|Eck And Alastair
||[Aug. 26th, 2014|09:00 am]
Alastair: So what money are you going to use?|
Eck: It's nae problem.
Alastair: But what money are you going to use?
Eck: Is that all you've got to say?
And so on and on for 90 minutes. Much of the time they talked over one another. My attention wandered and I'm afraid I bailed out before the end. If either of them said anything inspirational I missed it.
Conclusion: Nationalism is a busted flush. If either of them had started warbling about flags and Burns and bonnie braes they'd have been laughed off stage. And what is left of nationalism if you take away the romance? Nothing but a squabble about where to site the parliament building and where the money's going to come from. If I were a Scot I might conclude there was some virtue in being ruled by shits in Edinburgh rather than shits in London- but I don't think I'd care very much either way.
The main problem is that the government is in London and London is not the rest of the country. All the regions have more in common with one another than they have with London. Don't get me wrong, I love visiting London, but it isn't like anywhere else yet government policies tend to assume that what works there will work everywhere.
Perhaps if London became an independent city state with its financial centre and stupendously rich foreign oligarch property owners, then the rest of the country can go back to being like the Post-War Britain we knew and loved, which is where our economies currently seem to be, minus all the industry we used to have of course.
If the BBC can move to Manchester then so can the British government.
Of course it doesn't have to be Manchester. Peter Hitchens would like to see the British government operating out of Glasgow- thus knocking Scottish nationalism on the head.
It won't happen, though, will it?
Damn it. I'm sorry. I've misremembered. It was you all along. I'll change the comment accordingly.
I read so much on line and in the papers that I sometimes lose track of where an idea comes from.
I'm not sure whether to be flattered or aghast at being mistaken for Peter Hitchens! On reflection, I'll go with the former.
Edited at 2014-08-26 09:52 am (UTC)
I disagree with P.H. about many things but value him as one of the awkward squad. He's a man who thinks for himself- without reference to any party line.
Edited at 2014-08-26 10:12 am (UTC)
P.S. LJ tells me I can't edit this post because it's already been commented on- so let me state here that the idea of moving the government to Glasgow originated not with Peter Hitchens but in an article my friend steepholm wrote for the Guardian,
Mea maxima culpa.
I've said all along it should move to my home town of Stoke on Trent. Good transport links and very cheap second homes for MPs.
Alternatively, the Northumbrian town of Haltwhistle believes itself to be the centre of Britain. But putting parliament there might spoil the place.
Poor old Stoke.
But, yes, it's a city in dire need of a raison d'etre.
Edited at 2014-08-26 10:12 am (UTC)
Wee Eck just seems to have become unwilling to tell any truth about the Scottish economy and currency.
The hub (a Scot as it happens) was at uni with him and says he was much the same in student politics.
Strong on the charisma, weak on detail.
The Scots I know best aren't Scots at all and would rather be ruled by the shits in Norway!
If Scotland gets independence will the Orkneys secede?
Many on Orkney and Shetland would like to. They're Scandinavians in all but name anyway and quite a number of the younger folk speak Norwegian as a second language.