Tuesday, 29 July 2014

"I'm a proud Scot but..."

I've finally figured out what that actually means. When a unionist is about to assault you with some negative mantra about voting Yes prefixed with the statement above - the Unionist's idea of pride is (hopefully) embodied in the tweet below.


A bit convoluted, but I know what I mean... *

It sort of follows on from the last post, which an alarming number of people read (which always makes me think I've made a terrible mistake somewhere.) Its not to do with the difference between governments - much as unionist like to talk about the Land of Milk & Honey we terrible 'nats' think we'll get with a Yes vote. We understand governments can be crap, even if we elect them ourselves and that things don't always go to plan. It would be disingenuous for anybody to say Westminster or London could not organise something but Holyrood or Glasgow City Council could. During the Olympics G4S security was a mess but at the Commonwealth Games transport from out-of-town car parks has been rubbish.

Its the actual campaigns I mean. The Yes Campaign looks to things like the CWG's and says: "Look, we can do this. Scotland has the ability." It talks up the Whisky industry, oil & gas, our food & drink, tourism, bio-medical sciences and much more besides. Holyrood offered to take in the injured from recent disgusting activities in the middle east. Sure, we have issues, what country doesn't but the Yes Campaign derives a measure of pride from the things Scotland does well and tries to tell people about it.

Unionists on the other hand do things the other way round. On our behalf, they spent 6.2 billion smacks building an aircraft carrier that has no planes and another we can't afford to run. We're about to have an unaffordable replacement nuclear deterrent inflicted upon us that isn't fit for purpose. Westminster uses aid as leverage in its trade deals (often arms) around the globe, our soldiers are ill-equipped yet sent into danger on a capitalist's whim. Our government refuses to condemn the actions of another which is bombing innocent women and children out of their homes, schools and hospitals.

Where is the ability in all of that, where are the positives, the things to feel good - dare I say - feel proud about?

The Union has done some good, but its been mostly by accident or because it was forced to. I was having a lighthearted debate on twitter recently about Westminster 'giving' more devolution to Scotland, the valuable gift of suffrage was mentioned:



The notion that the union ever gave anything to anyone willingly is laughable, as with suffrage, that had to be extracted with blood & tears and in some cases; Life itself. I'm not saying anyone will give their life for the ability to tax landfill in Scotland, but the idea we'd be 'given' meaningful powers by Westminster if we vote no is completely risible - the UK MOD wouldn't even let us choose what colour of smoke spewed from the back of a plane, what hope do we have of getting effective powers for Holyrood?
Going back to my rather pithy tweet; aircraft carriers with no planes, a nuclear deterrent that doesn't really deter, foreign policy lacking anything approaching a glimmer of morality, not to mention policies at home with faintly despotic properties 
Yet, when the boats are launched to great pomp, inhumane policies are announced with faux regret and the start of a war that killed millions is commemorated; we're supposed to glow with pride?
Really?


When it comes to the British Government and the Union - especially at this time - what passes for pride often comes across as hubris.



* My Twitter avatar is not me, I've never been that shape - ever. Its Andy Murray, and it'll stay there till he wins another Grand Slam, (or until the weekend when the Men's 10m platform takes place.)

5 comments:

  1. Pa

    I know politicians on the YES side say we should not call Unionists anti-Scottish but sorry I find the whole no side to be anti Scottish.

    Their constant talking Scotland down or the we can do that but we shouldn't or the best of both worlds that they never ever explain what that is supposed to mean. I am sorry but the no side are very anti Scottish and I really don't care what anyone thinks.

    The coverage of the games has also shown unionism at it's worst, England = Britain and Scotland is a home nation meaning England = home nation. It has been a sham and it is really annoying me, I have just commented on it on Munguin. The games should have made a nation feel good but the BBC are making sure that doesn't happen, they are making sure that we know England is the big boy in this so called union. I hope it backfires big time come September.

    But either way as I have said before nothing ever gets to be the same again. If it's a no vote in September there will be a huge amound of pressure on the unuionist parties to deliver change, esp the labour Party. of course they will not deliver any meaningful change that improves people's lives. They will brin in more costly administrative powers that make us all poorer and there will be a backlash. I don't even think that Labour understand what they have gotten themselves into, I might even blog about it.

    Bruce



    ReplyDelete
  2. Aye.

    I think Labour are on a unstoppable slide, they've really shown their true colours over the independence question.

    If its a no, there really will be no where to hide and potentially, when people who did vote no realise they've been duped - I think independence will come about in a fairly abrupt possibly very angry way.

    I would agree on a lot of it being anti-Scottish. The problem isn't with the statement or facts supporting it - the UK press call us anti-English for saying the No Campaign is anti-Scottish - which is a spectacularly stupid circular argument.

    Add in to that, its more often than not 'Scottish' people who are accusing other Scottish people of being anti-English because they've called the No campaign anti-Scottish.

    Then the same people tell us we should definitely vote No because there is too much division in Scotland - the press go onto report that in hysterical fashion but don't say the elected representatives making these statements profit hugely from their no vote.

    Well, I know what I meant... ;-)

    I haven't seen much of the games, I hear though the commentary is dire and the BBC seem to be favouring English coverage & English presenters.

    It does seem very silly though - CWG's held in Scotland, but our 'national broadcaster' seems to favour beaming English endeavours into Scottish home, ummm, the country in which the games are actually being held...

    Again, quite stupid and obviously so.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I read (sorry I forget where oribinally but it is in Wiki) that the MOD is renaming and reducing the last Scottish Regiments because of " due to long term poor recruiting records".

    Also in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23654334
    There is a long article about poor recruiting numbers. I think that not just the Scots but the whole UK and NI is unwilling to be cannon fodder for the MOD Wastemonster.

    What that says about referendum voting intentions I'm not quite sure, but I don't think it bodes well for the NO campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Aye...

    I think it hints at a UK-wide ennui with Westminster and its woeful mismanagement & double standards.

    They're running Britain into the ground and Scotland needs to get off while it still can.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Very true. Enjoyed your post and agree with you. Thank you

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for comment as always and I apologise if you have to jump through any hoops to do so. Its just that, I'm still being spammed by organisations who are certain I can't get it up or when it is up its not big enough or that I don't have anyone to get it up for.

Who knew blogging could be so bad for ones self-confidence?