And since we're now running into an at-times overly mawkish celebration of the start of what was arguably the most destructive war of its day - although these things are relative and it seems we've learned nothing from it given things going on still.
For non-sports fans, the CWG's like the Olympics might have been a bit of a turn off. Surprising myself, I did enjoyed seeing many (from all over) winning medals they really didn't think they'd win. I'd never noticed, but the Commonwealth Games are much less of an elite affair than the Olympics - while some might say its the poorer for it, I'd say the opposite is true.
In terms of the organisation of the games, speaking for myself, I have to be careful. I'm going to be a bit of wanker and quote myself:
"I’m just glad its over, not wishing to provide any one with horrid mental imagery, but for the past 17 days (feels like months) what we've seen is the British state (call it what you will) basically having sex with itself, for the next few weeks it will sit smoking a fag telling itself how wonderful it was until eventually, it’ll have to start replying to those emails its been getting for cheap Viagra and penis enlargements because, contrary to its own hype; even sex with itself was a bit crap."That's what I said at the end of the London Olympics so it would be hellishly hypocritical for me to overly laud Glasgow and Scotland for the Commonwealth Games. The British State still managed to muscle its way in - for example - where else in the world does a country hear about its neighbour's sporting success before it hears of its own? When we do hear about it, while our much larger some might say over-bearing neighbour is named - the rest of us are referred to by some woolly label like 'the home nations'.
One particular BBC dividend was having token Scottish commentary while wheeling out the (English) big guns for peak viewing, not to mention the BBC favouring English athletes in heats over Scottish athletes in medal winning events.
|Maybe not then. (Vertical stripes are slimming you know...)|
I understand why the BBC do this, most viewers are in England, but why do we settle for it. If we are a poor second in our sports coverage or during the news - even when the event is being held in Scotland - what hope have we got with things that actually matter?
Moving on to the World War One commemoration - I'm not even sure what to call it; is it a celebration? A remembrance? What is it exactly? There should be some sombre low-key marking of the anniversary of the start, but surely the main brunt should mark the anniversary of the end?
Hearing David Cameron give what he probably thought was a heart-felt speech on the sacrifice & bravery of those killed - if I'm being honest - filled me with disgust. Cameron represents those who would have been directing assault & counter assault with reckless abandon and little thought about human cost well away from the front line.
We're told by unionists it would be crass and tasteless to view these commemorations through the prism of the independence debate, isn't it fucking handy that they're able to talk at length then about the achievements of Britain in the face of such adversity while blithely skimming over the brutal reality of war?
Meanwhile, the usual throbbers say, in part, it was nationalism that caused the first World War - which is true, but since the politics around the current independence debate have so little in common with those that existed in Eastern Europe 100 years ago - its like comparing the words of David Cameron with those of Harry Patch.
The British ruling classes' attempts to link tragic acts of heroism in days gone by to Britain as it is today is a reprehensible attack on the memory of those who were duped into going to war by the ruling classes back then.
They wrap national self-interest up in a blanket of camaraderie & adventure then send young soldiers away to die.
Does anything ever change? The irony is sickening.