Jump to content

 

 

Does the SNP have a Rangers problem?


Recommended Posts

I think the issues are more to do with the constitutional matter than any left or right inclinations.

 

The SNP are a collective with one shared interest.  There are undoubtedly more left than right in there but it's largely irrelevant when it comes to their dislike of Rangers, which is nationalism vs unionism.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bill said:

Are you suggesting it's impossible to be nationalist and hard left? 

 

By my reckoning, Sturgeon's SNP is as close to being hard left as makes no odds - centralising govt, huge state interference, leadership cult, obsessive media control, &c. And all done in a nationalist context.

A centralising government does not make it hard left  or socialist; I have seen nothing from Salmond in his career about overthrowing capitalism. An independent Scotland under present conditions would make it vulnerable to every multi-nationalist corporation out there. The characteristics of a socialist society you outline there are straight out a of a Ladybird guide and nothing to do with the Communist Manifesto. Though I do realise that to some hard left is anything to the left of Ed Milliband.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, alexscottislegend said:

A centralising government does not make it hard left  or socialist; I have seen nothing from Salmond in his career about overthrowing capitalism. An independent Scotland under present conditions would make it vulnerable to every multi-nationalist corporation out there. The characteristics of a socialist society you outline there are straight out a of a Ladybird guide and nothing to do with the Communist Manifesto. Though I do realise that to some hard left is anything to the left of Ed Milliband.

The purist at work. Sorry, the Communist Manifesto was never essential reading for me, nor was memorising core dogma. For me socialism was always about collective thought and action, all strictly controlled and directed at minimising individual rights. That's pretty much the SNP process in a nutshell so, Ladybird book or not, the SNP is the epitome of a national socialist movement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Bill said:

The purist at work. Sorry, the Communist Manifesto was never essential reading for me, nor was memorising core dogma. For me socialism was always about collective thought and action, all strictly controlled and directed at minimising individual rights. That's pretty much the SNP process in a nutshell so, Ladybird book or not, the SNP is the epitome of a national socialist movement.

That rings a bell.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bill said:

The purist at work. Sorry, the Communist Manifesto was never essential reading for me, nor was memorising core dogma. For me socialism was always about collective thought and action, all strictly controlled and directed at minimising individual rights. That's pretty much the SNP process in a nutshell so, Ladybird book or not, the SNP is the epitome of a national socialist movement.

Maybe you try it then? And remember that in nigh each country where socialism (no country ever reached communism*, but that`s a dominant misconception in the West) developed they essentially had its own version, pending on the people** at work and the ressources they had at hand. Much like capitalism in politics  ("democracy" in about 300 shades) and economics works differently in every other country too. And having lived in the naughty "SED-ruled" and "Stasi-controlled" G.D.R. a.k.a. East Germany for 20 years and knowing hundrends of people who did so too, let me tell you that the second "bold" bit is way off the mark too. But rest assured, you`re not alone, as modern day German opinion-makers like to put East Germany ever closer to Nazi Germany, using the same terminology, drawing wild (but usually not challenged) comparisons and whatnot. Sick and tired of correcting lies to people and telling them about my experience, as most are simply not interested in those days or are neck-deep in their conception of socialism and East Germany that it would be a waste excercise. And in saying the above, I don`t want to say anything was just fine ... but if you look out the window these days at the various faces of capitalism, be it the Trump-lead and CIA-war-mongering US version, that of Erdogan in Turkey, the political madness of Italy or even those sheiks of Saudi-Arabia pulling the strings world-wide, the analogy of stones and glass-houses spring to mind. When people over here point fingers at politicial and business fiascos, essential slave-labour at meat-production companies, horrendously underpaid nurses and health personal or billions of tax money wasted on airports and train stations, or Bundeswehr-drones that didn`t even get a flying licence for Germany, you will quickly find someone point out that "in East Germany, it was worse!". The level they delve down to is nearly farcical. As if something bad makes another bad thing any better.

 

Heck, 20 mins of life-time gone for that, when I was looking forward to us chasing the Arabs.

 

*That what happens when words are liberally used far too often by those who could know better if they actually look what those words mean in a political and real world context. Just saying.

** People like to cling to power, no matter what system they use politically or via religion. Most hard-core socialist party leaders were wanting to keep their place as long as they could, but so too do certain people in the west too. Just look how Trump got his country worked up, how Erdogan rules Turkey, Lukashenko Belorus or indeed how the Iranian religious leaders dominate politics. Not to mention half the African states or some in South and Middle America. Any better than the much maligned "communist" countries? People craving power and utilizing the political system as much as they could. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, der Berliner said:

Maybe you try it then? And remember that in nigh each country where socialism (no country ever reached communism*, but that`s a dominant misconception in the West) developed they essentially had its own version, pending on the people** at work and the ressources they had at hand. Much like capitalism in politics  ("democracy" in about 300 shades) and economics works differently in every other country too. And having lived in the naughty "SED-ruled" and "Stasi-controlled" G.D.R. a.k.a. East Germany for 20 years and knowing hundrends of people who did so too, let me tell you that the second "bold" bit is way off the mark too. But rest assured, you`re not alone, as modern day German opinion-makers like to put East Germany ever closer to Nazi Germany, using the same terminology, drawing wild (but usually not challenged) comparisons and whatnot. Sick and tired of correcting lies to people and telling them about my experience, as most are simply not interested in those days or are neck-deep in their conception of socialism and East Germany that it would be a waste excercise. And in saying the above, I don`t want to say anything was just fine ... but if you look out the window these days at the various faces of capitalism, be it the Trump-lead and CIA-war-mongering US version, that of Erdogan in Turkey, the political madness of Italy or even those sheiks of Saudi-Arabia pulling the strings world-wide, the analogy of stones and glass-houses spring to mind. When people over here point fingers at politicial and business fiascos, essential slave-labour at meat-production companies, horrendously underpaid nurses and health personal or billions of tax money wasted on airports and train stations, or Bundeswehr-drones that didn`t even get a flying licence for Germany, you will quickly find someone point out that "in East Germany, it was worse!". The level they delve down to is nearly farcical. As if something bad makes another bad thing any better.

 

Heck, 20 mins of life-time gone for that, when I was looking forward to us chasing the Arabs.

 

*That what happens when words are liberally used far too often by those who could know better if they actually look what those words mean in a political and real world context. Just saying.

** People like to cling to power, no matter what system they use politically or via religion. Most hard-core socialist party leaders were wanting to keep their place as long as they could, but so too do certain people in the west too. Just look how Trump got his country worked up, how Erdogan rules Turkey, Lukashenko Belorus or indeed how the Iranian religious leaders dominate politics. Not to mention half the African states or some in South and Middle America. Any better than the much maligned "communist" countries? People craving power and utilizing the political system as much as they could. 

I've read your post twice and still haven't a clue what point you're making. To be honest, I've slightly less than zero interest in Germany, other than it's repeated inability to stay out of other European countries, so that might be holding me back. I don't suppose you have a short version.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.