Tuesday, 5 August 2014

Final word on the...

... Commonwealth Games.

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.


  1. Very true. Enjoyed reading this post and do agree with you. Thanks

  2. A war that was nothing to do with the ordinary people of Scotland or for that matter Wales, Ireland or England.

    Cousins and relatives fighting out a battle for supremacy, land, riches and glory.

    Harry Patch has it bang to rights there. In future if Mr Cameron wants to go to war, I say let him. I frankly couldn't care less. He can take half the Windsors with him, Willie and Harry and Beatrice and Eugenie.

    And up front with a big target on his bald pate, iain Duncan Smith, shackled to Lord Fraud and Esty McVile.

    Oohhh I'd pay good money to see that!

  3. Aye.

    Nothing quite so disingenuous as a politician tilting at the unfairness & horror of war.

    Seems to me people just want to get on, its only those who have power, territory or an axe to grind/dogma to promote that get ornery.

  4. (Thanks for reading 'M'. Always appreciated.)

  5. Pa

    Good post. Agree with Tris the War was nothing to do with ordinary people all over Europe, it was the elite deciding to fall out with each other. I also agree that I don't know what you call all the pomp and services across the country and it should be at the end not the start. Didn't hear Camerons speech and don't want to, these aresholes are still getting young men and women killed in meaningless wars and why we still put up with it is beyond me. WW1 was just an absoulute slaughter and waste of life on all sides, the old soldier is correct, give the useless politicians the guns and let them crack on.

    The CG, from what I saw, were enjoyed by many many people. I watched a little but not a lot due to the bias of the EBC and the shocking commentators who just could not see past England. I found it funny that even people like Hoy did their best to avoid words like Glasgow, Scotland, Scottish, Yes and we were relegated to being the home nations with the Welsh and Irish. It was also the home games according to the EBC, if I were the people of Glasgow, who did a great job, I would be very pissed off. Some people wonder why we get so angry with Britain, they just need watch some of the EBC in Scotland to understand why, we are a country not a region of England. Pretty sick of it to be honest.

    OT but was disappointed with Salmond overall last night, as I have been saying for two years the YES side needed to have something up their sleeve on currency. If it's a YES there will be a currency union but they needed to be able to call the no sides bluff. It's not rocket science, Salmond should have said months ago if the no side persist with no currency union, if they want to harm their own people, push up interest rates and potentially default on their loans that is their choice. We want a currency union but we will push ahead with our own currency, take our share of the assets and the debt, set up our own national bank, continue to pay into the world bank and build up our reserves slowly but surely over time. Call their bluff and make it clear to the rest of the poeple of the UK, your life is about to get a hell of a lot worse and here is who is to blame.

    I still think it is too close to call but if it's a no I would bet it will be because the yes side could not get past the fear and lies on the economy and stupidly never had a fall back position just in case.

    Darling was shocking, and again very handling of the debate by the STV made it a lot worse, they just can't do debates. Where AS did win was the audience questions, that was the best part and most informative and I would not be surprised that a lot of don't knows were swayed by AS.



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?