maineflyer 0 Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Strangely, despite the abundance of words and analyses, the observer never seemed to have what it took to win any wars. Distance prevented it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Perhaps distance could be applied to the problematic relationship between the club and our support...? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,325 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Think we should keep that bmck article somewhere where we can easily access it. It' s a pleasure to read and so much more original than those rants and cliches turned out by so -called professionals. Actually I never read the newspapers now; there is much more erudition showed by gersnet contributors - though I don't like the bad language. And I too have started to feel like Norris that I'm not really interested in football, just Rangers. Why is that? Partly nostalgia I guess - memories of being lifted up by my uncle to watch Henderson, McMillan, Millar, Brand and Wilson. The 2-3-5, WM formation, if you like. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggordy 0 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Just read it again, still fantastic ! The media in general deal in sensationalism and love to generate conflict. Going back to my college days and politics in particular. A book called " The Sun Wot Won It" [ 1992 ] describes how the newspaper ridiculed the Labour Party continually making them out to be idiots etc. The drip, drip effect was soon absorbed by the electorate and whenever anyone thought of the Labour party they thought of a bunch of idiots. Even people who never read the Sun heard others talking about it, TV programmes followed this track of what was thought of as populist opinion and it became cool for comedians to make jokes. The more the Labour Party tried to prove this was unjust and untrue, the more exposure it had and, subsequently, the more material the Sun et al had to manipulate. Maybe some similarities in our mhedia conflict but the Sun had Rupert Murdoch backing it while timmy has only some journos with an axe to grind. I think we have to bite back in a low key sort of way and choose our reactions carefully so as not to appear neurotic. We have to target who we complain to. For example, if the Retard prints something detrimental then we have to make our feelings known to the Sun. Let them slug it out while we keep a low profile. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 "Radical conservative"? What d'ya mean radical? Conservative I've no problem with (God bless you Margaret) but radical? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Fantastic thread. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it, even although my only Greek tragedy has been watching Georgios Samaras through the years. Barry you are a fantastic writer. The Gersnet is gifted with many great writers long may it continue. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Time for you to also get back to writing the "taxi" piece pete ! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 Time for you to also get back to writing the "taxi" piece pete ! I can't dream of competing at this level Craig but i will try and offer my thrupence now and again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted August 19, 2009 Author Share Posted August 19, 2009 It would be impossible to argue with the central tenet - that dignified silence ought to be balanced out with occassional bites to let them know RFC has teeth - and my only quibble would be that I think that's what we ARE doing. i don't think that's what RFC are doing, though i do think it's increasingly what we are doing. the "rangers for me" boycott is a solid example, but i would imagine as many people failed to buy it because they couldn't endure spiersian anti-prose for more than a few paragraphs. to get loosely to the point, i think the best way to keep away from petty, reactionary, digs is to have strong leadership. for various reasons the RST, DM and the assembly don't have the clout or will to take a decorous but teethy stance on all this. i think that's a pitty, because strong leadership has unifying qualities, it provides a strong model that the lowest common denominator can aspire to. without this, i think most of our attempts will be dispirate and easily dismisable. spiersy probably got hit in the pocket a bit, but i'm quite sure the bbc organisations/petitions almost had a negative effect. that said, my own personal point of view is yours. i would've been one of the ones in athens defending perciles, i imagine. i don't care what the BBC, or the media in general, say about rangers fans because it's impossible for me to feel marginalised or victimised or dishonoured by idiocy. i don't buy their papers, i don't pay a telly license. and i think, unlike pericles, you might be right that even just maintaining the high ground will win out in the end, even if we didn't hit back. the number one rebel rule: when you don't have any political or physical power or success, you adopt the moral high ground to win some back. i think there's a danger of us doing that which your stance avoids. celtic have been doing this for years, but now that they have the mighty pen, eventually all that "we're so hard done by, we're the victims of such abuse" is going to fall in on itself. rebellion is only romantic while you're oppressed; it's hard to play the rebel, or oppressed, when you're in fashion. eventually society'll see through it. that and the fact that europe's moved right a bit - the liberal-pluralism that hunts out oppressed people everywhere to love isn't as cool anymore. i think if we can maintain the high ground just a little bit longer it'll all fall in on itself. anyway, enough amblings. i better get back to work. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted August 19, 2009 Author Share Posted August 19, 2009 Actually I never read the newspapers now; there is much more erudition showed by gersnet contributors - though I don't like the bad language. sorry i like swear words, i think they're descriptive, but i really should keep them for the pub and out of writing but i agree - i don't see the point in reading people who are paid to disguise their love or hate of our club and their opinions. the only difference between fans who write and journalists is first-hand access to news. i think this is one of the big reasons why the papers are quick to ridicule online fans as radicals so often - if i can read b_s, s_a, frankie, or cammy for free, why would i pay to read mcnee or one of his ilk? And I too have started to feel like Norris that I'm not really interested in football, just Rangers. Why is that? Partly nostalgia I guess - memories of being lifted up by my uncle to watch Henderson, McMillan, Millar, Brand and Wilson. The 2-3-5, WM formation, if you like. i'll only over get to have seen henderson on video memories like that are probably bigger than football as a whole, especially in it's modern state. there's too big a gap between players and fans now to produce those sort of memories, i tend to think. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.