As the UK creeps on towards fascism...

 

THE BANALITY OF EVIL

In the eighties I lived in the south of England. The Thatcher government was still adding to it's list of disastrous policies, some of which continue to cause severe repercussions today. Notably the culture of greed and selfishness they promoted, the destruction of the social housing fabric, and the deregulation of the banks. To that list add the wilful destruction of communities, politicising the police, selling off public assets to the wealthy, an unnecessary war (complete with ludicrous jingoism), showing friendship towards terrorists, just so long as it was state terror. And that's just off the top of my head.

In November 1988 Jim Sillars won a by election in Govan for the SNP. He made the point that only full Independence would enable Scotland to avoid the right wing excesses it had to experience from a government it didn't vote for. That was probably the first time I really gave much thought to ending the UK, although it wasn't foremost in my mind at the time.

Then came the Blair years, which began with hope and did little to justify it. No reversal of so many of the disastrous eighties idiocies. But at least Scotland got her parliament back, and some proper democracy, even if powers were deliberately limited. And at that time Scotland still largely voted Labour.

But the tories were back in in 2010, and this time would manage to show themselves to be even worse, in both competence and policy, that those awful eighties. And even more right wing, more oppressive, something I hoped I'd never even have to imagine after the Wicked Witch of Grantham was removed. They gave us Brexshit, helping turn the UK into an international laughing stock. They gave us the most dishonest, narcissistic, incompetent Prime Minister in living memory. Only to follow that up with the thickest. And now the slimiest.

This is the standard I use for defining fascism. Look at Eco's list, and think how many of those fourteen apply to what the tories have been doing in recent years. The othering of immigrants, the populist announcements, obsession with EU plots, disregard for the rights of the weakest in society - it's all there. The appearance of several serving tory MPs on Gammon Broadcasting, including one who has, inexplicably, just returned to the cabinet. It might pretend to be a "news" channel, but only the most gullible could fail to see it for what it is, a far right propaganda outlet (and peddler of sundry ludicrous conspiracy theories...). Gary Lineker got slammed for pointing out much of the rhetoric, especially from the genuinely evil Braverman, mirrored the hate speech of Germany in the thirties. He was spot on.

Of course the steady creep of fascism isn't as obvious as many would want it to be. There are no jackboots of death camps. But that doesn't stop evil permeating government - the Rwanda policy, and associated disregard for rule of law, should be all the confirmation of that you need. As a title I used the phrase made famous by Hannah Ardent at the trial of Eichmann. That apparently normal, even bland, functionaries can commit the most heinous acts and still convince themselves that they are good people. It feels ever more appropriate in tory Britain.

Sadly I don't see Starmer doing enough to reverse this trend. He might make some minor improvements, but he had adopted too many of the current policy attitudes to make a big difference (although I could have seen Corbyn bring proper change - which is why the establishment had him character assassinated). For Scotland there seems only one permission. Jim Sillars was ahead of his time. But that time is very much here now. It's why I'm still Yes.

Choices, choices - the General Election looms

JUST A FEW DAYS TO GO

The SNP is massively flawed, both as a party and as a government.  There are times when their instinct to centralise and control, as evidenced in the creation of Police Scotland or the much derided 'guardian for every child' policy, is disturbingly reminiscent of some of the worst aspects of the later years of the New Labour governments at Westminster.  With new powers coming to Holyrood this was an opportunity for the party to show off its progressive credentials, but the response to this in their manifesto is timid at best, especially on tax.  They have become a managerial government, largely competent, but lacking flair or imagination.

And yet.  All the polls are indicating that the government will be returned with an increased majority, backing up their huge success last year when they won all but three of Scotland's seats in London, with just over 50% of the votes cast - a far, far stronger mandate than that 'won' by the Tories.  The party itself attracts massive popular support, with membership greatly outstripping that of any other party (indeed they are the third largest in the UK, and by some margin), and there is a fanatical element (often the so-called 'cybernats') that can become overly aggressive at times.  Why is a party, which on paper should be struggling to keep the bandwagon rolling, looking such a dead cert to continue?  And can I find any reason to vote for them?

I have almost always voted tactically.  Having lived most of my adult life in England I found myself living in constituencies where I felt it my public duty to put my X in the spot where it was most likely to prevent a Conservative winning the seat.  And often that's the thing about democracy, you can find yourself voting not for the party that best reflects your views, but the least worst option available.  It's not the party you're voting for, but voting against the less palatable choices.

So what are the choices in this general election?  What are my choices?  As I've already stated, I have no truck with the Torykip world view.  Greed and selfishness are not a basis for public policy, and the Scottish Conservatives have shown no convincing signs of distancing themselves from the disastrous Cameron regime.  Any party whose policies kill disabled people is not getting my vote.

Oh, and ukip are ever more of a joke in this country.  Led by the buffoon who is a national embarrassment (how did anyone think Coburn would be a suitable representative for Scotland in Brussels?) and apparently having their own little civil war in the last few days of electioneering, they play to the worst aspects of the human psyche.  May they all rot.

Then there's Labour.  No longer able to count upon the loyalty of thousands no matter how incompetent, they are suddenly struggling to hang on to their position as second party.  Which is a shame.  Unlike the SNP they are proposing to do something a bit more radical with the new tax powers, and are making some noises about opposing Trident.  Plus they have taken a stronger stance than the government against any fracking taking place in the country.  All three policies feature on my personal list of things I'd like to see.

But I have two problems with Scottish Labour at the moment (apart from them just not being Corbynite enough for my taste).  Locally their choice of candidate in my constituency is a huge negative.  The popular, and effective, incumbent MSP is retiring, his replacement an establishment figure who has been prominent in many of Edinburgh Council's greatest failures (and there have been a few).  Nationally, much as Dugdale appears to be a very nice and very genuine person, she does little to impart confidence.  She does not make for a convincing potential First Minister.

There's an irony here.  Wee Ruthie does demonstrate some of the leadership qualities Kezia lacks - but her polices are, well, shite.  But if the Tories did become the second party it might actually be no bad thing.  Scotland needs an effective leader of the opposition, something sadly lacking in recent years.

Then there's the LibDems.  Remember them?  If Kezia appears to be a weak leader, what can you say about Willie Rennie?  Is it even worth bothering?

That just leaves the Greens, and a few minority parties.  In the constituency vote none of them really has much chance of winning, certainly not in this area.  But at regional level it's a different matter.

For all that RISE have some very attractive ideas, I feel at the moment that the Scottish Greens best represent my own views.  Strong on the environment, radical on tax and with an attitude to independence that matches my pragmatism.  I'm a Yes voter, but not a nationalist by instinct.  And in Patrick Harvie they have the most effective leading politician in the country, someone I have great respect for.

In an ideal world I'd like to see a SNP/Green coalition in power, with Patrick and co giving Nicola's cabinet the progressive kick they need.  That seems an unlikely outcome, but a strong Green presence in Holyrood would be to Scotland's benefit.  I'll be voting SNP in the constituency, even if I have to hold my nose a bit to do so.  But my list votes goes to the Greens, and that one comes with conviction.

Of Salmond and Corbyn

POLITICS FOR PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND POLITICS

I'm back to having a rant again, this time about two aspects of current political discourse which are really getting my goat.

Yes, Alex Salmond did, quite clearly, say that last year's Indy Referendum was a 'once in a lifetime opportunity'.  A fact which gets trotted out by unionists again and again as evidence that there should be no further reference to the matter for at least twenty five years, and that Salmond and other SNP leaders suggesting a further Indyref appears inevitable within a much shorter timescale shows them out to be the most pernicious of liars and totally untrustworthy.

How many of those same people have been quick to condemn David Cameron for stating that there will be no Indyref before 2020, despite Ruth Davidson saying, in the run up to GE2015, that she had consulted with her Westminster leader and could say categorically that the possibility of a future referendum would not be ruled out at any point?  Do I here shouts of "liar, liar" from those self same unionists?  Apparently not.

It turns out that politicians, whenever they are seeking our votes, will often indulge in a practice known as 'hyperbole'.  Leading to, post ballot, another phenomena known as 'broken promises'.  Apparently politicians, and not just from the SNP, have been found exaggerating a wee bit, or even telling outright porkies, just to convince us to vote the way they'd like us to.  Who knew, eh?

So maybe it's best if people try not to draw too deep an inference from a single sentence uttered up by a single politician on one particular single occasion. Because if that's how you gather evidence to back up your opinions then there's a fair chance that you'll end up sounding like a complete arse.

And on to rant part two, again focusing on a phrase that seems to be doing the rounds of all those with a singular fixation. In this case, on the electoral chances of one Jeremy Corbyn. The man who has been the surprise hit of the Labour leadership campaign, despite having been included either to demonstrate the breadth of opinion within the party, or as a token to keep the more left thinking elements in their place.

But Corbyn and his supporters haven't read the carefully prepared neoliberal script that was supposed to anoint the coming of the second Blair. Far from being the token entry he has suddenly become the bookies favourite to win, and the Red Tory faction of the party are furious. "Corbyn is unelectable" they say, appearing to forget that he's looking a strong possibility to win this thing they're having called an election....

But no, this time they mean he couldn't lead the party majority in a Westminster election, because he's too 'left wing' for the electorate. And here's the bit that inspired this rant. "Look what happened in '83" they'll say - that proves it. Really?   So '83, '83, '83 is being trotted out everywhere.

If a week is a long time in politics what does that make three decades? The world is a very different place to the one that saw off Michael Foot.  Who, even five years ago, would have predicted the rise of Syriza and Podemos?  Who, less than twelve months ago, would have predicted the landslide SNP victory in May which returned the 56 MPs who appear to be having to act as the opposition in Westminster, since Labour have all but given up?

The SNP campaigned on anti-austerity platform, similar to Mr Corbyn, and did very. very well out of it, thank you very much. To the point where there were many voters in England wished they had the chance to vote for the party. And let's not forget who was the star of the party leaders' debates, and the only one of the bunch to have positive personal approval ratings going into the election. One Nicola Sturgeon of course.  OK, so Jeremy may lack the First Minister's charisma, but much of the public would warm to a conviction politician who knows what direction he wanst to take and speaks up on behalf of the oppressed classes.

If Corbyn is genuinely unelectable it isn't because of his policies. A huge proportion of the population support rail renationalisation for instance. No, the real enemy he would be fighting isn't voter opinion as such. It's the ways in which that opinion will be twisted against him by an almost entirely right wing press. I couldn't put it any better than Frankie Boyle does : "It’s worth remembering that in the press, public opinion is often used interchangeably with media opinion, as if the public was somehow much the same as a group of radically right wing billionaire sociopaths."

You can see it happening already. Even the Guardian feels a need to mention that Corbyn has been seen wearing a 'Lenin Cap'. Wasn't that the same cap the Beatles wore on an early album cover? Why isn't it a Beatles cap? Or, more to the point, what's his bloody cap, whatever shape it might be, got to do with his politics? Nothing is the answer, so why does it get a mention? Because sneaking in words like Lenin or Marx, however inappropriate the context, is the media version of going "look out or the bogeyman will get you" and hoping the children are scared into being good. Except that we're supposed to be the children....

If Jeremy Corbyn is considered unelectable, as they put it, doesn't that highlight the most serious flaw in our political process? The main stream media is the greatest democratic deficit we face. In Scotland that's been partially overcome through the development of online news and opinion sources that cover a wider spectrum of views. England could do with much the same.

Turns out this rant had three targets to go for!