Racism is an odd beast - laughable in its atavistic - and usually illiterate - certainties, but frightening in its possibilities. I've dealt with two examples in the last 24 hours, one from a ScotNat, the kind of supporter my party, or indeed any party can do without. The other was a strange one -
I went into GuitarGuitar, and my eye was caught by a bangitar - a hybrid instrument, consisting of a banjo body and resonator affixed to a guitar neck, with six strings, unlike the banjo's four or five. It is tuned like a guitar, and offers guitarists the opportunity to instantly play the banjo with guitar fingering - or so it would seem. I have a five string banjo (both my guitar and banjo skills are rudimentary), but I was in enough trouble with the guitar, as a sax and clarinet player, so I gave up on banjo stringing and tuning, took off the fifth string, and retuned as the top four strings of the guitar. This works reasonably well for me, but it's definitely not right ...
So I went on to YouTube in search of banjitar advice, most of which was either sales pitches from manufacturers, or enthusiastic new purchasers, "I've just bought my banjitar and it's great!" etc. But one site - I won't identify it - offered bangitar lessons, the guy was knowledgeable, and he offered the insight I needed - that the bangitar, played as a guitar, sounded crap, and the only way to make it sound good was to master banjo picking and strumming styles. He was right, and I was grateful, but there was a jarring note. He said "The banjitar is a kinda half-bred thing - a bit like Obama!" and he laughed. I offered the comment that it was a pity he had made such a racist remark about his President, and asked if it was really necessary. This produced a torrent of abuse, and the information that I was blocked. He followed up this morning with another, even more abusive comment on my YouTube profile. (He is now blocked by me.) Ah, the American Deep South Republican Right - good ole boys - a pickin', a pluckin' and - well, best left unsaid!.
NUCLEAR MATTERS
The nuclear lobby has been lying low since Fukushima, after an initial bout of futile propaganda, but they've crept out of their nuclear shelters since then, and are beginning the insidious fightback - radiation's not so bad really, it may even be good for you, the real threat to humanity is wind farms polluting the landscape, alternative energy will never work, the wind doesn't always blow, the waves don't always wave, etc.
The symbiotic twin of nuclear energy, the WMD industry, is also out and about, alarmed at the prospect of losing their WMD dumping ground, Scotland, and the vital submarine bases. I was more than disturbed that the SNP government seems to be rather less hostile to nuclear submarines, and appeared to be welcoming the retention of nuclear submarine bases in Scotland as part of the defence-as-job-creation scheme thinking that regularly pollutes and distorts rational debate of defence matters.
Now I accept that there are difficult moral questions when one comes to weaponry, because it is designed to kill and maim other human beings, and the scale of horror from, say, the flamethrower, designed to burn alive another human to the baton, designed to inflict a sore head, involves moral dilemmas and choices even in individual cases. Unless one rejects all defence concepts for a nation and all conventional weaponry - I don't - choices have to be made.
When one comes to the incinerations of millions and the pollution of the planet, human imagination quails, and human morality often fails. "I am become Death - the destroyer of worlds." The Bhagavad Gita, quoted by Robert Oppenheimer as the full horror of what the implications of his work dawned on him as he observed the first nuclear explosion. This choice should be simple, and for me and many others, it is - starkly simple.
But as a nuclear-powered submarine is not a weapon in itself - it is the carrier of a weapon or weapons system, and the nuclear reactor that powers it is not a weapon - why should we object to it, especially if it provides jobs?
Well firstly, I reject the defence as job creation scheme argument, and believe that defence policy and expenditure should be based solely on defence considerations. But the UK is deeply in the grip of the military/industrial complex and the armaments industry, and all our politicians are infected by this kind of thinking. It is the kind of thinking that powers graft and corruption wherever and whenever it occurs.
Secondly, I believe the retention of nuclear-power submarines in Scotland is the thin edge of a nuclear wedge - it compromises the SNP's position on nuclear power and WMDs.
Nuclear power is unacceptably dangerous. A young serviceman, armed and drunk, attacked his shipmates and killed his officer on a nuclear submarine recently. He has just been sentenced to 25 years for this crime. A recent television documentary on nuclear subs showed a crew member being disciplined for drunkenness on board the the sub. It's not so long ago since two armed nuclear subs crashed into each other on the high seas.
This is the nuclear reality that nuclear proponents would like to slide over, with their emphasis on the safety of the systems and procedures. No system is safe against human fallibility, against human error, not to mention human greed and corruption in defence and civil nuclear contracts in the manufacture and maintenance of equipment. The nuclear error is one that humanity cannot afford to make - other errors pale into insignificance beside it. But we have politicians who are the moral and intellectual equivalent of a five-year old playing with a loaded gun or a live grenade.
Keep nuclear, in all its manifestation, out of our new Scotland.