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?

Yeah, what excuse? That good old misplaced sense of victimhood? Seriously, the frequency with which I hear anti English shite spouted by people here in SW Scotland is awful.

I love some Scots but the comments coming from educated, well brought up people who would never dream of attacking someone for being French / Italian / Pakistani / American - but the English are fair game. And the poison and vitriol pouring out of the mouths (and keyboards) of the 45% (or 44.7% actually) is appalling.

I'm one of the 45. I have never posted poison or vitriol. I am also English. Saying that everyone who voted Yes in the referendum is anti-English is both insulting, and wrong.

Yes, YABU.

It isn't one of his best cartoon, but given he is attacking both the SNP's desire to get into government and taking a side-swipe at how far Labour will go with Scots Nats to do the same, I don't think it can be called racist. It's political satire (and not everything satirical has to be funny for it to still be satirical).

Nor is it sexist: NS is shown as the leader of the party, making the decisions, and in the last frame is dancing with the SNP's most prominent candidate in the upcoming GE.

And I say this as someone born of Scots parents , brought up in N.I. and currently living in England. I am British.

Agree this isn't racist. This is making a political point regarding an interview with Nicola Sturgeon in the Guardian : if the line in the sand isn't Trident, if it isn't a coalition with their arch rival, exactly where do the SNP draw the line? What do they believe in?

And this is completely equal to the treatment that Steve Bell gives English politicians.

And it's not like Scots and English are distinct races anyway. Otherwise you'd have to give English kids free places in your universities too, right? Or it would be discriminatory. And racist.

Issy my sexism claim wasn't around the cartoon but other events, hence the tin hat reference.

They are distinct nations, and he made sure that was clear I that cartoon.

My word, we got so far in before ABE got flung in, I thought we'd escape that!

Eh, yeah, get over it. It's not the same.

NS wants to be pm of Scotland, not fm

Well of course she does - thats what the SNP stands for after all, having a mandate for independence.

Im also part of the 45% who voted yes and have never said or typed any posion either. Its generally people who have disagreed with me i.e. voted No who have beccuase I have the audicity to disagree with them, certainly on line anyway. In real life, life goes on, I still have relationships with people who voted no etc etc

But this satirizes the vacillations of the Scottish National Party, not the people of Scotland. It's about a political party, not a race of people or indeed a nation of people.

That particular cartoon arguably does yes, but the press in general is saying some pretty appalling stuff about Scots at the moment. The prevailing mood in the press does.seem to be in general indignation that Scots should use their democratic right to vote in a way thatay mean Scots have some influence in Westminster.

Pre-referendum it was all about pooling and sharing, a union of equals. Unfortunately it now seems that Scots are not equal enough to be afforded a voice of their choice at Westminster.

No I disagree melli, the SNP are the elected Government representing the people of Scotland so who else would its (hypothetical) policy concerning incest be referring to?

YABU. Its a boring and not very funny cartoon, but to think that people won't see through you misrepresenting it as the basis for a whole host of "racist attacks" is naïve at best, and probably more to do with the fact that there is another election coming, and the SNP internet patrollers are coming out, keen to snip down anyone who shows the ability to think. Particularly those in Scotland.

and the SNP internet patrollers are coming out, keen to snip down anyone who shows the ability to think. Particularly those in Scotland

LOL

Haha, so anyone who supports the SNP like me doesnt have the capacity to think either or even entitled to speak about it online without having an "agenda", in amongst all the other rubbish stuff I discuss online!

Correct. If you voted Yes or are an SNP supporter then you dont post comments on threads, you post propaganda. And you are probably a communist. And you are in hourly contact with Salmond who masterminds evil separatist plots and is telling you exactly what to write, because you can't possibly be capable of intelligent independent thought. You poor gullible Scottish fool.

I don't think the cartoon is necesaarily meant to be funny ha ha, more sardonic, as is Steve Bell's wont. And I read it as being directed at the SNP as a party, not imputing characteristics to the Scottish.

I do get that to many Scottish people it will nevertheless be seen as doing exactly that, because in their view that is what English people/media habitually do.

And this thread is not really helping either side of the debate think better of the other.

Ratbag I don't think it represents English people at all and what they do or think - but it certainly represents a side of the media - a national newspaper. Maybe you don't mean to be patronising and my apologies if you don't but it just sounds like you are saying that Scottish people who don't read it like you do are "like that anyway" ie willing to take offence and see an anti-Scottish view regardless.

Neither side of the debate will ever think better of the other Monstrous.

Beware a referendum on Europe - it will solve nothing if the Scottish referendum on the Union is anything to go by.

Loving OP's exhortation to "Get over it".

Maybe you don't mean to be patronising and my apologies if you don't but it just sounds like you are saying that Scottish people who don't read it like you do are "like that anyway" ie willing to take offence and see an anti-Scottish view regardless.

No, actually I really bloody don't 'mean to sound patronising' and I don't think I did. As a black woman I do get the dynamic, where a majority group who often demonstrate prejudice against a minority group also characterise the minority group as touchy, seeing offence where there is none and lacking humour. It's happened to me more times than I can count.

I don't see the cartoon in the same way as the Scottish posters on this thread. However, I'm not remotely trying to push forward my view of the cartoon as definitive or more credible. I am acknowledging that varied experiences will mean that different people genuinely see the cartoon in differing ways.

Calm down, I'm just saying how it came across to mean that's all! And yes that's exactly how it came across to me, I did say apologies if you didn't mean it! It was specifically your sentence about what Scottish people see English people habitually doing, being oppressed and put down by the English. But this is the internet, we can't always get across what we mean or don't mean. I do read the cartoon as a dig at Scottish people.

To me, not to mean!

"Both Osgood Mackenzie and Sir James Horlick were careful to plant big shelterbelts to protect their fine rhododendrons and azaleas. Shrubs need a shelter as much as a modern multinational company. On Gigha the plantings then encountered a hazard which their planter, Sir James, had not anticipated: socialism. They have been parcelled up and transferred into the “community ownership” of recently empowered Scottish crofters. If you are wondering about a spare Hebridean island, warmed by the Gulf Stream and not too populated by seals, think again. The Scottish National party will have it off you and your camellias will be split among Scots who are interested in firewood"

FT 6th March archive.today/Fj7lm
(Gigha became community owned way before the SNP were in power btw)