority party at Westminster for a very, very long time, that he wouldn’t bother.”
What choice do our English brethren have? Conservative, conservative or conservative. Or, with the appearance of UKIP, conservative. They are already a one party state.
@Vronsky
If there is a Yes vote then I fear Cryptonym is right – there will be military intervention. First step by Westminster would be to declare that they do not recognise the result (stuff the Section 30), pushing the ball into Salmond’s court. Alex won’t, can’t shrink from UDI. Then you will see at close hand exactly what sort of government you have. Sectarian false-flags à la Omagh will be first up, followed by <strike>tanks on the street</strike> a peace-keeping force.
What is the point of this post? Seriously, why are people on here talking about violence? Is there any positive reasons for bringing this up?
I think folk are getting a bit het up, at least for now. I really don’t think today has been a good day for the unionists at all. Sure, they’re all celebrating, but all they’ve actually done is give the Scottish people a very clear demonstration of thoroughly co-ordinated bias. One that will make already aware and pro-indy folk more angry, and swithering folk begin to see the light a little more.
The ideas of phases two and three. I’m 100% certain things will get far, far worse. But we just have to keep the hied. It will be difficult for them, at this stage, to start a “the Yes campaign are all extremists” black ops operation, because it’s already grass-roots. This is very much Westminster and the UK state and media against Scotland. Some of us have known that for a long time. The kind of open admission today has been ultimately can’t play well for the unionists. Apart from anything else, the autonomy of people and democracy are pretty important international concepts, are they not?
Mato 21,
Apparently, according to another article from the same source, whilst there were tanks parked in the fruitmarket (IIRC), no tanks were ever deployed.
The somewhat famous photograph is of a tank during a recruiting campaign in WW1.
Or so someone on there said.
@cath You are, of course, correct – and this is the big advantage of the grass roots campaign – if it really takes off. Let me make clear that I don’t expect the UK govt ever to proscribe the SNP or any of the Yes campaign groups. Nor do I expect violence. But what I do expect is a drip drip of propaganda with dark hints about extremism. Such as, for example, this: link to scotsman.com (only rather more up to date)
@muttley79
“Is there any positive reasons for bringing this up? ”
Yes, history. Read it.
Lets see where the UK is by the summer. The referendum isn’t featuring down there for now but there are some significant milestones on the horizon, bedroom tax, budget announcements, on going failing economy – it’s quite possible that being Better Together is self evidently not the case well before we need to remove the gloves or to continue the analogy – come off the ropes fighting!
Cath,
I once again agree with you on this one. To me it just reinforces my belief that the Better No Campaign is indeed as one dimensional as it has always seemed to be. Phases 2 and 3 etc.. will just be louder, shriller and more verifiably rediculous versions of phase 1.
I have had my doubts that experienced professional politicians and media manipulators from such a historically successful empire could be so incompetant. I have toyed with the idea that they must therefor have some alternative plan in action, that I in my naive inexperience, just can’t see.
After sitting down and coldly listing to myself all the strategic, tactical and intelectual blunders made by the Unionists since 2006 (and before) which have culminated in the delivery of this YES/NO referendum, I can only come to the conclusion that, no, they really are that stupid and immobile !
They will keep on banging away with the same old failed tactics huddling around their MSM camp fire for warmth, comfort and reassurance. This reassurance is, as they are only too aware, shallow and of little protection come the vote. That’s why episodes of blind panic such as the Section 30 order debate will surface more and more and simply cannot be controlled.
It will be a YES vote in 2014 for so many different structural, historic, political, financial and personal reasons. Obvious propaganda will only help. (weesmiley)
@mato21
Tanks in George Square.
@Vronsky
Yes, history. Read it.
I have thank you very much. There is no need to be patronising. I do not know what you are trying to achieve by predicting Omagh style atrocities in Scotland? If you are attempting to win over people who are undecided then I do not think it will work.
Might I suggest a re-reading of the excellent article When push comes to shove posted on Wings Over Scotland in December 2012.
@Braco You know how company spokesmen float around claiming that something is ‘in their DNA’? The idea of the right to govern Scotland is deeply in the DNA of the Westminster establishment. It goes back to 1296 in one form or another. The Better Together campaign is a useful idiot (led by one too). The UK govt. is a different matter. As I wrote at the time, that first paper on the position of Scotland in international law was a clear statement of aggressive intent. No compromise. We can expect the next ones in the sequence to be just as aggressive. Thanks to those interfering buffoons in Brussels, it’s not on the cards to invade and burn out the Borders, as was the case in the old days – but a complaisant media, a sequence of no compromise papers, and a drip of propaganda is how it will be played.
The Man in the Jar,
Maybees aye, maybees naw:
Oh, bloody hell. This is the thread I found ages ago:
link to urbanglasgow.co.uk
Twas the Cattle Market, so IIRC not 🙂
I also thought the tank was called Cecil. It was apparently called Julian.
@douglas clark-
Brilliant link. Fascinating stuff. Cheers.
I agree Braco.
Also, I have a lot of faith and trust in the SNP and the wider independence movement. People within that movement have been fighting for independence – against their own interests, to the detriment of careers, wealth, respect, chances at power etc – for decades. They have been through tough campaigns before and been on the receiving end of every propaganda tactic and dirty trick going. There will be little that will surprise many of them, and they may even have learned how to deploy a few in return along the way! And bear in mind they won both of the last two, despite the media and Westminster, even if 79 was stolen by Westminster. That kind of passion, dedication and genuine belief in a cause is something the unionists don’t understand, can’t fathom and can’t match.
Seems to me there are actually only so many techniques a state can use to lie and stifle the interests of the people and democracy. One is to keep people happy enough that they don’t question it, so essentially the democratic will is genuinely the status quo – good welfare state, people feel happily British, a good level of democracy and devolution where it makes sense. All of that is long gone. The second is state and media propaganda. But that works best when it’s subtle. Today was subtle as a sledgehammer and we’re still 18 months off the referendum.
The third is infiltration, aggression, violence etc. Making Yes campaigners look extreme will be hard now the SNP is in government though. And the Yes campaign is filled with very respectable folk. Those of us on the ground should be aware of it, and be careful. But we’re in a situation with internet, the EU, the UN…? Really, what other tactics do they have? And what kind of Britain will they be creating if they go all out using truly dreadful ones?
@douglas clark
There would have been at least three tanks in Glasgow they never operate on their own. I know I drove one for years. Not I may add one in the video! Smiley
From Bertrand Russell’s 1950 book The Impact of Science on Society:
“What is essential in mass psychology is the art of persuasion. If you compare a speech of Hitler’s with a speech of (say) Edmund Burke, you will see what strides have been made in the art since the eighteenth century. What went wrong formerly was that people had read in books that man is a rational animal, and framed their arguments on this hypothesis. We now know that limelight and a brass band do more to persuade than can be done by the most elegant train of syllogisms. It may be hoped that in time anybody will be able to persuade anybody of anything if he can catch the patient young and is provided by the State with money and equipment.”
Smart as he undoubtedly was, Russell appears to overlook the resilience and persuasiveness of grass-roots political movements. Perhaps not surprising, coming from yet another top-down establishment thinker. Incidentally, Russell was also a prominent supporter of eugenics.
I should add that I was as convinced as anyone else that tanks were deployed, but that can now be dismissed as an urban myth thanks to the good people on that web site. As far as I can tell.
The degree of fear on the unionist side was however, palpable. It would be absent any sense whatsoever to not see that action as the iron fist coming out of the velvet glove.
As far as I know, no-one died.
Could that happen now and not invoke an Arab Spring?
I think not. And that is the problem for the armchair warriors. It would be all over the airwaves. Which is why it will not happen. The rUK cannot afford the bad publicity of an acrimonious divorce. It would be played as a McSpring and you’d never hear the end of it. They cannot, DNA or whatever, be seen to be oppressing us after a democratic vote.
Before it? Well we are all seeing what they are capable of.
Sad to say, I think they will play the POTUS card. I hope, I had a lot of hope in him, that Obama doesn’t fold.
Kininvie,
Your example of the Uk Governments legal document/opinion is a prime example of the stupidity I was talking about. I see no discernible difference in the caliber of the Unionists, no matter which area they are operating from.
Cath,
I really can’t see this getting nasty in the way people here seem to be worrying about for all the reasons that you list. I also would add the very important point that I do feel that the general public in the rest of the UK recognise our right to choose.
They may not like what we choose, but having accepted our right, I cannot see them countenancing their Government militarily interfering with Scotland either pre or post Yes vote.
I really don’t think they care enough, which is part of the reason we are where we are I suppose.
Hmm…
Enjoying the craic on here.
CameronB,
You say, and I agree:
“Smart as he undoubtedly was, Russell appears to overlook the resilience and persuasiveness of grass-roots political movements. Perhaps not surprising, coming from yet another top-down establishment thinker”
If I have read his comment correctly he is a dystopian. It is just a fact of life that we will believe anything we are told by well wrought authority figures.
Well, we don’t, do we?
No, we don’t. We can think for ourselves.
____________________________
Deploying flashback victim ‘helicopter out of Glasgow ’cause it’s just like Vietnam all over again’, Tony Blair is an act of genious on the part of the Better Together campaign.
I hope they continue
As nobody seems to have picked up on it, or simply can not be bothered commenting, I actually think Bertrand Russell was anything but an establishment thinker. He may have come from the aristocracy and will have shared a cultural experience of entitlement, but his position on most important issues was somewhat in opposition to the status quo of the time.
CameronB,
I am not suggesting he was for the future he foresaw. It would be like saying Eric Blair was pro 1984!
I just hope he’d be a tad disappointed about how accurately he called it.
The victory of the Cassandra’s, if you will. It is almost always easier to describe decline rather than progress. I think Bertrand Russell preferred the easier gig.
There is a guy called John Brunner that wrote a book called ‘Stand on Zanzibar’ that is frighteningly prescient of where we are now. Your chum would have loved him.
@ douglas clark
There you go casting Cistercians again. Who’s chum?
Did a quick Wiki on “Stand on Zanzibar”. Looks interesting, but I need cheering up, don’t I?
A “victory of the Cassandra’s” seems particularly apt. What I think we are seeing today, is a blurring, or re-molding of the definition of “progress”. If you can stand back and take a wide angle view of the world, I think it is actually possible to watch the process Eric Blair described as Newspeak, or the destruction of language in order to limit the boundaries of thought.
Still, grass is an awffy bugger to stop. The roots seem to get everywhere. 🙂
It would be an awfy good thing to see the BBC getting a good verbal doing live on some programme – now and again – would be nice.
Comedy is always a good way of “reaching people”. Do we have a Beppe Grillo to do the ridiculing?
CameronB,
Apologies, not your chum then, 🙁 . Maybe mine :-). This is from Wiki, so might be inconclusive:
“Russell was a prominent “Anti-war” activist; he championed “Anti-imperialism” and went to prison for his pacifism during “World War I” Later, he campaigned against Adolf Hitler and Stalinism, and attacked the United States of America ‘s involvement in the Vietnam War and was an outspoken proponent of Nuclear disarmament. In 1950 Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature”in recognition of his varied and significant writings in which he champions humanitarianv ideals and Freedom of thought.
Phew! I was in moderation, but I think it’ll be all right now.
Looks to me like a bloke that got most of it right!
CameronB,
You say:
“victory of the Cassandra’s” seems particularly apt. What I think we are seeing today, is a blurring, or re-molding of the definition of “progress”. If you can stand back and take a wide angle view of the world, I think it is actually possible to watch the process Eric Blair described as Newspeak, or the destruction of language in order to limit the boundaries of thought.
Still, grass is an awffy bugger to stop. The roots seem to get everywhere. ”
Agree 100% with that. I take it that you and I agree that young Eric had more to do with informing protest (and independence) movements than anyone else in the 20th C? My favourite take on him is V for Vendetta. You know the last scene is anarchism gone mad, you know in your head it is wrong, but your heart says different.
Ré your next post, BBC Scotlandshire does a wonderful job of taking the piss. As you say, we should never underestimate the power of wit.
You might be correct re Eric Blair, he was certainly very well placed to describe the colonial system. I’m just glad we covered 1984 and Animal Farm, when I was at school. I didn’t really understand the significance of the themes and issues at the time, but at least I was provided some structured guidance in how to examine his work.
Can I suggest Gene Sharp, as a possible contender for the ‘biggest stirrer in town’? Often credited as the brains behind the wave of colour revolutions that has “freed” so much of humanity, his work has proven remarkably useful to those not necessarily on the side of open and democratic society.
link to aljazeera.com
link to telegraph.co.uk
link to informationclearinghouse.info
link to howtostartarevolutionfilm.com
We don’t need Beppe Grillo – just a few episodes of Reporting Scotlandshire 🙂
As for the concept of a unionist phase 1,2 & 3. Personal attacks are certainly on the cards – if they can find any dirt, that is. Violence won’t work though, there is no history of violence in the independence movement and any manifestation of it in the lead up to the referendum would be deeply suspicious. Unless Westmimster bribes us all or the Scottish government does something catastrophically incompetent, then I am afraid the unionists’ main weapon is the BBC.
@ douglas clark
I had hoped that you might have picked up on my tongue being pressed against cheek, when I accused you of casting Cistercians.
He was obviously a remarkable man, but like everyone he had good and bad aspects. He did support women’s rights and homosexual rights, as well as everything you listed, so was possibly an early example of metrosexual man(?) However, Russell also advocated the sterilization of the “mentally defective”, in his 1928 book “Marriage and Morals”. He also advocated procreation rights based on colour, and was a consistent advocate of one world government. He was an entitled aristocrat.
Russell also analyzed the question of whether a ‘scientific dictatorship’ is more stable than a democracy, on which he postulated:
“Apart from the danger of war, I see no reason why such a regime should be unstable. After all, most civilised and semi-civilised countries known to history have had a large class of slaves or serfs completely subordinate to their owners. There is nothing in human nature that makes the persistence of such a system impossible. And the whole development of scientific technique has made it easier than it used to be to maintain a despotic rule of a minority. When the government controls the distribution of food, its power is absolute so long as it can count on the police and the armed forces. And their loyalty can be secured by giving them some of the privileges of the governing class. I do not see how any internal movement of revolt can ever bring freedom to the oppressed in a modern scientific dictatorship.”
“It is to be expected that advances in physiology and psychology will give governments much more control over individual mentality than they now have even in totalitarian countries. Fichte laid it down that education should aim at destroying free will, so that, after pupils have left school, they shall be incapable, throughout the rest of their lives, of thinking or acting otherwise than as their schoolmasters would have wished… Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they are so.”
Here is a link to a very powerful documentary on eugenics, by the BBC no less. Not that I do not think you are already aware, but I think it amply highlights the error in basing the structure of society along the lines suggested by Aristotle.
Gotta say, coming new to this conversation this morning and reading some of the posts is a a little disarming. – Terrorits ? Violence ? MI5 ? ‘
Though I had just walked into the next Bond film.
Who to believe?
Certainly not the Guardian. That is one perfectly reasonable comment moderated out so far today, and three that have simply vanished. Along with Macart’s comments. I think they tippled that we were sparking off one another.
“That is one perfectly reasonable comment moderated out so far today,”
I think a very interesting experiment might be to keep a record of comments rejected/deleted by both newspaper sites and blogs (usually Unionist ones, but certain others are also guilty – I note that despite promising they’ll return deleted comments to their author, Better Nation still haven’t given me back any of the wholly-innocuous ones of mine they canned months ago).
Of course, that’s slightly tricky as you don’t know which comments will be rejected or moderated until it’s happened, at which point you have no access to the text. But I developed a habit, whenever I post anything lengthy or important to a site I suspect might not be entirely even-handed, of hitting Ctrl-A, Ctrl-C before I hit Submit, and then pasting the text into a Notepad document I keep open on my desktop. Then if the comment vanishes I have a copy.
I think if we all did that we might get a highly instructive illustration of who’s really “closing down debate”.
Time to shake ourselves off and settle down a wee bit to think.
We know what the media are going to do. They’re doing it and it’s getting worse in degrees – and it will get even worse I promise you in the run up to the referendum.
However, lets ‘keep the heid’.
We have to persuade 20% of ‘don’t knows’ to vote Yes. That’s our objective pure and simple. We’ve seen that already the Yes vote is recovering after last year’s constant ‘Britfest’ of Olympics and Jubilee and we’re now seeing the decline in the ‘No’ vote as many are now beginning to waver.
And what have we done to reverse this trend ? – absolutely nothing ! The SNP have carried on as best they can running against 100% of the press all the time. The papers have battered every form of ‘separation’ that they can and yet, after all that’s happened, look at the evidence and see that our vote is recovering and their vote is wavering.
More and more people are getting turned off by Reporting Scotland, by the BBC, by Unionist politicians – by the constant negative spin that ‘ we are all fucking useless’ somehow and we couldn’t organise a piss up in a brewery. We don’t need to do anything, they are doing it for us. They are changing people’s minds because there is only so much shit you can take before you bite back, and thats what’s going to happen. In fact that is exactly what’s happening.
So don’t fall into their traps – don’t get angry and lose the heid – thats what they want you to do.
Don’t start name calling using words like ‘fascists’ – thats what they want you to do
Don’t go and pick a fight with a unionist – thats what they want you to do.
All that negative stuff you can leave to them, it’s not winning them any votes as we can all see.
There is still a year and a half to go, yes – a year and a half. In politics thats a huge time.
All I had asked was why the MSM was not reporting the publication of Scottish government reports, produced to standards approved by the UK government (GERS), but was instead presenting badly faked smear and fear. I did also link to your analysis Rev., but in plain text format.
“This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs”.
I think there are unwritten rules for independence supporters.
Tartanfever,
Well said. I find myself banging the same drum every time the conversations turn to how all powerful the BBC, MSM and our opposition are.
It makes me sound like a bit of an optomist but I truly believe, from the evidence that you list and from other indicators, that the success of our campaign is that it is really completely unconnected to the MSM and The Better No campaign.
The goal of converting as many individuals to our cause is a personal, one to one, grass roots effort and will be carried out very much under the radar of the usual political establishments campaigning techniques.
Not in any religious way, but I feel Scotland’s folk memory of the Reformation as a grass roots, bottom up, revolution that successfully over through an all powerful political and religious establishment should be giving the Unionists some uneasy sleepless nights.
We have precedent on our side. Two, that went on to completely revolutionise societal thought (ours and the worlds) for centuries after.
I really hope that a similar revolutionary enthusiasm to re think just exactly what government is for and the re invention of democratic institutions (that are now centuries out of date) will catch hold of the national imagination and be enthusiastically encouraged .
A sort of melding of the fire from the spiritual enthusiasms of the Reformation and the Intelectual enthusiasms of the Enlightenment. I will stop now as I am sounding like some sort of idealist or something! (embarrasedweesmiley)
@ Braco
An interesting fact about Martin Luther, he was struck by lightning. This may have resulted in his religious revelation. Stanley Koren developed the “god helmet“, which he believes can reproduce mystical religious experiences, by stimulating the temporal lobes with electromagnetism. Seems as plausible as talking bushes or virgin births to me.
“I only said I was the greatest, not the smartest” Muhammad Ali
rope’a’dope ? Brain damage.
It would seem this is the guy who’s pulling the levers against Scotland’s chances, hopes and aspirations – as much as possible that is!
So, let’s hear it for credit, where credit’s due.
Anyone got his e-mail address?
Step up Ric Bailey
•POSITION: Chief Political Adviser, BBC
•DATE OF FELLOWSHIP: Michaelmas Term
•SPONSOR: BBC
HIS BIOGRAPHY:
I’ve been a political journalist with the BBC for most of my career – as a network lobby correspondent and presenter in Mrs Thatcher’s time, then later as the political news editor of the BBC’s Westminster unit. For six years, from 2000, I was Executive Editor of the flagship BBC One political debate programme “Question Time”, including editions in China, Russia, the US and the Middle East, also setting up a long-running citizenship scheme for young people – “Schools Question Time,” now in its eighth year.
‘Currently, I advise throughout the corporation on political impartiality and independence, oversee policy on polling and other aspects of editorial policy and organise for the industry the UK’s system of Party Political Broadcasts….’