logo
Virtue signalling from Bearsden Bolsheviks won't beat curse of racism

Virtue signalling from Bearsden Bolsheviks won't beat curse of racism

Calling everyone scum and horrible people might evoke cheers and feet-stamping from the Bearsden Bolsheviks, but it merely deflects our gaze from how complicit the political elites of Scotland and the UK have been in driving working-class people into the arms of Reform.
'All parties in Scotland and the UK have massively let down working class people,' Mr Kerr tells a full-house of 250. 'You see it every day when you walk the streets of this city and see the state it's in. You see it in my constituency where people can't get houses and in the state of the houses of the people who can.'
The event was aimed at tackling the rise of right wing politics (Image: Gordon Terris)He cites the scourge of private landlordism 'who are taking the absolute piss out of our economy. And not only wrecking our economy but soaking up investment capital and wrecking lives in the process. That's the root. That economic need and neglect has always been fertile ground for the far right.
'But I'm not going to say that everyone who votes for Reform is a fascist. There's a vacuum which Reform fill.'
He reminds us of how many working-class people recently voted for Reform in Clydebank and Easterhouse. 'We have a job to go into these communities and fill that gap which Reform are seeking to fill.'
He dismantles First Minister John Swinney's fatuous £10k summit which recently brought together the troughers and frauds of the Scottish civic elite under the pretence of opposing extremism. 'That was manna from heaven for Reform,' Said Mr Kerr. 'It was entirely the wrong tactic. That looked like the Scottish establishment all sitting down together: it was a gift to Reform.'
As the others vied with each other to express horror at the prospect of Reform rising, this Glasgow councillor was telling them what voters in Larkhall were telling me the previous day: they're sick of being gas-lit by a class of superannuated professionals telling them how to behave; how to speak; how to eat; how to raise their children and then cancelling them if they fail to comply.
Even so, it's good to be here at the Boardwalk events venue in Brunswick Street in the heart of Glasgow's Merchant City. The previous day, I'd walked a while with Reform's candidate in the Hamilton, Stonehouse and Larkhall by-election. I'd needed to understand why many of Scotland's everyday working people feel drawn to Nigel Farage and a party which preys on their fears and their exasperation and channels them towards something ugly.
Read more
But I also needed to be confirmed in my own core beliefs that the scourge of racism erodes this country's health and averts our gaze from that which causes most damage to our society and those who profit from it. Among them the predations of unfettered capitalism; the low wages; the tax avoidance of our largest corporations; the health inequality and the instincts of a Labour Government to build a multi-billion-pound war economy intended to soften us to the inevitability of war with Russia.
We needed to be reminded that Scotland's legal and political establishment, lobbied by the Scottish Police Federation, have spent years and a lot of money seeking to undermine the public inquiry into the death of Sheku Bayoh, who died in police custody in Kirkcaldy ten years ago. And how this has been accompanied by a campaign to defame him and destroy his family. Aamer Anwer, his family's lawyer, claimed they had 'treated his colour as a weapon'.
We all needed to be reminded about the Park Inn Incident on June 26, 2020 in Glasgow. This was the mass stabbing by asylum-seeker Bahreddin Adam which left six people wounded. He was eventually killed by police, the first time they'd shot and killed anyone since 1969 in Scotland. Bahreddin Adam had made 72 calls to various social services before he snapped.
This was in the midst of the Covid pandemic where asylum seekers were detained in hotels, isolated, neglected and treated like caged animals by a liberal political administration who talk big about racism but which pay a suite of private facilities companies millions to take these poor people off their hands.
At conferences such as these there are always workshops and the trick is to separate the genuinely interesting ones from those organised by groups which seek to hitch their own questionable agendas to something virtuous: in this case the good fight against racism.
On Saturday, I dropped into one featuring a documentary called 72 Calls: The Park Inn Incident, in which survivors of the attack spoke with compassion about Bahreddin Adam and the mental despair that they and he had endured while being moved around like livestock. It also exposed Britain's inhumane asylum system whose main purpose seems to be to dehumanise and degrade other human beings so much that it will send a message to other poor souls.
The conference featured debates and workshops (Image: Gordon Terris) These people are expected to live on a daily allowance of £9 which hasn't risen in 25 years. Their often-remote locations seemed designed to deter connecting with local communities and the prospect of being ordered to move location at a few minutes' notice disrupts children's education. Far Right groups target communities where asylum hostels are known to exist to spread lies and disinformation about their luxury conditions. And when a Labour Prime Minister makes speeches about Britain being an "island of strangers" they're emboldened.
This event is happening in the middle of a district which bears the names of the countries and communities that Britain ransacked and then sold into slavery. Our continuing wars of adventure throughout the last two centuries have literally caused the geopolitical upheaval that brings many of these people to our shores. I'd welcome them all and call it restorative justice. Someone has to pay for what we did to their countries. And if we're that generation then so be it.
I heard, Sabir Zazai, Chief Executive of the Scottish Refugee Council, speak much more softly and authentically about how to combat racism than most of the sloganeers waving their fists for likes in the opening session.
Mr Zazai cited the race riots in Southport and north England as what can happen when you dehumanise an entire race on their colour country of origin. 'Women wearing scarves are now feeling unsafe,' said Mr Zazai. 'They ask us the dreaded question: 'is it safe for us to go out' or 'will my accommodation be attacked'. This is new.'
Read more
Refugees and migrants ran small businesses and added to Scotland's arts and culture with their food and music, he reminded us. 'We need to fight back with love and compassion. Let's get to know each other better. Offering people sanctuary and protection can be unifying and uplifting for a community. Treat them as fellow human beings. Tell them that Scotland is as much their home as ours.'
Earlier, Matt Kerr rebuked his own party leader for his Enoch Powell rhetoric. 'I'll tell you something,' he said. 'We need to refuse to be strangers by talking to the person next to you and holding their hand. You pick them up when they need it. That's life. That's the antidote to all of this. That's where it begins. You start in your community. You have the conversations with your family, with your friends and it'll be difficult but have courage and stand together.'
It's just that, in the hands of a political and trade union class who have dehumanised working-class feminists and who are mocking once more the practice of Christianity, the anti-racism message rings hollow.
The Stand up to Racism campaign has never been more important, but some of its loudest and entitled messengers are its worst ambassadors.
Kevin McKenna is a Herald writer and columnist and is Scottish Feature Writer of the Year. This year is his 40th in newspapers. Among his paltry list of professional achievements is that he's never been approached by any political party or lobbying firm to be on their payroll.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Clyde Metro possible routes and cost known by 2027
Clyde Metro possible routes and cost known by 2027

Glasgow Times

time36 minutes ago

  • Glasgow Times

Clyde Metro possible routes and cost known by 2027

Consultants are currently developing a case for investment which is seen as an 'essential' step towards providing a 'mass transit' system. Glasgow Labour has claimed the Metro scheme is a 'stalled plan dressed up as progress' — with no start date and no funding committed. READ NEXT:Glasgow's drug consumption centre is working says health secretary Transport spokesman Cllr Saqib Ahmed said: 'Clyde Metro should be Glasgow's next great infrastructure revolution — but right now, it's just another SNP soundbite.' A spokesman for the city's SNP group said the cross-party Glasgow City Region cabinet has allocated £12m to advance the business case, which Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT) is progressing. 'That's a considerable amount of spend and effort for a soundbite,' he added. The funding, which will support the development of the case for investment (CFI), is from the City Deal, a more than £1bn infrastructure programme funded by both the UK and Scottish governments. Council officials have said the CFI will identify the funding strategy for 'subsequent stages of the Clyde Metro programme'. READ NEXT:'Don't blame us': Taxis hit back in Glasgow city centre transport row They also said 'one of the key objectives is to improve the sustainable transport access to Glasgow Airport' and this will 'continue to feature as a key priority in all the options we are exploring.' At a council meeting on Tuesday, Cllr Kieran Turner, Labour, asked whether there would be potential routes and costs at the end of the CFI process. An official said: 'Yes, absolutely. At the moment, as part of the initial engagement, we have four network options which were presented. 'Those network options will then get synthesised into a preferred network.' The process will involve deciding on which modes of transport will be included, such as heavy rail or tram, as well as a recommendation on 'what the first move needs to be'. Cllr Turner added: 'Until people start to see something that is a little more concrete, even in terms of option selection, there are still going to be questions in our constituents' minds around if any of this is ever going to happen. 'Is lots of money just getting spent on consultants? And will anything come of this?' The official said there will be answers at the end of the case for investment, including potential timelines. It will be 'absolutely critical' for securing 'a commitment from government to give funding', he said. Public consultation on the project could be held in spring or summer next year. After the meeting, Cllr Ahmed said: 'Communities have waited too long for transformation. Instead, they've been left behind by a government more focused on branding than building. 'Glasgow Labour will keep fighting for real investment in our transport network.' Labour want a commitment from the Scottish Government to fund phase one of the Metro project and a 'clear, costed and deliverable' construction timeline. The SNP spokesman said Clyde Metro is 'an agreed national transport priority'. 'Labour's failure to deliver the type of modern transport system developed by our peers during their time in power in Glasgow is why we have decades of missed opportunities to catch up on. 'If Labour councillors want to start being constructive perhaps they can insist from their party colleagues that we received a share of the £15bn the Chancellor is allocating to English cities for major transport projects.'

Reeves hits back at spending review critics claiming ‘my choices are Labour choices'
Reeves hits back at spending review critics claiming ‘my choices are Labour choices'

The Independent

time37 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Reeves hits back at spending review critics claiming ‘my choices are Labour choices'

Rachel Reeves has hit back against her critics in Labour in a passionate defence of her economic policy as she fends off a cabinet backlash over her spending review. Labour heavyweights, including Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper have been holding out on agreeing spending settlements with the Treasury, accusing the chancellor of trying to impose 'austerity 2.0' and cuts to public services. Among the issues being fought over are funding for local government finances, social housing budgets, border control, and policing. But in an exclusive article for The Independent about the announcement on extending free school meals to 500,000 more of the poorest pupils, Ms Reeves underlined her record of trying to rebalance the economy in favour of the less well off. The chancellor has leaned on her own childhood experience growing up in Lewisham during the Margaret Thatcher years, where she recalls school lessons in prefab huts, which she said sparked a 'sense of injustice'. Ms Reeves has previously spoken of the "tough choices" she has been forced to make because of the inheritance she had from the Tories. But she emphasised in her piece how she has found money for free school meals and - at a time when she is under fire for making £5bn in disability benefit cuts - and had also found the cash for above-inflation increases to universal credit from 2026. She said: 'These are our choices. They are Labour's choices. And they are the right choices. It is about breaking down barriers to opportunity, driving better behaviour, attainment and wellbeing in our schools. It's about putting more money – nearly £500 a year – back into the pockets of working parents every year. And it is about helping those who need it the most, so every child has the best start in life.' The chancellor has often been accused of being cold and out of touch by her critics, with complaints over some of the choices she has made since coming to office. She is currently looking for the estimated £5bn needed to reverse her cuts to winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners and end the two-child benefit cap. The toughest fight she is facing is with Ms Rayner's Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) where the deputy prime minister is fiercely resisting the tightening of funds for councils and cuts to the housing budget. But Ms Reeves has looked to her own background as the daughter of primary school teachers in south east London to explain her own philosophy as she approaches her announcement next week. She said: 'Like most people, my politics were shaped by my upbringing. I grew up in the 1980s and 1990s under Margaret Thatcher and John Major's governments. I saw firsthand the impact of underinvestment in our country's state schools. 'My sixth form was housed in a couple of prefab huts in the playground. The library, meant to be a sanctuary of learning, was turned into a classroom simply because there were more students than space. 'I felt then, as I do now, that successive Conservative governments did not care about schools like mine, communities like mine, or the kids I grew up with. She went on: 'That sense of injustice is why I joined the Labour Party. I wanted to do something about it. I want to tackle some of the burning injustices within our society. I wanted to give every child, whatever their backgrounds, the same opportunities to thrive. 'It is the same motivation that drives me today as chancellor of the Exchequer.' She highlighted how she had brought in leftwing policies to close the gap between the wealthy and ordinary people in the UK. 'I ended the tax loophole which exempts private schools from VAT and business rates so we could put more money into our state schools,' she said. 'I put the money aside to begin rolling out free breakfast clubs in every primary school to put more pounds in parents' pockets and to give children the best start in life. And it is why we have announced today that from next year we are giving every child with a parent in receipt of Universal Credit free school meals.' She added: 'Britain's renewal is about people. It is about the next generation. By investing in our children, we are investing in the future of our country, making sure that every young person can fulfil their potential, and that Britain can thrive. This is the promise of change. This is the promise we are delivering.' The intervention comes as Ms Reeves and her team in the Treasury brace themselves for criticism over expected cuts in her spending review, which sets out government finances for the coming years, next week. Already, senior Labour figures have privately attacked her for sticking to her election manifesto pledges not to raise income tax, VAT or employee contributions to national insurance. One senior source said this would mean 'there will be a lot of cuts' and the party will be forced 'to ditch many of its manifesto spending pledges.' Several Labour MPs backed by trade unions are now openly pushing for so-called wealth taxes, with a leaked memo revealing that Ms Rayner had led the charge. The deputy prime minister called for eight wealth taxes in what is seen as 'a progressive alternative' to Ms Reeves' 'austerity'. This included increasing dividend tax rates for higher earners and targeting property traders who use corporate structures to avoid stamp duty.

Increasing UK defence spending is worst way to support jobs
Increasing UK defence spending is worst way to support jobs

The National

time41 minutes ago

  • The National

Increasing UK defence spending is worst way to support jobs

THERE are many reasons to oppose the UK Government's push towards increased militarism in an already unstable and increasingly violent world. Adding more bombs – especially nuclear bombs – to the mix is not going to improve matters. The only thing that ever has, has been years and decades longs work by diplomats to de-escalate tensions and to build peace. As Master Yoda once said on being accused of being a 'great warrior', 'wars not make one great'. READ MORE: Douglas Ross accused of 'bullying witnesses' in key Holyrood committee By far the worst reason to support the extra spending is the usual 'enemy-at-the-gates' emotional fearmongering that proponents usually cast about when they want more money for more bombs but the second worst is the claim that such spending will 'support jobs and the economy'. I'm going to make the case that spending the same amount of money on just about anything else would do more good for the UK and Scottish economies. The scale of the UK's proposed militaristic expansion is vast. We don't yet know how much extra they plan to spend but an increase from the current 2.3% of GDP to 3% (the minimum required to finance the proposed fleet of new submarines and nuclear-armed fighter jets) would cost around £20 billion more than is currently being spent every year. Increasing spending to match Donald Trump's demand that the UK spends 5% of GDP would cost £80 billion a year. Bear in mind that this is on top of the UK's already proportionately massive spending on military matters – it's instructive to note that the UK spends more per capita on nuclear weapons alone than any nuclear-armed nation other than the USA and Israel at around £90 per person per year (that's more than I spend on my mobile phone SIM contract!). Trump isn't likely to get his wish of Britain spending 5% of GDP – that's about as much as was being spent during the Falklands War when Britain's GDP was less than half the size is currently is – and it's not a commitment that the UK have made quite yet so we should only talk about that £20 billion increase for now. What do we actually get for that? In economic terms, the material assets are useless. The nuclear submarines and nuclear armed jets don't themselves produce anything or add value to the economy in the way that a factory might. If they're ever used, they have a negative economic value but Britain rarely counts the cost of its wars as applied to the people we're bombing or supporting others to bomb. Even if they're not used, they are likely to have a negative economic impact on Scotland. Military spending is exempt from the Barnett Consequentials that decide the Block Grants given to devolved governments so if the spending comes not from increased taxes (ruled out by Rachel Reeves) or from increased borrowing (ruled out by Rachel Reeves) but from cuts to Barnett spending like education, social security or something similar then that will mean cuts to Holyrood which is far less able to compensate via borrowing or increased taxes. This will have a devasting impact on public services unlikely to be compensated for even by the few jobs that will be 'created or sustained' in Scotland (a number that will likely go up and down in its estimate in line with pro-independence polling, as such UK-backed jobs so often do). How many jobs are we talking? The Government estimates that the £20 billion will buy 31,000 jobs. How many in Scotland? Unknown, but 20,000 of those jobs have been announced for the submarine programme to be based in Barrow-on-Furnace, 9,000 will be dedicated to building new nuclear warheads – most of which will be based in Aldermaston and the remaining 2,000 will be split across '6 munition factories' of which an unknown number may or may not be based in Scotland. £20 billion for 31,000 jobs is £645,161 per job, per year. That £20 billion per year would support far more jobs if it was directed to civilian research and engineering as it would go on to boost the economy further through 'economic multipliers' and the inventions and technology that would come out of that research. It's estimated that every £1 of public spending on civilian healthcare research, for instance, returns at least £2 to the economy whereas defence spending usually breaks about even – less so if the spending comes at the cost of public spending elsewhere. Given that the weapons are economically useless if they're not used and economically negative if they are used, then if the goal is supporting jobs it'd be more effective to pay each of those engineers £645,161 every year to stand by the side of the road and wave at traffic – at least they'd go on to spend that money supporting jobs in the wider economy instead of it sitting there in a bomb waiting to blow up someone else's economy, house and family. Less flippantly, we could give every single person in the UK a £300 end-of-year bonus for the same price – not quite a sustainable Universal Basic Income but that would become a very valuable economic stimulus package on the scale of the similar dividend that residents of Alaska receive every year. There may be legitimate reasons to invest in military spending but stop trying to either frighten us or bribe us into accepting the illegitimate ones instead. Simply put, if your goal is 'jobs' then don't invest in 'defence'. Invest in just about anything else. Maybe even invest in peace. Then you won't need the bombs at all.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store