Youth against the tired, predictable, stereotypical and cliched.

Another weekend musical treat from the far end of the spectrum to last week's trip to Scarborough Fayre. Today's tune, "Youth against Fascism (It's the song I hate)" by Sonic Youth doesn't actually deliver what the title appears to be offering.

Instead it's a clever dig at those who don't bother moving outside the cliched to express their fashionable and often manufactured outrage and anger at the easy targets. By doing so, they're not saying those targets are not only easy, but also usually justifiable- they're simply questioning, in some cases, the motives and, in almost all cases, the unimaginative, stereotypical language employed to deliver the message.

Another can of worms
Another stomach turns
Yeah, your ghetto burns
It's the song I hate, it's the song I hate

You got a stupid man
You got a Ku Klux Klan
Your fuckin' battle plan
It's the song I hate, it's the song I hate

It was aimed primarily at the whole agitpop music scene but being a regular reader of blogs such as Slugger O'Toole and the comments section of The Scotsman and Bele Tele I can see parallels; every thread about the Orange Order must contain an early dawn comparison with the KKK, only the SNP can save the Scottish Soul from the Unionist-Brit-English imperialists and if I had a pound for every "oppression" pumped out with monotonous regularity into the unionist-nationalist cyberspace, then this blog would have renamed "A Flute of Apolitical Moet & Chandon Brut Imperial" a long time ago....

Great War Portraits

This Remembrance Sunday will be the first with no living British survivors from the First World War- this BBC portrait gallery, based on this book, is a worthy memorial to that brave generation.

Nationalism = racism?

Despite the dodgy title (whereas the “N” word I think he’s getting at is definitely off the menu in all right-thinking circles, the latte-supping liberals he obviously has a problem with are more than comfortable with the the PCness of certain UK-based nationalisms ), a thought-provoking piece from Ewan Crawford.

Are all nationalists racists?
No. Are all racists, also nationalists?
Not all; I’m sure there’s also a small % of cosmopolitan and internationalist racists, it’s just I’ve had the good fortune never to meet any. In the vast majority of cases, though, the racist believes that it’s his particular nation which must be protected from the "others"; it's his nation and its people which stands above the "others"

Apart from the fact that Sinn Fein seem to have been omitted from this cosy club of "civic" nationalists, the most interesting question arising from the article is raised in the comments:

What would a party whose whole raison d'etre is that it's a Scottish nationalist party be hoping to achieve within a separate Scottish state?

Hannan acts with honour- a lesson for the UUP dissidents

Louise Bagshaw on Dan Hannan's resignation for the Conservatives' European front-bench:

I'm sorry that Dan felt the need to resign. But I respect immensely the sobriety and loyalty with which he has done so. He knows that we need to see David Cameron in number 10. He is fighting for a Conservative government, just as hard as I am. I hope that a forthcoming Sovereignty Act and victories around the negotiation table (and remember, the accession protocol was mentioned as a bargaining chip) will give him some comfort. In the meantime, Dan Hannan is giving no comfort to the enemy, whether Labour or UKIP. Some posters on ConHome could learn a lot from him.

As could some in the UUP.
Can those who have expressed their opposition to the link with the Conservatives through leaked letters to the press and tantrums during television interviews put their hand on heart and say that they have given "no comfort to the enemy" with their actions?

Quote of the day

Benedict Brogan:
If Mr Cameron and William Hague are indeed to run up the white flag on Lisbon, why is the party so calm?

Could it be that the party has matured enough to know that ideological posturing doesn’t butter parsnips on polling day? Is it because a near 20 point lead is the best commander of loyalty? Have they learned the Labour trick of ignoring what the grass roots think? Or maybe they’ve stopped worrying about what the netroots are banging on about over in the CH comments section. Whatever the reason, we are about to see a significant Tory policy shift, and it’s quiet out there. Too quiet.

Ah, but is that a "Too quiet" resulting from "pragmatism" defeating "principles"... or "too quiet" as in "the lull before the storm"?

A word from the technical department.

Our ancient computer at home has finally given up the ghost (it never did really come to terms with the introduction of electricity!), so all posts this week at least are being squeezed in on the 15 minute coffee break at work.

Comments will also still be posted, although obviously a bit slower.

Quote of the day

Particularly this week, not a clever strategy from Iris Robinson:

Mrs Robinson vigorously defended herself and her husband after it was revealed they had claimed more than £30,000 worth of food on expenses over recent years.

"If I was at home I would have the food in my own home, but when I go to London I don't. What are we to do, are we to say no to the allowance that we are given or not?" she said.

"I would defy anyone who would be in the same situation as me to say that they wouldn't take it. That's an entitlement because I am outside my own Province.''

Whether you're working in London or Castlereagh you still have to eat of course, but the defence that simply because you're away from your home the taxpayer (whether its allowed in the rules or not) should pay for your groceries is not a popular one- you'd have thought that Mrs Robinson would have realised that by now.

YouGov Scottish Poll

If there were an Scottish election tomorrow, according to the latest poll, there’d still be a minority "government" in charge after the votes were counted:

The SNP would lose power if a Scottish election was held tomorrow, according to a new YouGov poll.

The survey suggests Labour would be the largest party by four to six seats, even though the SNP would win the most votes. The findings are a blow to Alex Salmond, who has only 18 months until the next Holyrood vote.

And according to Weber Shandwick’s website Scotlandvotes.com, the voting intention figures would give Labour 45 Holyrood seats to the SNP’s 41.

The Conservatives would get 20 seats (up three), the Liberal Democrats 18 (up two) and the Greens five (up three).

Usual caveats apply, but it’s interesting that post-conference:

The poll found support for the SNP has slipped in recent weeks, putting them level with Labour on 29% for voting intention in the regional vote.

Maybe there is a limit after all to the public’s tolerance of the type of populist grandstanding (e.g "hanging Westminster with a Scottish rope") seen recently from Salmond and Co?

Scarborough Fayre ( 2009 dream remix!)

A tune I was disappointed not to see on the original Imaginary Village album, Scarborough Fayre, given the trippy, ethereal treatment by Chris Woods:



I quite like this version also, played at Wychwood August 2008 but I’ll reluctantly agree with the comment below that my main man, Mr William Bragg, does go off on one rather than just letting the music do the job:

"OMG .. SHUT UP Billy ... Love ya BUT ...
Do yer philosophy on a box & reminisce over apint in a bar. Here it's MUSIC .. play not gob! Fancy talking over that wonderful intro. Jeez Billy.. couldn't you hear the music behind you??"
There's a time and place for marmite and two Jewish geezers from Queens but this probably wasn't it...

Clarification required ASAP to clear up Tom's "relative" confusion

More on Unionist "Unity", this time from the other "cockpit" constituency:

A UUP MLA has said he would be "open" to discussions on an agreed unionist candidate for the marginal Fermanagh and South Tyrone constituency.

Tom Elliott was speaking after the DUP unveiled a campaign calling for one unionist representative to be on the ballot paper for next year's General Election.

The UUP man maintained the new electoral alliance his party has established with the Conservatives - who have stressed they would run candidates in all 18 Northern Ireland constituencies - should not "prohibit or preclude" talks with their main unionist rivals.

OK then...if he agrees with the concept of the pact and he has actually listened to the line Owen Paterson has kept repeating for the last three months or so, then what would be the point of those talks if they are to be about "joint" candidates?

When asked if the UUP could step aside as a result of such discussions, Mr Elliott replied: "I'm not ruling in or out anything.

I don't see the practical outworkings of it if the DUP think they are going to be a single candidate and win the seat, but all of that is a matter for discussion."

Huh? Either that last lunchtime pint has slowed down my thought-processes or Tom is talking gibberish there.

"The UUP MLA, who stated he was "relatively supportive" of his party's link with the Tories, argued his party was better positioned to reclaim the seat held by Sinn Fein since 2001."

"Relatively supportive"? George Orwell would have loved that mangling of the Queen’s. You either support the link or you don’t; for example, you can’t be a "relatively" "agreed" UUP-Conservative candidate. Having seen the nonsense spouted you can only hope that this is an unilateral "initiative" from Elliott and not something leaked out from the party’s hierarchy because his *logic* is all over the place with this interview; some more examples:

"We can't agree something without party agreement."

Oh ffs- that’s rather obvious isn’t it? Actually, reading his previous sentence, I’m pretty sure what he means here is that negotiations should take place at a senior not local level, but someone who’s offering himself up for the nation’s parliament should be able to do a much better job of expressing himself and handling the media than he’s managed with this effort.

Secondly, as previously suspected, it looks like Tom hasn’t quite yet got the grasp of what the UUP’s alliance with the Conservatives means- if that alliance is to continue, then the Conservatives views will need to be taken into account and...(one wonders how many times this fact will have to be repeated before it finally penetrates certain skulls) the Conservatives have said there will be a Conservative-approved candidate in all 18 Northern Irish constituencies.

"Speaking to the News Letter, the Fermanagh representative said: "The point I have made all along is that I have always been open to discussions but they can't be done through the public domain."

A point which would have read a lot better if Tom hadn’t himself used the public domain of The Newsletter to share with us his incoherent ramblings on the matter.

The whole article is a joke to be honest although to be fair to Elliott, the fault for that lies more with the lack of any clear direction from the party’s leadership on the issue of "agreed" candidates. A simple answer of “yes” or “no” is all that’s required and the sooner the better.
And if Elliott is to be “agreed” UUP-Conservative candidate for Fermanagh and S Tyrone then a crash course in what he's actually "agreeing" to might also be useful.

And that would appear...

...to be that:

The Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich has said that the controversial Polish politician Michal Kaminski is "today against anti-semitism".

If the Chief Rabbi of Poland says it, I'm not sure how much farther this particular allegation against Kamenski individually can go...

Speaking on the programme, the rabbi said that Mr Kaminski, an MEP for Poland's Law and Justice party, an ally of the Conservative Party in the European Parliament, was a "complicated person".

Yes, I think we've gathered that by now.

Quote of the day

George Soros (rest of the speech on the Open Society is also worth reading):

In the absence of perfect knowledge we need beliefs. I happen to believe in harsh reality, while other people believe in God.

Nevertheless I would argue that when society ignores the objective aspect of reality it does so at its own peril. If we try to avoid unpleasant situations by deceiving ourselves or the electorate, reality will punish us by failing to meet our expectations.

Yes, reality can be manipulated, but the results of our actions are governed not by our desires but by an external reality whose workings we cannot fully comprehend.