Dr Waiton on Rangers, Free Speech and Sectarianism

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I think you're probably right under normal voting circumstances, but I'm not so sure if that will apply this year when it comes to the Scottish independence referendum.

 

I also think that if you were to look at politics in Glasgow over the past decade, there's a fairly large body of evidence to suggest that the Catholic community have repeatedly voted MPs of their own persuasion into office.

 

There's no polling data to suggest that the Catholic vote in the referendum will vary markedly from the vote of the rest of society, so I'm not sure on what you base your uncertainty.

I suppose it depends on whether they listen to the Catholic bigots, like Galloway, who claim they'll all be murdered in their beds one minute after a Yes vote is declared, or whetherthey listen to the Protestant bigots who claim the Scotland will turn into a Catholic theocracy at roughly the same time.

 

As to the second point, I'd be interested to look at that data if you can steer me in its direction. The figures of which i am aware suggest that overall the Catholic vote for Labour has fallen from 80% at the turn of the century to around 65% now. Still a majority, granted, but it suggests that as the SNP was seen to be the only left-wing alternative, so the Catholic vote - and the Scottish vote as a whole - shifted toards them.

 

I would suggest that the reasons for catholics voting catholic has more to do with the fact that Catholics were standing for Labour rather than some sort of sectarian motive.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

There is a lot of Horse trading going on behind the scenes, the Catholic Church made their opposition known to gay marriage, The SNP ignored that opposition, but at the same time turns a blind eye to the apartheid schooling, i would say that's a trade off imo.

 

Much as you or I may regret it, there is no public debate or groundswell against segregated schooling at the moment. It is simply not an issue that most people rank as a priority or care greatly about. So to suggest that the SNP were 'trading' a bargaining position when there was no bargaining going on is just plain wrong.

 

There has been segregated schooling in this country for a century, so it's beyond me quite why you're pointing the finger at an administration which has been a majority government for 3 years, 3 years in which it has been dealing with an economic crisis and preparing for independence. Even if it has the will to abolish segregation, it wouldn't have the resources or the energy to take on a battle of that size at this time.

 

At some point you're going to have to accept the mountain of evidence before you - the SNP is not a party which cares particularly about religious affiliations and there is no evidence to show that it has allowed any RC church influence in any of their decisions, far less "pandered" to them

[andy steel 0]

If you say so, man. Tell me though, how else do you explain the huge preponderance of of "them" in most of the bodies I mentioned before? Why are there questions being asked about the silence in the MSM, the number of Celtic ST holders on the committees dealing with the land deals, the makeup of the corrupt cabal in the SFA/SPL/SPFL, and more? It is way too large just to be an east end conspiracy.

If, as you try to portray things as being normal - people are people and want the best for their kids etc. I understand that - why are 'we' coming up on the short end of the straw while 'they' are gaining advantages all over the place? Just coincidence? I would think that there are warning signs all around and if 'we' don't get a bit more organized with a more representative political scene, this fantasy might take a different direction.

 

I'm happy to do so.

 

When the political franchise was extended in this country, horribly late but at last, the first people to challenge the accepted right of landowners and military types to stand for election were people from mining communities and those of Highland extraction who had moved south to find a better life, folk like John MacLean or Robert Robertson.

 

The next group included people of Ashkenazic heritage, chaps like Manny Shinwell, who had moved to Britain in search of a better life.

 

The next group featured people of Irish origin, your Pat Lally's and the like. Most were the children of people who had moved to Britain in search of a better life. They were followed by representatives of the post-war Asian influx.

 

Nowadays, you find a decreasing cadre of politically minded people from such backgrounds (though not Asians, suggesting that they are struggling, broadly, to escape the 'ghetto') because they have become comfortably middle class. Instead, you find a new kind of activist, the Patrick Harvie type. They believe in single issue politics to make a better life etc.

 

This is hardly unusual or specific to Scotland; it's the story of immigrant communities the world over. Coming from (I assume) north America it can hardly be unfamiliar to you. If people who support celtc are in positions of power in Scottish football, I suggest we look at the moonscape that has been and is our boardroom and perhaps point the finger of blame for that more at ourselves than anyone else.

[Zappa 0]

There's no polling data to suggest that the Catholic vote in the referendum will vary markedly from the vote of the rest of society, so I'm not sure on what you base your uncertainty.

I suppose it depends on whether they listen to the Catholic bigots, like Galloway, who claim they'll all be murdered in their beds one minute after a Yes vote is declared, or whetherthey listen to the Protestant bigots who claim the Scotland will turn into a Catholic theocracy at roughly the same time.

 

As to the second point, I'd be interested to look at that data if you can steer me in its direction. The figures of which i am aware suggest that overall the Catholic vote for Labour has fallen from 80% at the turn of the century to around 65% now. Still a majority, granted, but it suggests that as the SNP was seen to be the only left-wing alternative, so the Catholic vote - and the Scottish vote as a whole - shifted toards them.

 

I would suggest that the reasons for catholics voting catholic has more to do with the fact that Catholics were standing for Labour rather than some sort of sectarian motive.

 

I'll have to come back to this mate, as I'm too tired to get into it any further than reading your posts for now.

[Hildy 0]

If sectarianism is wrong, how can sectarian schools be right?

[BrahimHemdani 1]

If sectarianism is wrong, how can sectarian schools be right?

 

I am very strongly opposed to separate schools for whatever religion but may I remind you that the word "sectarian" does not appear anywhere in the OBA, for one simple reason, the SG could not define it.

[barca72 440]

This is hardly unusual or specific to Scotland; it's the story of immigrant communities the world over. Coming from (I assume) north America it can hardly be unfamiliar to you. If people who support celtc are in positions of power in Scottish football, I suggest we look at the moonscape that has been and is our boardroom and perhaps point the finger of blame for that more at ourselves than anyone else.

 

I agree with you on the immigrant community depiction, however, I disagree on the cadre comparison. For the most part this would hold true normally, but the Irish/catholic community have long reached comfortable middle-class status and yet they are still greatly over- represented compared to other communities.

For a long time SDM and those who came after him conceded Rangers responsibility to maintain a level of representation in the governance of Scottish football. This does not, however, explain the wholesale bigotry of the SPL owners' treatment of Rangers. Were their votes completely independant and hence coincidental, or were Rangers akin to a lightning rod that attracted their wrath? How many of these owners or their fans have Irish or catholic leanings? Just how political is football in Scotland?

Similarly, is the greater number of catholic politicians in the general populace to be put down to voter apathy completely?

[andy steel 0]

I think it's inaccurate to put the detestation of Rangers, as seen in our implosion, down to bigotry. There are plenty of people who absolutely hate to their marrow our club because of our fans and their repertoire, mainly of years gone by it's true but the enmity remains.

It doesn't make you a bigot to have no time for people you consider bigots - it doesn't make me a bigot to object to the CoS's stance on equal marriage laws, for example.

 

Irish/Catholics in politics, certainly there are plenty but the drive is slacking and has been taken up in recent years by women, who were of course discriminated against heavily in that very community until they/their families moved to Scotland. That's something to be proud of, not freak out over.

 

It's not voter apathy which sees Catholics elected, it's voter disinterest in their religion. Again, not something to fret over but a positive.

 

Whoever is most powerful in Scottish football will run the show: it's the same reason why Puerto Rico hangs on the US's coat tails. You don't have to look further than that for explanations over the state of the game. But even if you were right (which you're not) and Scotland was chock full of football clubs owned by Irish Catholics - would that not make it a bit dumb of us to make a point of putting the boot into said community?

[Hildy 0]

I am very strongly opposed to separate schools for whatever religion but may I remind you that the word "sectarian" does not appear anywhere in the OBA, for one simple reason, the SG could not define it.

 

Why then do particular police officers have ANTI-SECTARIAN INITIATIVE emblazoned on the back of their jackets when on duty at Ibrox?

[Hildy 0]