to think this is unacceptable and wonder why Scotland is fair game for racist attacks like this

[ScotsWhaHae]

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2015/mar/09/steve-bells-if-

It's not even funny.

Incest? Wtf?

I'm disappointed in the guardian. It raises the question though, substitute the Scottish references for some other nation, would that be acceptable?

We got told repeatedly about the anti English sentiment north of the border last year, during the referendum. Shit like this isn't appearing in Scottish editions of the news papers.

Along with the casual racism lets add sexism into the mix. We have a female first minister. Repeatedly in main stream media I hear people talk about Alex salmond and the snp. He's not the leader of the party or the first minister. Is the press that out if touch with Scottish politics or are they just ignoring Nicola on account of her begin female?

And let's not get started on 'the wee lassie with a tin helmet' comment. But that won't be in any of the English editions will it?

A long read but an alternative view with out the fear, loathing, polarisation and overreactions.... www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/beth-kahn/looking-through-distorted-window-english-reflections-on-scottish-referendum

A long read but an alternative view with out the fear, loathing, polarisation and overreactions....

That was a good read - thanks for the link!

I've read that article before.

It's all in the point of view, isn't it?
I think the writer is middle class Southern English and as such I don't recognise the writer's view of England and the English!

Oh, we're not onto the prescribed reading again, are we? Can it not be a textbook next time, or preferably two i.e. something that's actually been published somewhere? I'm pretty sure some of the posters on here claiming not to know of this boycott thing were the same ones advocating reading the site Wings over Scotland...

In fact, I could just write the script now for the Indy lot, I've heard it so often before:

• Mock outrage claimed at something perceived as "anti-Scots"
• Posters post views for and against this
• OP criticises them and claims this is much more serious, etc.
• Posters spring up to support the OP
• Awkward posters springs up, OP and supporters make personal attacks to discredit (multiple by 3 or 4)
• Attacks get a bit nasty and more personal
• OP and supporters accused of doing the same thing they are complain about, they respond by saying they know nothing of this, that they only know of it as being a place where angel fly on angel wings distributing gifts etc.
• OP or supporters claim some mysterious element to the debate, something only they or their kin can understand, which rules out posters disagreeing with them
• OP supporters recommend some "reading" of an internet site, which they claim is totally neutral and unbiased, and therefore far superior to anything else available
• Loop ad infinitum

There is only one person who has been consistently nasty and personal on pretty much every previous thread about Scottish Politics.

Changing nickname doesn't negate previous behaviour.

Again, you said the SNP had circulated a list of things to boycott, they didn't.
All of us have heard of people talking about boycotts, no one is denying that but if folk want to boycott stuff that's their choice.

Careful Fanny, you to might be labelled a bully by pointing out the obvious - that Chandler claimed in this very thread something that is blatantly not true!

yep totally agree Bakewell slice, it's all in the PoV... the reality of the situation always looks different from the angle you are viewing it from. truth is always multi faceted.

There's more to this than the admittedly narrow minded indy SNP lot spouting off or the similarily over opinionated likes of Chandler in the opposite corner. The article I linked to is by no means the only way of viewing things, but for me it describes the last few years of Scottish politics very well.

Not for me!

fair enough!

:-)

Chandler, you really should direct some of that energy elsewhere, it phenomenal you can dedicate so much time arguing issues of your own making. No one is biting. No one, other than you, have brought up any of the things you are arguing about.

You don't even keep up with yourself.

Remember the indy threads? Even no voters gave up trying to have a rational discussion with you. They stopped trying to back up your points.

You really are rather disruptive. Derailing and determined to continue debating the referendum that you won!

Its a disgusting cartoon and should never have been printed. There is nothing that condones it, its purely offensive.

However, it is not "racism". The "national and ethnic origin" of the Scottish people you will fine, is largely the same as the Irish, the Welsh and many of the English. Ethnically white, Celtic or Gaelic in origins. We are mostly spung from the same "race".

typos. Sorry. "find" and "sprung"

Muminhants
As for blaming the "English" for the clearances, Culloden, William Wallace and the like, I've said it before and I'll say it again, I was born in 1972 and bear no responsibility for any of it. And I didn't vote until 1990 so didn't elect Maggie Thatcher either. And even if I had lived at the time of the Clearances, I probably would have been some poor peasant and would have had little to do with anyway. It wans't England vs Scotland it was rich lowlanders versus poor highlanders. This constant harping on about ancient history is childish and stupid and irrational (and yes I know Britain as a whole is guilty of it in relation to WW2 as well although I think lots of Brits like and admire the Germans these days).

I'm the one that mentioned the Clearances upthread but if you read my post you will see it was in reference to the land reform legislation currently being discussed in Scotland when I said that the FT extract shown in a previous post was a good example of why land reform was needed in Scotland. Land ownership is a very current topic for us - not a case of harking back to the past at all - as the present set-up is a real brake on economic development in rural areas. The FT extract is a telling insight into how some people see the Highlands and Islands as rich man's paradise rather than a place where the land should be an asset for the people who live and work there.

FWIW I do not blame the English for the Clearances or Culloden etc, and I have no dislike whatsoever of the English either (in fact, I am married to an Englishman). However, I do think that Scotland should have its own government because I think Scottish people are the best people to make decisions about our own country and how it is run.

TheChandler Yes, of course... should have spotted that a name change has occurred since Indyref. I should have known that there wouldn't be two different people with such a, how shall I put it, unique debating style...

ScotsWhatHae

No one is biting.

You are extremely amusing though!

Compared to the delight of living surrounded by the orange order, who were not only marching on the run up to it, but stood outside polling stations harassing people as the vote was happening?

I am not a member of the Order or support it in any way but
(1) the Order is not a prescribed organisation and its members had as much right as anyone else to hold a public demonstration in support of their members' views. As far as I am aware the march in Edinburgh passed with no incident.

(2) and where did intimidation at the polling stations happen? Don't recall any reporting of that happening by either side. Frankly given that what you describe is a serious criminal offence, the fact that no-one wanted there to be a challenge to the validity of the vote, the fact the police were on high alert to deal with any such incidents I find that incredible.

"its members'"

1...I live near a walk route, every walk last year turned into a no march and they weren't all without incident.

2...there was no police presence at my polling station or the next nearest one, I have no idea if it was reported after I left.

My point was that there were supporters of both campaigns behaving badly, I'm not sure why my experience of the vocal unsavoury no supporters is more incredible than someone else's of vocal unsavoury yes supporters.

I know I didn't discuss it in public in the run up to it and wouldn't have put up stickers or posters because no surrender isn't any better than being blamed for the clearances.

I also think that many have forgotten about some of the thuggish behaviour of some no supporters. Burning of a yes shop, death threats to Alex Salmond and let's not forget the events of George Square on September 19th.
Just for balance yunno. There was bad behaviour on both sides. Let's not forget that.
The cartoon is offensive and unfunny

However, it is not "racism". The "national and ethnic origin" of the Scottish people you will fine, is largely the same as the Irish, the Welsh and many of the English. Ethnically white, Celtic or Gaelic in origins. We are mostly spung from the same "race".

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. It's legally possible, as others have pointed out on this thread, for English-on-Scottish, or Scottish-on-English racism to exist, and/or any other permutation within the UK. Racism can be an attack based on ethnicity or nationality as well as simply "race" meaning skin colour etc.

In a very modernised, first-world place like Scotland there are hundreds of different "races" if you are talking about skin colour etc, and and many people who come from a mixture of those. Yet if they identify as Scottish, they can be the victim of anti-scottish racism.

Humza Yousaf is one example of a high-profile, Scottish-born, and fully Scottish as regards nationality, SNP member who isn't "ethnically white".

(I can't speak for him but I'd guess that as an SNP minister he identifies as Scottish)

Zoom zoom its nationalism not racism. Being Scottish is not a race.

Nationality is covered by racial abuse and/or discrimination.

The word racist is bigger than race. It has been explained.

That is actually true ScotsWhaHae, which makes the Scottish Government's policy of discriminating against English students over university tuition fees all the more inexcusable.

Imagine if someone successfully complained about it and had it reversed, and they had to pay back all the money!

Scots. Its been explained incorrectly. The word "race" covers race. Its regionalism at most.