I was thinking more about this issue over the weekend with some of the stuff I was reading with some suggesting that Chris Hoy's comments may actual highlight how Scotland has suffered as part of the UK sport set up. So he says, competitors benefit from using facilities in (generally) England. Others could say, why don't we have these facilities ourselves?
Whilst is it nice to have elite athletes achieving at the highest level, maybe the top priority of an Independent Scotland should not be to produce another Chris Hoy but to treble or quadruple the number of young people in this country who compete in track cycling in the first ten years. That ambition should of course extend to all sports and whilst The Scottish Government does have control over some sport funding, it does not have total control over spending.
However, this thread was more about the reaction to Hoy's comments and Mary raised the issue of 'cybernats'. Governgirl, you questioned whether nationalists were attempting to silence people who disagree with them. I have to assume you were referring to 'Scottish nationalists' here, as most would, but take a look at the link below which addresses a number of issues, two of which have cropped up in this thread.
Is it the unionist who are really the nationalists? If so, what does that make many pro-Independence supporters - that's right, just plain only pro-Independence supporters. Many don't consider themselves nationalists at all - Patrick Harvie for instance - it is the media's tactic to associate Independence with nationalism, in the hope is discourages support.
Is it then the media who are trying to silence those who don't agree with them? The article below also addresses a couple of the issued I was thinking about when I contributed to the Mike Russell thread - that generally the media is so biased in favour of the No campaign, although there have been a couple of softening stances at The Herald, Sunday Herald and maybe even The Daily Record lately in my view. I've said before, that's fine for the printed press as it is privately funded and no-one is forced to buy newspapers. The BBC however is supposed to be balanced in its political coverage and it is not - it is a disgrace and its just not a level playing field. The fact we have even reached the stage where we have a referendum is a success.
Mary, you said something like its a shame the view of fair minded SNP / Independence supporters are not getting through. Have you considered why?
http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-opinion/7496-scottish-unionism-british-nationalism-and-their-creeping-fascist-tendenciesMentioned in the article is the story about the comments made by a former UK Cabinet member, ex Labour Chancellor no less Denis Healey. Only a day or so before The Scotsman decided to print a story about an MSP allegedly making comments about the merits of different transport methods, Mr Healy gave an interview, which other media outlets picked up on. Speaking about the impact of oil revenues on Scottish nationalism (even I have been affected) he said
I think we did underplay the value of the oil to the country because of the threat of nationalism but that was mainly down to Thatcher.
Full article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/may/29/scottish-independence-oil-healeyOf course, we know that now from the McCrone Report, which was classified as Top Secret and since the mid 70's we've had Labour and Conservative governments working in tandem to ensure the importance of oil revenues and what they could do for Scotland never became apparent to the public.
As a brief summary, the McCrone said
“lt must be concluded therefore that large revenues and balance of payments gains would indeed accrue to a Scottish Government in the event of independence provided that steps are taken either by carried interest or taxation to secure the government ‘take’.
“Undoubtedly this would banish any anxieties the government might have had about its budgetary position or its balance of payments. The country would tend to be in chronic surplus to quite an embarrassing degree and its currency would become the hardest in Europe with the exception of perhaps the Norwegian kroner”.
So what do you think is more befitting of a national newspaper - The Russell story or the Healey story? Only one appeared in The Scotsman, unless their search function is not working.
People of my age have been lied to our whole lives by successive UK Governments.
Better Together? Really?