Comment posted SNP need to back off the ‘Anti-Scottish’ tactic by newsroom.
For ratzo: No one comment gave us cause to decide that it was important to call attention to a direction of travel that is potentially dangerous and should be left behind.
And this is no facile argument.
Supporting the charging of fees for tertiary education – for example – may be short or long sighted, it may be capitalist, it may be elitist, it may damage the economy, it may fuel growth – but it is not ‘Anti-Scottish’. It is entirely feasible than an independent Scotland might have to charge such fees – and how would that square with the tag of being ‘Anti Scottish’?
As soon as you start labelling anything negatively as ‘Anti-Scottish’, you are also creating a positive category of ‘Scottish’ – and that binary distinction in these terms is essentially racist and yes, it is incipiently fascist.
Fascism is not hurling people into concentration camps and murdering opponents at will.
That is the end result of fascism.
Fascism is the insistence on and the imposition of a single perspective, a single purpose, a single rightness – and an inability to tolerate the contrary view.
This is why the Blair regime became essentially fascist and why much of the legislation enacted – badly - in a hurry, by David Blunkett was fascist in spirit.
Maya Evans, standing at the Cenotaph in London in October 2005, refusing to stop reading (not shouting) aloud the names of British soldiers who had been killed in the 2003 Iraq war was neither a terrorist nor did she represent a terrorist threat. But she was arrested and charged under anti-terrorism legislation – simply because what she was doing was politically uncomfortable for the Blair regime that had taken us into that war. That regime could not tolerate that contrary view. Evans became the first person in the UK to be convicted under Blunkett’s 2005 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act.
newsroom also commented
- For kenmcdonald: We do not intend to comment further on this matter – but the essence of extremism is unreason.
- For the cybernats:
Everyone is aware of the existence and operation of the so-called ‘cybernats’ – the SNP’s internet attack dogs, sent out to howl at the quiver of criticism on the horizon.
It is not difficult to discriminate between the, sometimes angry, responses of wounded nationalists and the vicious rants of the cybernats.
I have been watching the comments to this article and its clarifying comment with interest, amusement and serious concern.
The interest is purely academic, in the sense of observing and analysing behavioural phenomena. In the extremist comments I have seen an all but absolute absence of reason; a shrill and dark abuse of anyone with contrary views; and an unthinking dismissal of an issue that begs reflection.
The amusement relates to the rural Irish wisdom that: ‘If you throw a stone amongst a pack of dogs, it’s the one that gets hit that squeals’.
So I know that our very real anxiety about the underlying fascist attitude in the emergence of the ‘Anti-Scottish’ tag has been received as damaging.
The real damage is in the attitude rather than in the criticism. The cybernats and their masters might better reflect on the damage done by their own conduct in the face of reasoned criticism.
For Argyll has been well disposed to independence – and equally well disposed to a federalist solution.
In the light of what I have seen in the extremist strain amongst the comments above, I now have very real reservations about an SNP led independence, if this is evidence of what is to come.
What I am seeing is the habit – the deliberate habit – of the truly fascist. This will not tolerate criticism in the pursuit of a totalitarian, authoritarian nationalism. This will not stop to discriminate between legitimate and illegitimate criticism. ALL criticism is regarded as illegitimate.
If the SNP attack dogs can be licensed to behave in this way at a time when their party is working hard to court favour for an independence vote in 2014, what will this sort of administration be like when, if successful, it no longer needs to worry whether people like it or not?
Will I personally vote for independence if this is the true proposition to contemplate? If this is where we are headed, I would no longer consider it for one second.
I have been horrified to live through the Blair regime that saw folk arrested in Brighton – by police – during a Labour party conference, simply for wearing anti-Blair T-shirts; and at the same conference saw an octogenarian physically hauled out of the conference chamber for shouting ‘Rubbish’ during a speech by Jack Straw.
That is starting to look pretty tame against the incipient fascism here in Scotland.
What the cybernat behaviour has done in the extremist comments above is to reinforce in large the initial concerns we had at the ‘Anti-Scottish’ adventures – that there is a genuine fascism being consciously loosed to shout criticism of any kind into silence – and that is cause for all our concern.
Anyone who imagines that For Argyll is likely to be cowed by anything, never mind brutishly irrational screeching, has profoundly misread who we are and what we are for.
- For David McCann: See our reply to ratzo.
We were trying to treat this lightly, although we do see it as a phenomenon that is worrying.
We’re happy to accept that this may not have been the best approach and rest our case on what we have said to ratzo.
And, for the recored, we do see this manifestation as having all the hallmarks of juvenile spin doctoring.
- For ratzo: We cannot see anything amusing in pointing to creeping fascism. That this will be unintentional does not neutralise its fascist impact.
Scots who do not want independence are no less Scottish than those who do.
Each, as they see it, has the interests of the country at heart; and each has anxieties over the independence referendum that lead them to do what they can to manipulate it towards the outcome they would prefer to see.
We are on the record as being opposed only to the status quo, which Scotland has clearly outgrown; finding equally acceptable an openly and well specified independence or an equally open and well specified federalist revision of the UK.
In our view, it is dangerous not to identify and be critical of bad practice, from wherever it comes.
The sort of blind or nervous affiliation that makes it possible for people to accept on condone wrong conduct because it comes from their own ‘side’ is what breeds monsters.
Who wants to live in a country, independent or not, where any criticism or opposition is hit upon as ‘Anti-Scottish’. If you cannot see where this can only lead, that too is of real concern.
Recent comments by newsroom
- Indy, research funding and Scottish universities
Anyone is welcome to put their views on this site, Graeme. That’s what the Comments facility is there to enable.
I was an academic for a substantial period and have experience both of engaging in academic research and of supervising doctoral research; of the way research funding works; of the way the research process works; of what drives it and what enables it to be the best.
Of course Scottish universities would continue to do research but without membership of the common research area we have at the moment, it is hard to see how they could hope to produce the top flight results they have been producing in the current research environment.
Most research has a value but if a small country wants to get its research into orbit, it needs a bigger rocket than it can fuel by itself.
Anyone may say what they wish on this but I defer to no one on the soundness of the argument this piece presents.
And it has nothing whatsoever to do with nationality.
- Campbeltown Picture House planning for spectacular return
In many cases we would agree with you.
In this case, with the Campbeltown Community Business working closely with the funders to ensure that they meet the requirements of the applications’ processes when they submit them – and with the general level of awareness and interest there is in this project, we are confident that the project will succeed and the work will be done.
There is little attraction in going to an event that marks a temporary closure so, while we have no information on the event or the size of its audience, it is not surprising if there were few there.
When the Picture House reopens, it will be an object of curiosity and interest over a wide area.
If the team and their consultants get the ambience right and the programming right [these are their next series of challenges - it's pretty sadistic in the continuing demands], that initial curiosity is – and must be – convertible to a regular audience.
This initiative has so much to offer to the community life of Campbeltown, to its business community and to support for economic growth, it has a strong likelihood of success – and the voluntary members of the Community Business have their feet to the Board.
- On nationalism
If you’re referring to the author of the letter, you demonstrate the process he is talking about.
If you’re talking about the author of the article, myself – I am a rationalist, not a nationalist. The two are not compatible.
- On nationalism
It has to be doubtful that the egg-lobbers of Kirkcaldy see: ‘a Yes vote about trying to protect what is left of the values and institutions that many of us used to think of as being British’.
There is though a very challenging play by the Irish playwright,Tom KIlroy – Double Cross.
This identifies the double-jeopardy of empire as being that a state newly emerged from empire into independence and forming its own identity, has no template other than empire – and so ‘creates’ itself in the image of its former imperial principal.
What you are saying here carries all of the symptoms of that particular double cross.
How can you know that there never was a better way of doing any of the British things you claim, bizarrely, that a ‘Yes’ vote is designed to preserve? [And the notion that the proposed new Scotland is conceived of as a place of sanctuary for the repository of the sacred artefacts of the Union you would destroy is the laugh of the campaign.]
The NHS, for example, is now a sacred cow by default. It would be a positive advantage to be free to start again in defining, shaping and delivering a national health service free at the point of delivery.
Your stance would be more worthy of respect had you shown an independence of mind that is willing to think newly.
It is also noticeable that you choose the soft option of engaging with the patently honest letter – from the already paralysed victim of the action you support Scotland to take; and that you are sufficiently arrogant to assume that your own idealism is in some way ‘better’ than his?.
You fail to engage with the major issues of the Achilles heels of nationalism – its chauvinism, its utopianism and its incipient racism.
And by the way, the federation that the United Kingdom should move to become and which would without doubt be the most popular option of all – cross-party and across the Union – would not be a ‘unitary state’.
- On nationalism
‘we ourselves’ and ‘ourselves alone’ have the same connotation of comfort in separateness.
powered by SEO Super Comments