Sectarianism in Scotland - The Simpleton's Solace

[bmck 117]

I'd argue with all your qualifications but it'd distract the rightful focus on Frankie's awesome piece

[Frankie 8,570]

I'd argue with all your qualifications but it'd distract the rightful focus on Frankie's awesome piece

 

Not at all - no issues with the discussion taking interesting tangents.

[bmck 117]

Not at all - no issues with the discussion taking interesting tangents.

 

OK, I'll return to what MF and Zaps were saying after a long detour. We've been writing about this stuff for years. Often, when we do, people are kind enough to ask "Why isn't stuff like this in newspapers?". The question is usually rhetorical, but what's the real answer? People ask why it takes a fan to say it, when the club ought to be saying it. We point to various different things - the spinelessness of Rangers, the militancy of Celtic's friends in the media, the insidious influence of Catholics at parliament, the organisation of Celtic supporters - as if they are causes, when they in actual fact seem more like effects of a wind of change that's hard to define. A strengthened Rangers, a more balanced media, a less prominant Catholic representation in parliament would all lessen the impact, but they'd be going against a current - that's what makes that seem like unrealisable dreams. Catholic influence has always been insidious, they have always had friends in the media, we've never really even had to stick up for the fans before. What's changed? Everything has a history, and mostly everything can be defined - after my last article I decided to try and figure out with precision what it was. That's the only way the terms of the debate can be reclaimed, by knowing exactly what it is that's happening.

 

I started by looking at all the things written by fans on the subject. When you look at the tone of our writing, it's always one of a level, calm, but definite sense of injustice - what is the injustice? It seems to me that despite all the different emphases by different people there's a common thread. Justice means everyone being bound by the same rules. Even when the nominally protestant culture was dominant, there was no proscription (other than the odd kicking) on what Celtic fans could sing. If one group can sing bigotted songs, justice says that all groups ought to be able to sing bigotted songs. Laws or rules should not grant exemptions to one cultural or social group. That's the basic source of our injustice. It's the strength of that idea that underlies people asking why this stuff isn't said by the media, or by the club - we feel that people in positions of authority ought to be able to use that line of reasoning because it's basically true. That's how our culture works.

 

So I looked into why we thought that had to be true. Everything has a history, and that idea doesn’t exist in a vacuum – it came from somewhere and it gets its strength from something. Our dominant culture is liberal – not lefist liberal, but deeper than that. The liberal that places individual rights, equality under the law, and the right to live out life as you see fit regardless of your culture, so long as you don’t interfere with other people’s right to do the same. This is actually the offspring of Protestantism, but that’s another tangent. However, within the liberal tradition that has been dominant for a hundred years there is an internal history. The idea that laws or rules should not grant exemptions to one cultural group is called difference blind liberalism. It’s the idea that laws and public policy should essentially pretend that separate cultures do not exist and that laws are for everyone equally.

 

It’s this idea that underlies our sense of injustice at Celtic/Cultural Catholics being granted an exemption from the general rule which prohibits bigotry. It’s this idea that has protected us (and them) this far. It’s this deeply embedded idea of political philosophy that gives us our straightforward and intuitive sense of injustice when we’re singled out. However, this idea is functionally finished in terms of dominant liberal culture. The reason we’ve lost the terms of the debate is because this is an historical idea, now. It still has some influence, but it’s in the process of being replaced by what’s referred to as cultural resources liberalism, which gives a theoretical framework to the idea of cultural exemptions within the liberal tradition. Cultural resources liberalism says that public policy/laws should not ignore cultural difference, but should recognise that the ability to express one’s self identity depends on having sufficient cultural resources to do so. Where public policy or laws inhibit a central part of a specific culture’s identity, there are grounds for that culture to be exempted from a general rule.

 

This is best explained by way of an example. There is a general law that demands helmets be worn by motor cyclists on grounds of general safety. Ignoring the debate on whether safety laws are paternalistic/justified or not, the contrast between the two approaches within the dominant liberal tradition is clear. Difference blind liberalism says that a person’s culture doesn’t matter with respect to general laws, so all groups must wear them. Cultural resources liberalism says that for Sikhs, for example, having to wear a helmet precludes the ability to wear a turban. Because wearing a turban is so central to Sikh self-identity, the removing of it essentially prohibits someone from being a Sikh, then they should be granted an exemption from the general rule. There are always limits to exemptions, but where those limits are subject to impact on other social groups/absolute moral philosophy. Now that we have a broad idea of the political philosophy that’s motivating people of academic classes across the board, we can begin to understand what form Celtic fans’ arguments are really taking and why it has such intuitive appeal to educated people (including, what it’s limits are and how it’s best to respond).

 

The essential argument that permits Celtic fans exemptions from general rules is that their ‘political’ songs constitute an integral part of their distinct and minority cultural identity. It’s this same argument that justifies separate schooling. Rangers do not get exempted because they have no distinct cultural identity – they are not really protestant, they are not a minority, they do not really have a distinct history that requires protection. They are part of the dominant culture - that is what culture they are attached to. The ability for Rangers fans to sing songs is perceived as extra, non-essential, to their cultural identity as part of the broad dominant culture in a way that it isn’t for Celtic fans (I’m not arguing the rights or wrongs of this, I’m just trying to explain why things are the way they are). This is what motivates John Reid to say “We’ve always been an Irish/Catholic club”, because the underlying idea of exemptions based on liberal cultural resources is predominant and is increasingly carrying the intuitive weight that the ‘difference blind’ liberalism that we turn to used to.

 

Another analogy which shows this is that of the Musqueam people in Canada. One guy got arrested for fishing with a net that was bigger than the new maximum length. They argued that fishing in this manner was for sustenance, yes, but also cultural identity as it constituted an integral part of their distinct culture. To stop it was to stop their ability to be Musqueam, and maintaining minority cultures is a public good. As such, they were granted an exemption from the general rule – but their additional claim to sell the fish commercially was thrown out. Fishing, it was argued, formed a central part of their cultural identity and history, but commercial selling was extra.

 

To draw it back to us and Celtic. The ‘orange’ strand of the dominant culture is seen as an extra – like selling fish commercially – and not sufficient grounds for a cultural exemption. So our songs etc get clamped down on. On the other hand, singing Irish songs for Irish culture is seen as integral – a central and immovable part of Irish identity so it’s considered part of the general exemption based on a distinct Irish/Catholic identity. While this may piss people off, I think it’s infinitely useful to know. It helps us understand in clear terms why it is they get special treatment – what current there is in the culture that seems to make it intuitive for other people and not for us – and also how it may be criticised without recourse to the current sense of injustice that’s been getting us nowhere because it’s going out of fashion. All our objections lie on the ‘rules should apply to everyone’ argument that used to hold weight, but doesn’t now. A better line of approach would say argue along the lines than what we see at Parkhead is an extra rather than essential part of Irish minority, or that what we find in Ibrox is infact central to some sort of distinct protestant culture separate from the dominant culture.

 

Anyway, I’ll get back to MF and Zappa’s thoughts and how it fits into this, and some more practical suggestions on a better approach to this later. Just some food for thought. Apologies for the long read – some things, especially things of this sort, can’t be said briefly.

Edited March 25, 2011 by bmck

[Zappa 0]

A better line of approach would say argue along the lines than what we see at Parkhead is an extra rather than essential part of Irish minority,

 

Most of them aren't even Irish, they're Scottish. I've got English, Russian and Indian ancestors, but my non-Scottish lineage on one side of my family doesn't give me special rights to be exempt from new emerging rules in Scotland where I was born. Why should a Scot with Irish ancestors be different?

[Jim1955 12]

It may seem extreme but we stand in some danger of being thrown out our nest by the cuckoo in our midst. I am appalled by the organised, and well organised it must be admitted campaign against us. They are detemined to set the parameters of the paradigm and any dissent is met with coordinated cries of "Injustice"

[maineflyer 0]

It may seem extreme but we stand in some danger of being thrown out our nest by the cuckoo in our midst. I am appalled by the organised, and well organised it must be admitted campaign against us. They are detemined to set the parameters of the paradigm and any dissent is met with coordinated cries of "Injustice"

While it might not pander to the more cerebral bears, the most powerful tactic against these orchestrated campaigns may well be simply telling them to fuck off.

[Zappa 0]

I was just on NewsNow and thought I'd check out the Timmy activity on there to see what their minions who can write are up to. Came across this article released today - http://www.sconews.co.uk/latest-edition/7689/new-goals-on-bigotry/

 

New goals on bigotry

 

Church calls for fresh approach to tackling sectarianism after anti-Catholic chanting blighted League Cup final tie

 

The Church is calling for a new plan to tackle sectarianism after what was billed as a ‘showpiece’ League Cup final between Celtic and Rangers was marred by sustained anti-Catholic chanting in spite of renewed pleas for an end to bigoted behaviour.

 

Peter Kearney, director of the Catholic Media Office, said the current approach to the problem, an issue that has become known as ‘Scotland’s shame,’ was ‘putting the cart before the horse.’

 

Better behaviour call

 

Before last weekend’s Hampden final Cardinal Keith O’Brien and the Right Rev John Christie, the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, issued a joint call urging fans not to ‘disgrace the good name of Scotland’ by engaging in ‘violence, abuse and bigotry.’ In spite of the church leaders’ plea, however, Rangers fans were heard singing sectarian songs throughout Sunday’s game, including the notorious ‘Famine song.’

 

Joe Bradley, editor of the Celtic Minded series of books, said the continued singing of the Famine song showed Scotland has not moved on from sectarianism.

 

“Obviously such songs have a long history in Scottish football,” he told the SCO this week. “These particular ones seemed to have disappeared in recent years from football’s public stage, but Sunday shows that they remain part of anti-Catholic and anti-Irish popular culture.

 

“The lack of subsequent appropriate and erudite comment on the part of many in Scotland, not least of all politicians, the police and football authorities, reflects a society struggling with ethnic and religious diversity and with a lack of in-depth knowledge and understanding with regards ethnic and religious prejudice and bigotry in this country.”

 

Socialist politician George Galloway told Irish journalist Phil Mac Giolla Bhain that he had been appalled at the chanting from the Rangers support.

 

“The Famine song, just one of the hate anthems that assaulted us from the TV, has been ruled as racist by an eminent judge,” Mr Galloway said. “The police, who praised the fans and the comparatively low number of arrests, clearly stood back and allowed the sectarian and racist abuse.”

 

Government stance

 

Justice Minister Kenny MacAskill, however, has claimed the game, which was played after the recent government summit on sectarianism, had been a ‘showpiece final.’

 

“This was the showpiece final everyone wanted to see, and it was a great advert for Scottish football,” he said. “The players, management and fans contributed to a memorable occasion, and I urge that their positive example inside the ground is replicated outside it over the course of the evening and beyond.”

 

First Minister Alex Salmond convened the recent summit between Celtic, Rangers and the police after the previous match between Celtic and Rangers saw a number of arrests and three red cards on the pitch.

 

Crown action

 

A spokesman for the Crown Prosecution service told the SCO that solicitor general Frank Mulholland, with the backing of Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini, recently recommended a number of measures to the Scottish Government regarding sectarianism, including increased maximum sentences for sectarian offences (from six months to five years); penalising people who use the internet to post sectarian abuse and the release of the breakdown of how and where sectarian offences were occurring in Scotland. The Scottish Government still has to legislate on these issues.

 

Peter Kearney, who has been calling for these figures to be made public for the past five years, said that information must be released so it can inform anti-sectarianism policy going forward.

 

“At the moment we don’t know the details of who is at risk of sectarian attack,” he said. “In 2006, which is the last figures we have, it showed Catholics were five times as much at risk. But we don’t have this data for the present day and we need it to find a solution.”

 

Mr Kearney also said that organisations like Nil by Mouth, which received a share of �£500,000 in funding the recent anti-sectarian summit, were taking the wrong approach to the problem.

 

“The current approach to sectarianism by giving funding to Nil by Mouth and others is like putting the cart before the horse,” he said. “We need to analyse the data first and then use that analysis to develop solutions. Right now we have it the other way around. Anti-sectarianism funding has to be informed by the Crown Office statistics so we can move away from one size fits all approach.”

 

Mr Kearney did welcome the recommendation that online sectarian abuse could also become a criminal offence with a lengthy sentence.

 

“The Prosecutor’s approach to sectarianism must cover all types of sectarian offence whether on line or in person,” he said. “It’s a welcome move in that any change sends out a clear signal that religious hatred will not be tolerated.”

[mainstandbear 0]

It never ends with that lot...all the rent-a-quotes falling over themselves to join the bandwagon.

the (boys of the) green brigade were happy to sing their 'political' songs' and not a word is mentioned. The sectarian nature of these songs is conveniently overlooked by the unco guid...were the ira not a collection of sectarian murder gangs...much like al qaida...where protestants were murdered just for the percieved sin of not being catholic. 'paddy mccourts fenian army'? is that not another name for the ira or ira wannabes?

as usual, its all about the big bad prods

[Zappa 0]

Also worth a mention here as it's definitely related to the discussion in general and also what Barry was saying, is that part of the catholic cabal's current multi-pronged campaign consists of persuading catholic Scots of Irish decent to say they are actually Irish on the census. Peter Kearney (yes the same one who helped get Dallas sacked from the SFA), the Director of Communications for the Catholic Church in Scotland and Joe Bradley, from 'Celtic-Minded' both spoke at a talk today at the 'Glasgow University Catholic Chaplaincy'. The talk was entitled "The ethnic Irish, ethnic Scots and the census of 2011: a Catholic Community in conversation asks about ticking the 'right' box?". The Celtic Supporters Association have actively been promoting this and just yesterday published an article entitled "Being Born in a Barn doesn't mean you are Horse" which invited Celtic fans to attend this so-called 'Scottish Catholic Media Office Monthly Talk'.

 

To some people this might all seem innocent, but this is all part of their cabal's wider 'sectarianism' campaign I can assure you.

[mainstandbear 0]

Also worth a mention here as it's definitely related to the discussion in general and also what Barry was saying, is that part of the catholic cabal's current multi-pronged campaign consists of persuading catholic Scots of Irish decent to say they are actually Irish on the census. Peter Kearney (yes the same one who helped get Dallas sacked from the SFA), the Director of Communications for the Catholic Church in Scotland and Joe Bradley, from 'Celtic-Minded' both spoke at a talk today at the 'Glasgow University Catholic Chaplaincy'. The talk was entitled "The ethnic Irish, ethnic Scots and the census of 2011: a Catholic Community in conversation asks about ticking the 'right' box?". The Celtic Supporters Association have actively been promoting this and just yesterday published an article entitled "Being Born in a Barn doesn't mean you are Horse" which invited Celtic fans to attend this so-called 'Scottish Catholic Media Office Monthly Talk'.

 

To some people this might all seem innocent, but this is all part of their cabal's wider 'sectarianism' campaign I can assure you.

 

Scotland = big bad sectarian country that hates catholics...suits their agenda as they claim victimhood and refuse to assimilate into the country that took their forefathers in.

maybe they should 'go home'