Save Our NHS

NOT SO BAD

I've had a cough for a few weeks. Annoying, restricting, constricting, sometimes even painful. It seemed to be going at one point, but returned with fresh impetus. So it seemed like I should consult a health professional.

Yesterday morning, around 10.30, I called our GP surgery. The receptionist asked for my symptoms. I asked to speak to my usual GP if at all possible. She checked the schedule. He would call me back that afternoon.

Which he did, around 2. We talked for at least 10 minutes, going through my experience and symptoms in detail, he explained what was going on, and told me he'd prescribe a nasal spray, which he gave clear instructions on how to use. The relevant slip would be at the desk within 10 minutes.

Half an hour later I was up there, given the slip (top of the pile, handily) and went to our local pharmacy. Yes, they had the spray in stock, and off I walked with it in my bag. I took the first treatment last night before bed.

Which is, you may think, as it should be. That's how a socialised health service works. You want medical help, you call up, you get the help. Yet if you read the Cassandras on social media out there, what took place is something that never happens in reality. Our NHS, and especially the Scottish NHS if you believe the SNP-hater brigade, is collapsing, unable to function, not meeting needs.

Of course you can't extrapolate the state of an entire national public service based on one experience. And I don't pretend to. However the story above is broadly reflective of what both Barbara and I have encountered in our dealings with the health service over the past few years, when we've both had a few issues with our bodies. No doubt there are areas of the service that are underfunded, understaffed, overstretched. That variability covers both different functions of the service, and geographic differences. Other patients would be able to extrapolate very different conclusions from their personal experiences.

But that's the thing. Just because one person, or even a hundred, has a negative encounter with the NHS (especially if they are politically inclined towards looking for faults...), or the same for those with positive results, doesn't tell a complete story. The NHS isn't perfect. But it can, at times, function perfectly, as above. It is not collapsing. It is not completely the wrong approach (how can anyone - yes fascists of Deform, I'm looking at you - suggest that we follow the iniquities and exploitations of the US 'system'...?). And yes, it is very much worth preserving (albeit whilst evolving and improving).

I love our NHS. We need to protect it.

They 'know', do they?

 

ADDICTIONS

Addicts are manipulative. Often cunning, their desperation not to be 'found out' leads them into behaviour designed to hide their addiction from others, especially those closest to them. Be it drugs, alcohol, gambling or whatever, the stories of partners and spouses who have been the subjects of long term deception by the person they live with are countless. While this article is primarily about addicts of substance abuse, much of it applies to other addictions too.

This BBC post gives information about the items Peter Murrell purchased through his embezzlement of SNP party funds. Do you notice a pattern, a rationale behind the list? A sense of purpose? Some way of improving the person's life in the long term? Because I can't. The list provides no rational motivation. Unless. You see it as addiction. Shopping addiction. Trying to live a pretend life. Then you can see some reason for it all.

And why, as an addict, he could be so good at concealing what he was up to. There was a multi year, multi million pound police investigation, which found evidence that Murrell (and only Murrell) had been involved in the deception. But the allegations are still rife that others, especially his wife Nicola Sturgeon, must have been involved. Refer back to my opening paragraph...

Of course the allegations are largely politically motivated, or coming from those, like Joanna Cherry, who have a grudge to exercise. The loudest voices are from the far right, but it's noticeable that the fascists of Deform are also the first to shout down talk of investigations into the financing of all parties. Hmm, their proven links to Putin couldn't have anything to do with that, could they?

The accusers tell the world that they 'know' Sturgeon is guilty. And probably John Swinney too. If I think I know something it's usually because I have some evidence of it being true, so have these people been guilty of withholding evidence from a major police investigation? Or is 'know' shorthand for 'wish it was true that'? Because if wishes made things true mine would mean we didn't have seventeen fascists sitting in our national parliament. But there they are, including the grubby Thomas Kerr, and their presence and constant hate speech made the recent racist knife attack here seem somehow inevitable. This is what fascism brings. Along with a total disdain and lack of understanding of mental illnesses, like addiction...

Who do we think we are?

 

WHO IS THE YOO KAY?

Belgium. France. Spain. Portugal. Ireland. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Spot the odd one out. OK, I may have exaggerated for comic effect, but it is a weird name. And a weird state that has, and always has had, a serious identity crisis.

I lived in England for 35 years. Early on in my residency I gave up trying to correct locals in their usage of words to describe their own country. England seemed to suffice for many to cover England itself, Britain, Great Britain, and the UK. Some even appeared to scoop up the whole of the island of Ireland into their terminology. Ofter the four in my list were exchanged randomly, without thought. This is not something that happens in the other countries that make up the UK, where our sense of national identity is stronger. (Well, unionists in Northern Ireland are a pretty confused bunch sometimes...)

This identity confusion is continued in the media. If a UK newsreader talks about 'the largest city on the northeast' we all know where they are referring to. And it isn't Aberdeen. They frequently talk about 'UK politics' and then it's clear their subject is only England.

But if you want to see real confusion then have a look at the UK in international sport, which proves, maybe more than anything else, what an anomalous state this place is in global terms.  In sport is the UK ever 'The UK'?  I can't think of an example where it is.  In the Olympics, and a few sports like ice hockey, there is a 'Team GB', even though it is supposed to include Northern Ireland.  But in most international cometitions 'the UK' doesn't exist.  It's the national teams that play.  England.  Scotland.  Wales.  Sometimes Northern Ireland.  Is there any other state on the planet that does this?  And in one major international sport, one element of the UK's territory plays as part of the national team of the neighbouring state.  (Ireland plays rugby union as a complete nation, including the still-occupied territory in the north east of the country..)  That is an anomaly...

And now, for the first time, the UK will have First Ministers in two of the nations who want to take their country out of the UK, and another who favours reunification with the rest of their nation.  While the largest nation appears to be heading in a very different political direction.

It's easy to conclude that the UK is a bit of a mess, a place of uncertainty and confusion. But also that my title question was the wrong one. Maybe we should be asking - Why is the UK? (And for how much longer...)

It might not be wisdom, but here's a few thoughts

Some thoughts that keep buzzing around my head, and felt a need to be released…

Being, or wanting to be, a billionaire is a mental illness. I mean seriously… why? How deep is your sense of inadequacy? And why are you inflicting it on the world?

And related to that…

We need to make a lot more use of the word ‘enough’, and the concept it embodies. Do you know when you’ve had enough? Do you know when you’ve done enough? Do you know when you’ve got enough. It’s an imperfect world filled with imperfect people. Understand what’s important and necessary is one key to a contented life, and surely enough is… well, enough. Isn’t it?

The right bang on about rewarding ‘wealth creators’, and I couldn’t agree more. Where we disagree is on who those people are. The true wealth of a country lies in it's people, not an accumulation of money (which is, after all, merely conceptual). Our real wealth comes from learning, and teachers are the true wealth creators, to be rewarded as such. Oh, and the myth of the ‘self made man’ is just that – a myth. We are all interdependent. (Ditto the ‘alpha male’…)

The right bang on about immigrants and poor people as if they were your enemy.  But they're us.  Whereas the scumbags and companies that don't pay their due taxes... yeah, they're the real enemy.

The right bang on about the Starmer government being left wing, or 'socialist', or even 'marxist'. Would this be the same Starmer who purged most of the decent left wingers and socialists from this supposedly socialist part?  (And as for Marxist...🤣🤣)  The last time the UK had a government that could be seen as left wing was the 70s.  It's been downhill since then.

Never be afraid to use the F word when it's the right one to use.  Deform and other far right groups are Fascists.  Use the word, own it, and use this list from the great Umberto Eco to prove it.

I was chatting to a young person on social media and they asked me if, from my great age and experience, I had any wisdom to pass on. At first I thought “no, the best learning is your own experience”, and wasn’t going to say anything. But then I realised that maybe I did have something to pass on, in 2 parts :

First, learn to ask the right questions. They aren’t usually the ones that politicians, the media and advertisers want you to ask. So maybe don’t ask how to stop ‘the small boats’, but why these poor, desperate people are having to take that route? What are the barriers, where is their motivation? It’s not what Niggle Fuhrage and the Daily Fail tries to con you into believing…

Second, look after your knees. That’s the big one!

How did the US elect a moron to be president? Dubya now looks like a towering statesman in comparison. And if you doubt the ‘moron’ tag… try drinking some bleach.

And related to that…

Janey was 100% right (and fat ol' Donnie doesn’t understand how percentages work).

Anyone want to agree or disagree?  What would you add to that list?

Sorry Miriam, but I have to disagree...

NO HE ISN'T

We went to see Miriam Margolyes on the Fringe yesterday. A wonderful show, the actor pouring her talents into bringing Dickens characters to life, telling hilarious stories of her own life. She's great entertainment, and an unfiltered voice on the world. It's refreshing to hear a prominent Jewish voice speak out against the Israeli government's criminality and genocidal policies.

At the end there was an audience Q&A, and someone asked for her opinion of the Tangerine Tyrant. You probably know the gist of the answer already. She's not a fan, is she? She declared that he, along with the likes of Niggle Fuhrage, was a fascist. And there I felt myself disagreeing with her.

Fascism is an (abhorrent) ideology. And there is always some vague, if ill founded, belief system behind it. There is a form of coherence to the thinking of the fascist. There is no doubt that the likes of the Deform leader, and his cronies, meet the definition. Farage is a fascist, always has been. But Trump? I don't think so.

Certainly he has surrounded himself with a lot of people who are fascists. And clearly the results of his actions (I would hesitate to call them 'policies') can be seen as fascistic. But, as I said above, being a fascist involves a belief in some ideology. However the Mandarin Moron only has one belief - an even more ill-founded one it's true - in himself. This is the man (?) who mused, out loud, that injecting bleach into humans might help against covid. This is the creature (better) that said, to camera, that he was going to lower prices by 1000%.

Trump is not a fascist. Trump is, genuinely, too stupid to be a fascist. Sorry Miriam. Everything else you said was true.

Another Future is possible - it's not this one though

 

BUT ONLY JUST...

Before the election I felt that Starmer's campaign slogan boiled down to one statement :

"Vote Labour - We promise to be slightly less shit than the tories."

Which was hardly a high bar to stagger over, was it?

And here we are, after only three weeks or so, and already they are barely maintaining to live up to that 'promise'. Within days of taking office we had the immoral sight of Foreign Secretary Lammy happily shaking hands with a far-right, mass-murdering, war criminal. Now we have draconian action against seven MPs who had the audacity to act in line with their consciences and vote against the continuation of a measure that contributes substantially towards existing child poverty. All part of Keir's continuing war against the heart and soul of what Labour should be, and which his namesake did so much towards.

So there's no doubts, are there? Labour is now a right wing party, only a bit less extreme that the lunatics they have replaced. (To be fair they have at least got rid of the crazy and inhumane Rwanda nonsense, and imprisoning asylum seekers on a giant barge.)

Did people really understand what they were voting for? Or simply opted for something that couldn't possibly be worse than what had been endured for fourteen years? Hope seems in short supply right now...

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.

Old but evolving

 

NEVER STOP CHANGING

Do you have a particular word that you know perfectly well how to pronounce properly, but also know that there's a mispronunciation lurking deep within your brain which is always likely to leap out at you unexpectedly?  I have one that has it's own special annoyance.  It was a word that was common when I was growing up, usually as an adjective for flooring or kitchen tablecloths.  Then it seemed to fall into disuse and I could feel comfortable knowing I probably wouldn't have to use it.  Until, like a bad smell you thought you'd got away from, it made it's reappearance.  Now with a brand new meaning that seems to be everywhere.  There was nothing wrong with record, or album, or LP, or 33, but they have all been superseded by my linguistic nemesis.  Yes, the word is vinyl.  Which I do know, really I do, should rhyme with spinal.  So why does a part of me want it sound like compile?  I have no idea where that came from.  I do know it will always be there within me, and care will always have to be taken...

A few months ago I posted on here about 2022 being the year when I started to feel properly old, due to some physical health issues that have sprung up, and the consequent treatment.  Sooner or later, it's something we all have to face up to, in some form or other, as the years pass.  And I have to admit that my mental abilities maybe aren't all they once were either.  A bit slower to process information sometimes, a bit more forgetful.  My driving certainly isn't what it used to be.   All these things I accept as part of growing older.

But there's one aspect of ageing that isn't as inevitable as the above, and which I will fight off succumbing to with every facet of my over-the-hill mind and body.  I don't know what the name for it is, but it's that mysterious and insidious visitor that leads older people into bigotry, brexshit and Daily Fail reading.  The ones who think that growing up with ice on the inside of their bedroom windows never did them any harm.  The ones who imagine there's some strange force that's not allowing them to say Merry Xmas.  (And who rant against people who use that 'X'...)  The ones who don't want people who "aren't like us" to have any rights.  Who think immigrants should be "sent back where they came from", that anyone reliant on social security for their food and housing needs "to get a proper job" and that the BBC has become "woke" (even if they don't know what it means).  

No thanks.  That's not a road I ever intend to head off on, for the only end points are irrational fear and unwarranted hatred.  I'll stick to becoming more left wing as I age, more convinced that Scotland needs to go it alone, and more in favour of extending human rights to marginalised groups like trans people.

But I can see how so many of my contemporaries end up heading towards the dark side.  

Where's the alternative?

 WHO'S ANYBODY?

So we're to have a new First Minister in a few weeks from now.  Maybe that's something that was needed.  Although it feel more like the SNP government has been in power for too long. They are running out of ideas, and have serious issues over competence, corruption and honesty. So it would be good to have someone else to vote for, to usher in a more complete change that might bring in real improvements after the next Holyrood election. But who  is that alternative?

Twitter in these Muskian times seems flooded with right wing nutjobs.  And diehard unionists.  Often the same people.  My feed covered in them, unsolicited and largely unwelcome, like a dog crapping on your dinner.  Yes, I could simply block, or see only people I've chosen to follow, but there's something to be said for 'know your enemy', so it's worth persevering and seeing what the people who are causing the problems are saying.

And it gives the opportunity to ask questions.  There's a particular kind of right wing unionist who persistently whines and whinges about the SNP government, and makes constant personal attacks on the outgoing First Minister.  Mysogyny is never far away.  I've taken to asking them what seems like the obvious question - Who is the credible electoral alternative we should be voting for?

And the answer is always the same - Anybody.  When I point out that I've never seen the Anybody Party on any ballot paper their replies become more vague, or they vanish or block.  Most liukely because even they know there isn't a proper alternative.  Only Labour can oust the SNP as a government.  The Tories might like to pretend they could, but Scotland sees through them.  And if greater competence, less corruption and more honesty are the attributes being looked for, then their Westminster record shows them to be ten times worse than anything the SNP have done, without even the latter's humanity.

Which leaves Starmer's party.  Because much as I have some liking for Sarwar, he is still going to have to do the party line from London.  Which is avowedly unionist, doesn't commit to trying to reverse brexshit, and seems increasingly dostant from anything recognisable as socialism.  So what's the point of Labour?  To replace the nasty party in England for sure, but what can they offer this country?  I wait to be wooed.

In the meantime we can only wait to see who the new FM will be, and what they offer.  Sadly, it doesn't really have to be much to be better than the other lot.

There's no idiot quite like a far right idiot

 It was said, back in 2014, that supporters of Scottish Independence were acting as Putin's useful idiots.  That his aim was to do anything he could to destabilise the two most significant opponents he faced in Europe - The EU and NATO.  Breaking up the UK would be a step along the road to damaging both.  And the subsequent move of Alex Salmond to appear on the Russian propaganda TV channel suggests there may well have been links - although also having the arch unionist Galloway on there suggests Putin will take advantage of any disruptive influences he can find. 

In 2014 Putin's aims, if such they were, failed. But in 2016 he struck gold. His main weapon of choice in undermining western democracy is the political far right (so Indy may be seen as an aberration). The full extent of Russian interference may never be known, but Putin must have been delighted to see a fellow anti-democratic narcissist enter the White House, and for one of the larger states of Europe to try and destabilise the EU with a messy divorce.

Fortunately his success in the US was short lived - can you imagine having a Putin admirer running the US right now? Biden is far from being the perfect president, but he is so, so much better an option than Trump. But the UK has compounded it's gift to Putin by electing a hard right government of incompetents, who have become a laughing stock internationally. Yes, we have a Foreign Secretary who gets confused between the Black Sea and the Baltic (can you imagine the feeding frenzy of the UK's right wing media had Dianne Abbott or Nicola Sturgeon said something similarly stupid?), and a PM knee deep in Russian corruption and money laundering.

Putin will continue to use whatever means to further his destabilisation aims. He has made little headway in Europe's big hitter, Germany, but the French presidential election was a big test of resistance. Quite how a country that suffered so much under fascist occupation can now opt to vote in such large numbers for one of Hitler's successors is beyond me, but Le Pen was far too close to taking control of one of Europe's big hitters.  Macron, as in the US, is far from perfect but he's still better than the fascist option.

There are stories emerging that Putin may have overplayed his hand domestically in invading his democratic neighbour, and it might yet end badly for him. Should he go the subsequent power vacuum will be messy, but maybe a friendlier Russia will come out the other side. Until he is gone there will be Russian agencies trying to influence Western politics to their own ends. In 2014 that may have included breaking up the UK. In 2022 that would be pointless. Putin has had his success and the UK has neutered itself, becoming something of a joke state. The far right might not have come directly to power, but their continuing influence on tory policy, and the vile attitudes of many of their MPs, ensures the UK is globally irrelevant.

All of which leave Scottish Independence as a more attractive, and necessary, option than ever. Putin's useful idiots are the fanatical brexshiteers, howling at the EU moon. If they don't care about the possibility of reigniting war in Ireland they're not going to care much about some Eastern Europeans, are they? The break up of the UK could now be seen as a positive anti-Putin action, helping the further decline of a state where the government has embroiled itself in Russian money. Bring it on.

Throwing rocks isn't helpful

 

FIND SOMETHING BETTER TO DO WITH YOUR ROCKS

Someone has put up an edifice you don't like.  Although it's intended to help others, you feel threatened by it.  In your head all you can see are scenarios in which the edifice impacts your life, in a bad way, and you don't like that.

You have a pile of rocks.  Could your rocks help resolve your fears?  You have two choices.

You can throw the rocks at the edifice, and try to knock it down.

Or you can try to find out why someone thought the edifice was important enough to build, then use your rocks to help improve it, or to build a newer, better edifice, that gives the help needed and doesn't scare you.

When the voting franchise was extended to men without property, there were people throwing rocks.

When it was extended further to include women, there were people throwing rocks.

When homosexuality was legalised, there were people throwing rocks.

When equal pay for women was established, there were people throwing rocks.

When same sex civil partnerships came in, there were people throwing rocks.

The people throwing rocks weren't always the same people, but they were always people whose position in our social structures had been normalised, and felt that position to be threatened by giving rights to people who didn't have them.

I've very consciously kept my distance from the debates going on around the Gender Recognition Act.  It's far too complex and nuanced a subject for social media.  But I do see plenty of others who feel less restrained.  And an awful lot of them are throwing rocks.  Couldn't they find a better use for them?

What quality is most essential to be a decent human being?

 HAVE YOU GO IT?

As a society we are becoming more polarised in our views.  This has become increasingly true over the past forty or so years, and is now reaching worrying levels.  The old 

left vs right has spread into pro and anti EU, pro and anti Indy, pro and anti abortion, pro and anti vaccines, etc etc.  Whilst the dividing lines are blurred, it seems true that many of those in 'anti' categories will fall into the whole group of them.  Then there's criticism of the media, with the left seeing the BBC as a tory government mouthpiece, and the right saying that is too much influenced by progressive causes.  Here in Scotland Indy supporters feel the media is against them, but then so do the unionists!

Increasingly I find there's one word that seems to determine if people fall to one side of the arguments, or the other.  That word is empathy.  And nothing demonstrated that divide quite like one of the most important public demonstrations of last year, the Kenmure Street Protest in May.  

If you're unfamiliar with the incident, and haven't got time to follow the link, it happened when a Home Office immigration van tried to remove two Sikh men from their home in Glasgow because of alleged immigration offences.  The men were long standing members of the local community, and those neighbours rallied round in numbers, and alerted activist organisations, so that the immigration officers found their van locked in place by a huge, and ever growing, crowd of people determined not to let these men be taken away.  The police were called, and eventually they advised the release of the men.  The van went without them.

Reactions were split, each side vehement that they had right on their side.  The SNP, Labour and Greens all commended the humanitarian response of the locals.  The tories condemned the action for breaking the law.  But if it's bad law, and badly implemented too, who's to say what's right?

Ultimately your personal response to these events came down to the word I used above.  Empathetic people were able to place themselves in the position of these poor men, being dragged away from everything they new, without warning, early in the morning.  Others saw it in more black and white terms, without considering any of the human aspects.  

Which side were you on?  Do you have empathy or not?  I'm very much on the side of the protestors.

Change would be good - but not for the worse

 THE LEAST WORST OPTION

I would like to see an end to SNP government.  The party has been in power for too long, and is now looking and sounding stale, with too many stories of corruption and incompetence surfacing.  But.  If there was an election tomorrow I'd still be voting for them.  Why?

Two main reasons.  The first is obvious.  If, as I do, you believe in the benefits of Scotland becoming independent from the UK, and the increasing urgency of doing so, then the SNP are still the only really credible electoral show in town.  I might prefer to vote Green, but doing so might just lose a constituency seat to a unionist, so it isn't worth the risk.  They can have my list vote, my local authority vote, but for seats in either parliament there are bigger stakes.  (Of course if we had the much fairer Single Transferable Vote system in place for parliamentary seats, as we do at council level, it would be a different story, making it much easier to vote for exactly who you want.)  Alba have yet to show any real campaigning strength, so they can't be considered yet.

The second reason concerns those bigger stakes.  For more than four decades I have despised the Tories and what they do to ordinary people, and have always voted tactically to try to keep them out.  In the constituencies I lived in down south that meant Lib Dem.  Here we have other options.  But is there a realistic option to the SNP?

No party is perfect, no party has policies with which anyone, even party members, agrees 100%.  So we vote for the best fit for our priorities.  Often that means voting for the least worst option, rather than the best.  And this is what it comes down to.  The SNP might not be the party it once was, but is there a better option?  

I've asked unionists on Twitter (that well know source of rational opinion...) what the credible alternative Scottish Government is.  Answers, if given, tend to be vague, coy.  These are mostly right wingers,    Outside of the right wing bubble, the Tories remain what they've been since Thatcher's time - the most divisive and disliked party in the country.  The branch manager, and the Borders MP who is allegedly Secretary of State for Scotland, are ciphers, devoid of any bite or ideas.  And hamstrung by the failure, nepotism and general malfeasance of their masters.  Labour might have their best national leader in some time (they've been through enough of them in the past few years), but are also hamstrung by their London bosses.  What sort of Labour Party is it than can contemplate expelling the great Ken Loach?  As for the Lib Dems... choosing a vile misogynist who seems to be trying out-evil the Tories seems like a route to oblivion.

The SNP commitment to Indy can reasonably called into doubt, but for now they remain the most likely vehicle.  But even if that major issue were discounted, I can't see who would actually do a better job.  The least worst option remains the only choice.

Two different countries

 WHO'S CHRIS WHITTY?

Yesterday I returned from my first trip to a different country since January last year.  We were in Manchester for a couple of days, the choice of destination determined by a wish to see the Grayson Perry Art Club exhibition.  That had come out of the two series on Channel 4, of six programmes each, using art to look at various aspects of the pandemic and resultant lockdowns and restrictions.  

For those who didn't see the series, there was different theme each week - Home, Family, Food and others - and visual art works created in response to these.  One would be from Perry himself, another from his wife Philippa, one from a celebrity guest (mostly comedians such as  Joe Lycett and Harry Hill), one from a professional artist (or artistic team in the case of the Singh Twins), and several from members of the public.  The best of the latter would be chosen as exhibits for a planned future exhibition.  This exhibition which we went to see.

It was extremely enjoyable, full of interest, and a reminder that art doesn't need to be perfect, or technically brilliant, to be worthwhile, a rule that applies just as much other art forms.  There was a lot to discuss afterwards, a lot of lessons about how many ways people have coped with the strains of the past eighteen months.  

But there was also, to me, one undercurrent to the show I found slightly irritating.  One image cropped up regularly, in Grayson's own works, and those of the celebrities and public.  The face of Chris Whitty, the Chief Medical Officer for England.  But the show had placed a strong emphasis on wanting to represent the views and experiences of the British public.  So where was Jason Leitch?  Whitty has been a leading figure of the crisis in his own country, but irrelevant in the other constituent parts of the UK, or indeed Britain.  While I'd noticed this to some degree while watching the programmes, it was much more obvious when seen as one coherent exhibition.

I lived in England for thirty five years.  Much, of course, was the same as it had been back home.  But there were more than enough differences to make me realise I'd come to a different country.  One of those I noticed persistently across the decades.  An irritant at first, I eventually gave up correcting people and accepting that that was the way they were.  This was in the use of Britain/British as synonyms for England/English, and vice versa.  I couldn't say how many times I was told about how well England were doing in the Olympics, or asked if I'd seen the British football team playing a match.  

There was nothing malicious in this.  Nothing arrogant.  It was totally unconscious.  I once corrected my first wife over her misuse of the two terms, and that ended up in a row - she simply couldn't understand why she was wrong, that there was any real difference between England and Britain.  Surely they were the same?  But I have never heard anyone use Scotland/ Scottish in the same way, and I doubt if it happens in Wales either.  We have a much clearer understanding of our own national identities.  Whereas this confusion appears to be endemic to English culture.  And Grayson Perry is no exception.

Of course I write this from the perspective of someone who would like to see Scotland become independent.  Not from any hatred of England or the English - after so long living there most of my friends, and my wife, are English - but because we want to do things differently, and that we are clearly different nations.  Hard line unionists on social media often want to make out there is no difference between the cultures of England and Scotland.  But there are many, and this, for me, is the biggie.  We are Scottish, but also British.  To be English is, for most, to think that being British is the same thing.  Art Club is a sharp reminder that the differences are real.

Now, remind me again - who's Chris Whitty?

Hope in the thaw

 

OLD GAMMON OR NEW EGGS?

The crows nest, silhouetted against the pale blue above the horizon, still sits firmly perched amid the uppermost branches of the tree before me, a few shrivelled brown leaves clinging to a pretence of a life, no buds yet apparent.  The nest is silent testimony to the industry and construction skills of the birds who built it, and who return year after year to renew their family.  Their time will come.

If I look down I see more green than white now.  There was a moderate snowfall a couple of days ago, covering the graveyard in brightness, setting the gravestones into sharp relief, making them more real and a stronger reminder of the life events behind those monuments to death.  It rained yesterday, the resultant slush then turned into a treacherous low-coefficient topography.  Today only sunshine which, despite the chilled air, steadily removes the watery blanket, only a few stubborn patches of shade putting up a fight.  It's a beautiful day, a day to walk and breathe and enjoy.

It's the First of January.  An arbitrary human marker in the natural flow of the seasons.  A marker of plans and promises, a time of recounting and foretelling.  But who dares make predictions for 2021 after the indecipherable potage that was 2020?  There are few certainties, but that does not mean that we are without hope.  Last night marked the end of one dark saga, our ties to the EU finally snapped after years of lies and bigotry and uncertainty.  The full implications of the Gammon Curtain will be made plain in the coming months.  

But the leaves will return to the naked branches I look out on, the green will flourish and the cemetery adopt it's summer character for yet another cycle of planetary movement.  Diamonds might be forever, but winter, and the gammonist regime, are not.  This was not a direction Scotland chose, but, like the crows, we can rebuild our nest and give birth to something new. 

 The crows will be with us again, there will be eggs, and new life and hungry mouths poking skywards.  They do not need other birds to tell them what to do.  

America or Gilead?

 

ATWOOD'S WARNING

If you read one of Ian Rankin's most famous series of novels what does Rebus look like in your head?  Chances are, if you've watched many of the TV programmes, it's Ken Stott's face that you see chasing Edinburgh's criminals.  Fair enough, for Rankin doesn't provide many clues to the inspector's physical appearance.  Except that he's at least six or more inches taller than the actor who's become so synonymous with the role.  But overcoming the visual image from screen is, for most of us, hard to do.

It's the same with Wallander books, although there it depends if you're a fan of Sweden's Henriksson or Ireland's Branagh (I'm in the Krister camp).  And if you read any Sherlock Holmes tales the choice of screen faces you can 'use' is near endless (Jeremy Brett for me).  My point being that for most of us the visual image is hard to overcome, no matter what the page says, no matter that the written character is usually the original.

I've just finished rereading Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale after a gap of more than twenty years.  Maybe even thirty.  But in recent years I've watched the three TV series based on and derived from the book, the fictional Gilead turned into images that had existed only in my imagination before.  I was prompted to return to the original text because I'm now reading Atwood's long awaited follow-up, The Testaments, and it seemed sensible to re-immerse myself in that world, one that inevitably had some differences from the one I'd seen more recently.

In fact the differences aren't all that great, the first TV series staying fairly faithful to the original storyline and the culture it described.  The most striking exceptions being, you've guessed it, the descriptions of the characters versus their appearance on the screen.  Top of that list being Fred and Serena Joy who are far from the beautiful people we saw in Fiennes and Strahovski.  These things matter when they can affect the dynamics of the relationships being portrayed.  

I got through the book in a couple of days.  Still as riveting, thought provoking and frightening as it was.  No, make that more frightening, for this is 2020.  Reading that book now is a different experience from my first experience of it those decades ago.  For three main reasons.

One I've already mentioned.  Being faithful to the author meant trying to ditch the TV faces, forming my own pictures of the protagonists.

And I was back into a familiar world, with no need to try and begin understanding the Gileadian societal roles and hierarchy.  That first reading has always retained a powerful impact, back up by the Elisabeth Moss shows, so there was no need to puzzle over the Handmaids and Marthas and Aunts and Wives and Commanders and Guardians and Eyes and all the other narrowly defined constrictions of that brutalised country.  Although it was interesting to be reminded of how fundamentally racist the author's Gilead is, something there's less stress on in the TV series, where it's the patriarchal and fascistic elements that dominate.

Finally, the times we live in.  Tomorrow, and perhaps in the next couple of months, we'll all be watching to see how robust US democracy is.  Have enough Americans recognised what a monster they have in the White House?  Aren't the totalitarian instincts of the orange manbaby clear enough?  One of the clear lessons of Atwood's theocracy is how easy it is for democracy to slip away, bit by bit, until finally it's no longer there.  I'm voraciously consuming The Testaments now and it clearly shows how people can be manipulated into supporting the new regime.  Succumbing to fascism is a banal process, and many of the most brutal functionaries of the regime are not the ideologues, but the conscientious citizens who think that doing their 'duty' to their country overrides any moral qualms (a theme portrayed even more powerfully in the newer book).  Trump's America is already a far more racist and misogynistic place than it was four years ago.  Where would another four years of the same take them to?  The steps to Gilead are there to see.

And in the UK?  Ever since we were forced to swallow The Fairytale of Barnard Castle it's clear there's some kind of hard right coup in process.  If even the suggestion of someone like Dacre at Ofcom doesn't ring your alarm bells then maybe you're not paying enough attention.  It won't get too serious with Doris, who's only concerned about himself and already looks like he's had enough of a game he's found he's not very good at.  But the possibility of bespectacled slug Gove taking over is a more alarming direction of travel.  And yet another reason why Scotland needs out of this broken state asap.

Footnote - The dominant aspect of Gilead is the patriarchy, the total subjugation of women.  So I wanted to make sure I put women first in this post.  With one exception.  I wrote 'Fred and Serena Joy', not the other way round.  Why?  Because when I say it in my head it simply sounds better, rolls out more naturally.  In the same way that 'Diane and Bartholomew' works best.  And that matters too.  Gilead suppresses almost all forms of art, knowing that art is the enemy of tyranny.  So I'll stick with putting Fred first on this occasion, because art should always trump (sorry...) ideology.  Art reaches the humanity in us, it's about thinking for ourselves, about sharing, about imagination.  Art is the anti-Gilead.

Please, please, please let it be Biden....

I can't get angry any more. But that can change.

CAN ANYBODY FIND MY RAGE FOR ME?

We recently watched the BBC documentary about the rise (and fall and rise again) of Rupert, the man the great Dennis Potter name his pancreatic cancer after.  Barbara was near incandescent about the malign influence that twisted the outcomes of so many what-should-have-been exercises in democracy, notably in 2016 (I know everyone's saying 2020 is the worst year, but, at least for the UK, I'd still plump for four years ago in terms of doing long term damage).

And she's been fuming about Doris' raft of peerages yesterday.  His brother.  A thick cricketer who thinks (?) England is an island.  Ruth the Mooth, a woman we know holds many opinions because she's changed them so regularly.  A broad cross section of the population.  Well, the rich, corrupt and talentless bit of the population.  And, and so good to see that those rumours of Russian interference were totally unfounded.

Oh, nearly forgot - there's an actual fascist in the list as well.  And why not, she doesn't even stand out from the rest of the shitshow.

But I can't get angry.  I can't even find it in me to be mildly surprised.  The UK has a PM who's a pathological liar and was even shown to have lied to parliament but didn't resign.  A housing minister who's openly corrupt.  A Home Secretary who was previously sacked from government for risking state security.  I could go on, but what's the point?  Once we were all forced to accept The Fairy Tale of Barnard Castle there's no scenario ridiculous enough to seem far fetched any more.  The Looking Glass is receding in the mirror.  In a year from now they'll be convincing the faithful that food shortages were what they voted for and this is what 'sovereignty' (or whatever) looks like.  But hey, blue passports, eh?

If I am going to get worked up then it looks like the source will be closer to home.  My relative passivity in the face of the above correlates with my increasing confidence that the UK is coming to an end and Scotland will be independent soon.  (Apologies to readers in England and Wales but you'll have to find your own lifeboat.)  Brexshit and Covid and an incompetent posh boy charlatan of a PM are coming together in a perfect storm.  And it now seems the only obstacle that could intervene is... the SNP?

So very many of us now want Indy to happen, want it soon so we can escape the iceberg Doris and co are hubristically steering towards, see it as the only real answer.  But does the SNP leadership?  Joanna Cherry has been the most prominent, and smart, voice in the party pushing for alternatives to a never-happen S30, and now she looks to have been sabotaged.  That won't quieten her in any way I'm sure, but it has set he warning lights off.  Nicola's done a good job this year - but if she starts faltering on the path to our final destination I might just locate that misplaced anger.

Cummings' camel comeuppance?

A CAMEL WITH TWO HUMPS

He's no Hans Christian Andersen, but watching Dom's Jackanory session yesterday I found one old adage kept popping into my head (along with all the sweary stuff...) 

"a camel is a horse designed by a committee"

Dom's fairy tale looked, smelled and behaved like the most deformed camel of all time.  Within a couple of minutes of the start of the world's most boring fable there were lawyers on Twitter saying "this has been lawyered", something even a layman could spot pretty quickly.  So how did this sorry pastiche of a story come into being?

That's where the camel comes in.  Can anyone doubt this was the product of a hastily assembled group, including at least a couple of lawyers, told to find some kind of rebuttal to each of the points raised in the press over the previous days (mostly down to the excellent investigative journalism of Pippa Crerar).  And then the really fun bit, attempting to squeeze all those random excuses into something that vaguely resembled a coherent narrative, followed by coaching Dom in which version of the fantasy he now had to stick to.  I can't see any other explanation for something so transparently pathetic.

Two humps?  My knowledge of children is comfortably stamp sized, so I consulted everybody's favourite pish expert, Gusset Grippers, on the likelihood of a four year old going for five hours in a car.  

Her answer - "I’d suggest that if a 4 year old hadn’t peed in 5 hours it’s a bit of a worry.  The only way I can see it, logically, would be if he was dehydrated before the trip - in which case you have a kid whining for 5 hours.  Maybe they drugged him?"

Has Dom been taking parenting tips from Doris?

So now we know the answer to that age old question, "what do you get when you cross a hyena with a weasel?".  The Cummings kid must be a fekin dromedary.

PS  Gusset Grippers is as the wonderfully funny physio and comedian Elaine Miller.  Do give her a follow on Twitter by clicking here.  Who could resist a woman that talks pish for a living and promises to improve your orgasms?

Imagine

LOUISA WHO?

"All meaningful and lasting change starts first in your imagination and then works its way out. Imagination is more important than knowledge." Albert Einstein

It's been more than five weeks now since the name was revealed, a name now well established in the media, widely recognised by the public.  And still there are unionists, invariably tories,  bleating on social media that the NHS Louisa Jordan, the temporary hospital set up in Glasgow in response to the Covid-19 crisis, should be referred to as the NHS Nightingale.  So it can then be confused with all the NHS Nightingales down south maybe?

They object to the Scottish Government not following the 'lead' set by the government in London to have all seven of their similar institutions called exactly the same thing, identified only by location.  In part that's because they're the sort of people who will blindly, knee jerkingly, criticise anything their own elected government does, right or wrong.  They can't help themselves.  And in doing so are they revealing one underlying trait that determines their unionism - a severe lack of imagination?

I had never heard of Louisa Jordan before the announcement.  Most people hadn't.  Which is, surely, a good thing - ?  Everybody has heard of Florence Nightingale.  But how many other historic names from nursing can you come up with immediately?  Edith Cavell?  Emmm...?  These temporary medical facilities are being opened in response to a situation that sees many, many people shut away in their homes for weeks on end, with no idea of how long it may continue for.  Anything, no matter how small, that makes us think, provides learning opportunities, creates a bit of interest, is to be welcomed, encouraged.

In the bigger picture it's not important what these hospitals are called.  But in a shrunken world where the micro is taking on greater significance, calling all these institutions by the same name is a missed opportunity, a failure of imagination, an apparent fear of difference.  Why aren't those in England having the sense to follow Scotland's lead and giving them names that reflect their local connections, and bring an obscure historical name to prominence?  Why isn't the Exeter hospital being named after Elsie Knocker?  (And no, I'm not making her up, check out the link!)  She'd bring a smile to a few faces, I'm sure.

Criticise the choice of Ms Jordan as a name and you criticise imagination and difference.  (As if right wingers ever showed any hostility to anybody they don't see as the same as themselves...)  And imagination is the key to change.

And it's change they fear most.  They are desperate to defend vested interests - big landowners, the media, the wealthy, the 'safe' middle classes - with no thought given to the possibility of making life better for those less fortunate. If the system changes they might be relative losers, and they can't stomach that. It's  selfishness - most don't want to change a set up from which they benefit.

Hence the attacks on anything the Scottish Government do, no matter how trivial the reasons to try and justify them.  Hence the constant attacks on the SNP, and Greens, and the wider Yes Movement, because Scottish Independence threatens the cosiness of their world.

But the Covid-19 crisis has further highlighted the iniquities and weaknesses of what is now the 'old normal'.  It's a normal we can't return to, and we have to make sure that the new one is better for more people, that the growing inequality gap is reversed and that empathy has greater prominence in our society.  Let Ms Jordan's name be a symbol for change, for difference, for better.

Queenie - Could do better

WHALE MEAT AGAIN

Anyone watch Queenie's "inspiring" broadcast last night?

Naw, me neither.

Anticipating the usual meaningless platitudes I found something more interesting to do (not a high bar to climb over) and waited to see if the morning's headlines suggested she'd said anything that in any way contributed to the current store of knowledge around the Covid-19 pandemic. 

Hard to be hopeful of that happening because, unless I've missed something, she doesn't have any recognised expertise in epidemiology, virology, and/or immunology, or maybe even a bit of experience working with health stats.  Come to think of it, she doesn't have any recognised expertise.

I understand there was a passing reference to the kind of 'blitz spirit' drivel ( a period which, for those who know their history, and don't wear blue, red and white tinted specs, included rampant profiteering, black marketeering and a huge surge in burglaries due to the blackout - so Jacob Piss-Dogg would have fitted in well) to appeal to the right wing knuckle draggers that would have formed a large proportion of her audience.

But she conspicuously failed to announce any of the things that she could have done to make a real contribution, to make it seem like we really might all be in this together. 

She didn't offer to donate a portion of her obscenely vast inherited wealth to help out the NHS or all those people who have lost their incomes.

She didn't offer up some accommodation, in all those palaces and castles and big hooses, to homeless people for whom the phrase 'self isolation' is a sick joke.

She didn't even point out that her oldest son is a selfish dick who should be sacked from his 'job' for going, complete with entourage, to another country and risking the lives of the local community.  If it's what Catherine Calderwood deserved....

So what's left?  Yup, those same old meaningless platitudes.  Vive la Republique!