Crybaby Nationalists

It’s hard for any remotely aware and rational person not to barefaced laugh at some Scottish Nationalist types. If you can watch Firstminster’s Questions for any extended period of time and not come to the conclusion that Whollyrude as a whole would be greatly served by a bird-flu pandemic or spending time on an East Lothian NHS waiting list, you’re a better person than AhDinnaeKen isnae. And now we have the question of how to perceive the Scotland on Sunday’s latest image to illustrate a book review.

I was so upset that I decided to burn a Butcher's Apron and have a laugh about it.

I was so upset that I decided to burn a Butcher’s Apron and have a laugh about it.

By Hippy Krit

EVEN BY AhDinnaeKen’s low expectations of the Scottish Nationalist stereotype, it’s been a bad day.

The Scotland on Sunday newspaper uses its own copyrighted and doctored image to illustrate a book review exposing some ahem, uncomfortable facts, about Scottish Nationalism’s history and the next thing you know the Nationalists are all up in arms crying like big spoiled babies.

It might be possible to trace the phenomenon back to the litigation culture of the USA, but it’s becoming harder and harder to stomach just how whiny certain Scottish Nationalist types are becoming these days.

Everywhere you look some CyberNationalist or other is bleating about some perceived misdeed enacted against their righteous and sanctimonious cause by the evil and oppressive Unionist backed mainstream media.

One hate preaching stereotypical bleating Nationalist even went so far as to photographically portray the present day Royals – whom Alex Salmond wants to keep for an Independent Scotland – as Nazi supporters.

Anything the Scotland on Sunday can do, Wangs Over Skintland can do, worse. Hurrah for ahem, 'professional journalism.'

Anything the Scotland on Sunday can do, Wangs Over Skintland can do, worse. Hurrah for ahem, ‘professional journalism.’

The mere act of using an image to suggest that not everything is rosey in the Nationalist Thistle garden is now condemned as the “lowest, rankest depth plumbed by any Scottish newspaper this year, if not for several years.”

It’s the sort of irony free statement that adds fuel to the fire of disbelieving mockery and raucous laughter rumbling throughout the ancient and modern lands of oor ain wee Alba.

Haw haw – get ower it ya bunch of whinin’ babies. It’s an image which has achieved exactly what it set out to do – provoke debate and draw attention to the review of the book involved.

The default response to any kind of slight or challenge nowadays seems to be to shriek that you’re being bullied or persecuted or oppressed or subjugated or colonised, and demand – often via your blog or the threat of your twitter account – that nobody should ever dare question or criticise your cause in any way.

And as a result, the default position of the alternative donation led media is to cringe and whinge, bleat and whine and instantly do the same thing the mainstream media are accused of.

Now that’s what I call ahem, ‘professional journalism’.

Is AhDinnaeKen alone in wishing people were allowed to shout at each other a bit when they felt strongly about something, without everyone getting all faux offended or crying like a ‘professional’ baby?

It’s starting to look increasingly like it is, and that makes us pish oorsels laffin while simultanesouly trying not to choke on oor coffee.

Does anyone know a good ahem, ‘professional journalist’.

Crybaby!

Crybaby!

Advertisements

10 Comments

Filed under Media, Opinion, Wangs Watch

10 responses to “Crybaby Nationalists

  1. daftquine

    I tend to agree with most of this.
    Ritual burnings and abusive re-naming of the UK flag from certain quarters and the lack of furore around that on Unionist media side coupled with no response to disassociate from or condemn this on the Indy side (I include SNP MPs/MSPs) serves to remind me that there are some grown ups but they’re less visible on the Yes side.
    SIck of Scotland being ripped apart by this lot. 😦

    • It’s like the Economist cover furore all over again.

      I’ll make no comment on taste, but the SOS cover has certainly done what it set out to do.

      Like the Economist cover, if I had been responsible for it, I would have been pleased at the response.

      Regards

  2. daftquine

    Well I said elsewhere, “No publicity is bad publicity” for the author (of the book) but do you think some poor bugger will be forced to make a grovelling public apology to the ‘peepull of skintland’ for the pic?
    Wait & see my dears… wait & see. Still hating all this crap :(((

    • Annie

      Judging by the withdrawal of the cover online, seems like it’s only a matter of time.

      Still hating all this crap

      I find it funny that someone (Wings) could find 9/11 on the telly funny but a photoshopped swastika offensive. Not funny ha ha, but funny nevertheless.

      And as for Kevin Williamson and his outraged Tu Quoque tweets replete with Nazi saluting England footballers (1938) – don’t get me started.

      Regards

  3. “Haw haw – get ower it ya bunch of whinin’ babies. It’s an image which has achieved exactly what it set out to do – provoke debate and draw attention to the review of the book involved.”

    Indeed, and in view of the intolerant and bigoted nature of much of the response there’s surely an element of quod erat demonstrandum about the whole thing? Notice that the offending graphic has been removed from the SoS Facebook page, for example.

    And moving on to matters of substance, Alex Salmond says in today’s Herald:

    “Climate justice is part of the solution. And it has at its heart the concept of empathy, or sympathy – an appeal to enlightened self-interest.

    “Scotland has for a several years attempted to set a good example.

    “We have the most ambitious carbon reduction legislation in the world…”

    Is it just me, or is this all hugely hypocritcal given that he thinks North Sea oil is a “sunrise industry” and that we’re entering a new oil boom??

    And to link the SoS frontpage and Salmond’s article together, one Wings contributor says the Klan Alba splash is because:

    “Better Together and Westminster are simply terrified of this level of articulate and intellectual statesmanship.”

    I’m a Scotsman, get me out of here!!

    • Stuart

      Is it just me, or is this all hugely hypocritcal…

      It’s not just you. It’s something I notice the Greens referring to from time to time – a natural paradoxical conclusion to come to.

      What I found interesting from the Salmond speech is the attempted rehabilitation of Adam Smith – like a lot of Scots I automatically associate the enlightened Scottish economic philosopher with Thatcher and Michael Forsyth.

      He’s definitely signalling to the Yanks and the rest of the world that the delusion of a left wing utopia is not part of his Scottish independence vision.

      Either that or he’s going for the business and Tory vote. Displayed many shades of not minding Thatcher’s policies so much etc.

      Regards

      • Indeed, some of the more fundamentalist wing of the environmental lobby point out thecarbon reductions/oil boom paradox, but it seems so self-evidently hypocritical I don’t really understand why others aren’t making more of it.

        Don’t know if I’ll get round to reading the full speech, but indeed it sounds like the usual Salmond trick of juggling different ideological balls in the air at the same time and just hoping they won’t all come crashing down. Of course, the other big one vis-a-vis the USA is the pro-NATO/non-nuclear ambivalence.

        But I suppose because many people claim Adam Smith was a socialist – or at least not a hardcore economic liberal – then he can get away with a bit of saying different things to different audiences; it’s all a matter of emphasis depending on who he’s addressing.

        And as today’s events closer to home demonstrate, Salmond’s own fundamentalist flag-wavers don’t even think things like his philosophical contortions should be as much as mentioned. Better to pretend that all will be sweetness and light when we reach the Promised Land, and contrast this with the nasty Tories and the dystopian UK generally.

        Of course, as usual how all this plays with the hoi polloi is anyone’s guess, but I doubt if Salmond trying to punt Scottish exceptionalism as regards Adam Smith to an elite audience in the US will have much resonance with voters. Or at least no more than SoS’s bit of provocative Photoshopping.

      • Stuart

        “But I suppose because many people claim Adam Smith was a socialist…”

        Indeed. In much the same way that, depending on which camp you’re in, the Unionists and Nationalists claim Burns for their own.

        Salmond’s own fundamentalist flag-wavers don’t even think things like his philosophical contortions should be as much as mentioned

        I wouldn’t be surprised, cough, if the Nazi/saltire cover was a Nationalist trick to divert attention away from Salmond’s admiration of Thatcher’s favourite economic philosopher.

        Regards

  4. Did you see this in GA Ponsonby’s editorial on Newsnet:

    “There are no depths to which purveyors of this political porn will not sink in order to ensure that victims of this abuse remain in bondage. Like real world porn where the act of lovemaking is contorted and twisted, political porn ensures real debate is replaced with a grotesque and offensive caricature where stereotype and myth replace real people and fact.”

    Had to laugh at the reference to indy supporters being victims of abuse in bondage regarding the SoS kind of thing, but then realised the bondage reference might be a joke alluding to the porn simile. I think. On the other hand, I’m not so sure that Mr Ponsonby does jokes!!

    • Stuart

      I’m not so sure that Mr Ponsonby does jokes!!

      Hard call. I think he was declared an official humour free zone by the UN recently. The complete lack of humour does make him unintentionally hilarious. He reminds me of a less offensive but more pompous Peter A Bell. In full flight they are both truly entertaining.

      As for the porn bondage media relationship. It’s tempting to contact Mr Ponsonbody, tell him to belt up, and go f**k himself.

      But that wouldn’t be very civic, or funny, so I’ll resist.

      I don’t really pay a great deal of attention to Newsnat because it’s so, plainly and embarrassingly amateur (mostly).

      The Barroso letter affair proved that Newnsat/Ponsonbody, like Wangs/Rev Stu, is beyond parody or, for that matter, basic mainstream media awareness.

      Regards

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s