Latest news with #DaniGaravelli
The Herald Scotland
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Scots now so scunnered they want to set the world on fire with Reform
It's the same impulse that prompts people to take to the streets with Molotov cocktails or creep out of their beds in the dead of the night and fell a centuries-old sycamore. They are acts born of frustration and battered self-esteem, and they provide a temporary release. But then you wake up and see that nothing has changed. Except now the last community centre on your estate has all its windows panned in, and there's a vast emptiness where once there stood a tree. If the panic of SNP and Labour canvassers is anything to go by, the constituency of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse is teetering on the brink of just such self-immolation. In the by-election prompted by the death of Christina McKelvie, it now seems likely Reform will come second, and no longer inconceivable it could win, giving Holyrood its first Reform MSP. In a dilapidated street next to a shuttered off-licence, Nigel Farage's gurning face leers down from a billboard that reads 'Hamilton Needs Reform'. If the party does well, it won't be down to his personality; polls and vox pops suggest most Scottish voters still consider him 'an a***hole'. It will be because some people are so scunnered with the calcification of Scottish politics, they want to set the world on fire, while others are too scunnered to head to the polling booths and extinguish the blaze. This didn't happen with Ukip. In 2016, Scotland seemed largely immune to the allure of British nationalism, rejecting its manifesto of xenophobia and backing Remain by a ratio of 3:2. For a significant number of people back then, the answer to Farage's question: 'Who is really running [your] country?' wasn't Europe, but Westminster, while the anti-establishment party promising to cut them loose was the SNP. READ MORE: Dani Garavelli: A good death is an extension of a good life Dani Garavelli: Even for great writers, the pursuit of truth is perilous Dani Garavelli: Voters are done with politicians who talk big and act small ALMOST 10 years on, the SNP *is* the establishment party, tarnished by fraud allegations and paralysed by its own longevity. It failed to deliver on its promises, just as Labour had done before it, leaving its voters in a pilotless plane, floundering around for the eject button. For some in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, the eject button appears to be Reform, which is running neck and neck with Labour nationally. But we already know — from bitter experience — that populist leaders like Farage and Donald Trump build their electoral brand on a tissue of hate and lies. They offer us scapegoats and an outlet for our (self) contempt. They dangle the illusion of control in front of our faces like a hypnotist's watch. They conjure up six impossible things before breakfast. They swear they'll make our country great again while bringing it to its knees. Those who vote for them drink at a waterhole they know has been poisoned, then complain when they suffer have been handed lesson after lesson on how this ends. We have watched while Brexit wrecked trade, reduced EU immigration (but not net migration, despite Farage's odious 'Breaking Point' poster) and distanced us from Europe at precisely the point where Russia's invasion of Ukraine required a show of strength. What happened to the £350m a week that was supposed to transform the NHS? Where is the promised renaissance of marginalised working class enclaves like Sunderland? Lies, lies and more lies: that's all these parties offer. And if Brexit doesn't convince you, just look across the Atlantic: US citizens deported, foreign leaders antagonised, democracy hijacked. There's no dividend for those who voted Republican. According to various studies, the average family will be $4,000 dollars a year worse off as a result of Trump's tariffs. Around 275,000 people lost their jobs in March alone. Is your life in a rut? Do you crave upheaval? Well this is what it looks like, and it ain't pretty. In Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, the lies and race-baiting has already begun. Last week, Farage produced an ad that claimed Anas Sarwar had promised to prioritise the Pakistani community when he had done no such thing. It's a slander to falsely accuse another person of an obsession with race, and a piece of hypocrisy when the obsession is yours and yours alone. But Farage doesn't care. Rather he thrives on it because whipping up hatred is what he does best. He doesn't care that his policies don't stack up economically either, because he knows people believe what they want to believe, and because he presents himself as a free spirit, unshackled by focus groups and the other constraints of traditional party policies. Nationally and locally, Labour hasn't done itself any favours. Starmer allowed the Reform leader to dictate the terms of the debate, chasing his anti-immigration policies and rhetoric up a blind alley. Now Farage is nipping at the heels of Starmer's U-turns, pledging to end the two-child cap and reinstate the winter fuel payments. Only *Farage* didn't prevaricate for the best part of a year, nor is he obliged to demonstrate how he would fund them. Refused to appear IN Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, the party has sold itself short by fielding a candidate who seems to wish he was anywhere but a parliamentary election. At a time when all left-ish parties should be waging war on the right, Davy Russell has refused to appear at hustings and an STV debate. He appears apathetic about the prospect of ceding second place to Reform's Ross Lambie. Lambie's campaign statement includes the line: 'We are not daft; we know someone is up to no good if they'd rather spend £5,000 on being illegally smuggled into the country than spend £50 on a budget flight,' which makes no sense at all. The SNP have played a better game (aided by Labour who have gifted them the opportunity to call the contest 'a two-horse race'). In Katy Loudon, they have a decent candidate, and — while Labour are tussling over the same turf — they have set themselves up in opposition. Describing Farage as a 'clear and present danger', John Swinney said: 'It's time to unite behind our shared principles…and refuse to be divided by a man determined to destroy the values we hold dear.' This line is likely to be effective with liberal metropolitan types (like me) although disenfranchised voters who want a break from the status quo might prefer him to focus on what can be done to breathe life back into the clever move has been to draw attention to Reform's antipathy towards the Scottish Parliament. Swinney says Farage would use the party's Holyrood MSPs to bring down the institution they had been elected to. Perhaps Farage thinks this would be popular given Scots' own frustrations. But — like members of a fractious family — it's fine for us to rain curses down upon our 'tinpot' parliament, but hell mend any outsider who tries to diminish it. Devolution fears FARAGE should remember that, in 1997, devolution was not contentious; it was the settled will of the nation. Relinquishing power prised from Westminster would be a funny way for us to take back control. Perhaps voters leaning Reform-wards see a vote for Lambie as a one-off protest - something they can rescind at next year's Holyrood elections. But Farage's party has a particular momentum right now and once that juggernaut starts careening down the hill, it will be difficult to stop. The same is true of attacks on Holyrood. Sure, we should be pushing Scottish politicians to raise their game; but if we were to allow devolution to slip from our grasp, it would be difficult to reclaim it. It's something that requires protection, like democracy, as America is discovering to its cost.
The Herald Scotland
04-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Herald Scotland
More fool the politicians who took the bait of Kneecap's provocations
Last week, when it emerged Kneecap —a rap band posing as dissident Republicans — once told their audience: 'The only good Tory MP is a dead one. Kill your local MP,' Badenoch condemned their behaviour as 'totally unacceptable,' and called for them to be prosecuted. Long before these allegations surfaced, the then business secretary had blocked an arts grant to the band on the grounds of 'anti-British sentiment' — a move the band challenged, and which the new Labour government later accepted had been illegal. Like Hester, Kneecap apologised; unlike Hester, Kneecap is reaping the consequences of its actions, with a number of gigs already cancelled. John Swinney said they should also be axed from TRNSMT, while lord of the U-turns, Keir Starmer has said he doesn't think "individuals expressing those views should be receiving government funding". No-one is duty-bound to like Kneecap, or indeed rap music. It's a genre which, at its best, gives a voice to the dispossessed, and tackles controversial issues like social inequality and police brutality. We may be discomfited by the extreme nature of the sentiments expressed. But our discomfort is the point of the exercise. Its aim is to shake us out of our complacency, as all good art should. At its worst, however, it can feel like cosplay, a hijacking or commodification of an ideology for the purposes of self-promotion; a celebration of edginess for edginess's sake. Irish band Kneecap face being banned from TRNSMT IRA IMAGERY FOR me, Kneecap straddles that line. The band's love of the Irish language is deeply felt; it has much to say about the ceasefire generation. I very much enjoyed its film. And yet its relentless invocation of IRA imagery, its 'Brits Out' written on the cheeks of JJ Ó Dochartaigh's bum, and, above all, the gimmicky balaclava, though funny, and doubtless self-parodying, can feel a bit, I don't know, cheap? Because, whether or not you believe in the Republican cause, the costs of pursuing it were so high and are still being counted. READ MORE: Dani Garavelli: A good death is an extension of a good life Dani Garavelli: Even for great writers, the pursuit of truth is perilous Dani Garavelli: Voters are done with politicians who talk big and act small There was always a risk that Kneecap's laddish playing to the crowd would undermine its serious intent. And so it has come to pass. Two pieces of footage -—one containing the call to kill your MP, the other chants of 'Up Hamas and Hezbollah' — have been dredged up to discredit its entirely legitimate condemnation at Coachella of Israel's US-funded genocide. More fool Kneecap, you might say. It walked straight into its own trap. But also — and to a much greater degree — more fool those politicians who have taken the bait. They have mustered more outrage over the on-stage maunderings of a band whose entire shtick is to noise up people like them, than over war crimes being perpetrated by the ultranationalist leader of a rogue state. To witness Swinney and Starmer holding forth on the iniquities of Kneecap as if they were facing down some grand moral threat is frankly pitiful. Why are politicians of their stature wasting breath they could be using to confront Benjamin Netanyahu on a trio of Irish musicians? (Image: First Minister John Swinney) And — if they're so very invested in what Kneecap has to say — why don't they tell us if they see the band's Coachella statements as an incitement to a US visa revocation, or a shrewd analysis of a situation those in positions of power are too milquetoast to mention? 'Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people' Kneecap said, and 'it is being enabled by the US government who arm and fund Israel despite their war crimes.' Come on then, ye great defenders of public propriety? Is there any part of this statement you believe to be untrue? While you're at it, why don't you clarify if you are ok with the idea, frequently promulgated, that criticism of the Israeli government is inherently anti-Semitic? But they won't. Far easier to call on festivals to boycott a loose-lipped rap band than to call on Trump to reinstate sanctions against violent settlers in the illegally occupied West Bank or to call for/ implement a total ban on the sale of arms to Israel. CALL TO BAN BAND MEANWHILE, I wonder what motivation Lord Walney — aka John Woodcock — might have for urging Glasgow City Council, the Scottish government or UK government to take action if TRNSMT promoters DF Concerts do not? Woodcock is the chair of a defence sector lobby organisation and last year paid an Elnet-funded visit to Israel. Elnet was founded as a pro-Israel advocacy group and exists to promote cooperation between Europe and Israel. Woodcock was axed from his role as independent adviser on Political Violence and Disruption in February after multiple claims of conflicts of interest. With most politicians laying low, it is being left to other bands to rally to Kneecap's defence and to musicians, writers and documentary makers to fill a moral vacuum. For this they receive little thanks. Look at the response to Louis Theroux whose documentary The Settlers exposes the contempt some Israeli settlers on the West Bank have for the lives of Palestinians. Theroux starts off with his usual faux-naif shtick. Like Ka in The Jungle Book, he lulls his prey with soothing susurrations, as he winds his coils ever tighter around them. The idea is to appear neutral; to provide a blank canvas onto which others will project their dysfunction. And so it goes as he meets Ari Abramowitz, a Texan-born settler who objects to Theroux's use of the word Palestine on the grounds that he doesn't believe it exists, and a rabbi who calls Palestinians 'camel-riders'. He stays calm as IDF soldiers try to prevent Arab farmers harvesting their olives. But when it comes to Daniella Weiss, the so-called mother of the settler movement, he can no longer affect disinterest. As she lays out, with a manic grin, her vision of a West Bank and Gaza from which Palestinians have been expunged, he becomes increasingly agitated, until, finally, he brands her indifference to the suffering of Palestinians 'sociopathic'. Read More: DIRTY WORK AT one point, Weiss pushes Theroux in an attempt to get him to retaliate. But the documentary's sharpest truth is more quietly delivered: an admission by Weiss that her organisation, Nachala, is doing Netanyahu's dirty work for him. When Theroux asks her if the settlers force the Israeli government's hands by building small residential outposts, which grow and grow, until the Israeli government has no choice but to recognise them,' she answers: 'We do not force the government. We do what they cannot do for themselves.' Banging a pointer on a map covered in such settlements, she adds: 'Even if you take Netanyahu now: he is happy with what we do here and with our plans to build Jewish communities in Gaza. He can't say he is happy. He says the opposite. He says: 'It's not realistic'. Good! We will make it realistic.' It feels like —as he made his film -—Theroux realised that there are some atrocities so unconscionable that even weaponised passivity is not enough; that sometimes we are duty-bound to articulate our horror. If only all those angered by musicians and documentary-makers could share in his epiphany. If only they could stop picking on pointless targets, and direct their righteous anger at those hellbent on erasing an entire population.
