With considerable justification, I may be accused of overusing the word ‘idiot’. I hold up my virtual hands. I do use the term a lot. Two possible reasons for this come immediately to mind. It could be that I lack the vocabulary which would allow me to ring the changes with alternatives. The English language is hardly wanting in appropriate synonyms for ‘idiot’ – imbecile, cretin, moron, changeling, half-wit, retard, simple, simpleton etc. If anything, however, I am prone to over-elaboration in my writing. I tend to use ‘fancy’ words when ‘plain’ ones would suffice. (But never, I hope, when ‘plain’ would be better.) Nobody would seriously suggest I am lexically challenged. Besides which, I have been known to use terms other than ‘idiot’. Two of my personal favourites are ‘bladder’ and ‘bollard’. Many people have told me that referring to those anonymous mouthpieces for politicians and parties as ‘spokesbladders’ is vividly descriptive. Clearly, my repetition of the word ‘idiot’ is not due to terminological poverty.
The other explanation which occurs to me is that I use the word ‘idiot’ a lot because there are a lot of idiots. I reckon this is closer to the mark. Especially when one sojourns in the realm of social media as much as I do one is constantly assailed by idiocy in various forms. There are a lot of idiots out there!
Or should I say there is a lot of idiocy. I must also plead guilty to slightly misusing the word ‘idiot’. Calling someone an idiot implies that they are innately intellectually sub-normal. It is vastly more frequently the case that people of perfectly normal intelligence commit acts of idiocy. Smart people say and do idiotic things. It’s part of what makes people so fascinating that hermitry develops an almost irresistible appeal. I shan’t apologise for applying the term ‘idiot’ to those smart people guilty of an entirely human lapse. Although it may be wrong given a strict definition of the word, I feel it’s use is appropriate when the clever individual in question makes public some gobbet of idiocy that they’ve had ample opportunity to consider and/or correct. When, for example, an individual delivers that gobbet of idiocy in a speech or essay that has been days, weeks or months in preparation, I reserve the right to call them an idiot for having left the offending gobbet in place despite all the polishing and perfecting that has supposedly been done.
It is likely that Toni Giugliano is not by strict definition, an idiot. But you wouldn’t know this from the published comment I’m using to make my point. The comment he chose to publish on Twitter and which he has subsequently chosen not to amend so as to excise at least some of the idiocy. The following.
I refer not to the idiocy of Toni Giugliano’s “conclusion” regarding “A1ba”[sic]. Not everybody would agree that it is idiotic to conclude that Alba Party has a “mission is to prevent the FM from delivering independence”. Many would wholeheartedly agree with it. Like I said, there’s a lot of idiots (idiocy?) out there. There is nothing about the SNP/Alba tribal squabbling which isn’t idiotic. And there’s a lot of tribal squabbling. Toni Giugliano himself is evidently determined to make his own contribution to the tribal idiocy. Which would be a good enough reason to deploy the word ‘idiot’ yet again. But I think there’s a better reason.
Look at the last two lines of that Tweet. Methinks Tony is being a tad overgenerous with the idiocy. There’s the inane insinuation that Alba Party is comparable with “far right groups”. There’s the dumb hypocrisy of any apologist for the SNP leadership accusing others of exploiting minorities for political advantage. Their brand of identity politics is about little else but contriving a slew of minorities which can be presented as the victims of negative discrimination in urgent need of the party’s – and society’s – protection. Thus, the SNP becomes the hero of the tale while political opponents are accused of ‘attacking’ those minorities. It is becoming increasingly difficult to say anything about anybody without being told one has offended some minority whose members demand the ‘right’ to live their lives free of the fear of being offended. Or to be more precise, a minority that one or other political group claims to speak for while demanding on their behalf the ‘right’ to live a life free of the fear of being offended.
I am moved to wonder how it might be possible to be regarded and treated like everybody else while insisting on a ‘right’ that nobody else possesses.
There’s a great deal of idiocy in that short statement. But the bit I’ve chosen is the idiotic disconnect between in one line condemning others of sowing division (in the independence movement), then in the very next line demanding the creation of exactly that kind of division. Can there be any more sure and efficient way of engineering division than by defining exclusive and excluded groups as Toni Giugliano does?
Happy New Year, Tony! You’re an idiot!
If you find these articles interesting please consider a small donation to help support this site and my other activities on behalf of Scotland’s cause.
11 thoughts on “Here be idiots”
I especially note the use of the term ‘our Yes campaign’. Who is the ‘our’ referred to? I don’t remember Toni ever attending our local Yes group which has been in operation during and since the 2014 campaign despite his being the local SNP candidate for the Scottish Parliament elections.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The SNP registered its claim to the Yes brand some time ago. This was when they rebranded what they now regard as an extension of the party with the multi-coloured logo. The Yes movement just let them do it. No protest. Nothing!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I personally will not use the multi-coloured swap shop new YES brand.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reblogged this on Ramblings of a now 60+ Female.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Giugliano is a cretin, that’s for sure. He clearly has not a clue about STV and should read this:
SGP it was came up with “Vote till you Boak” in 2016, and that is completely right. If for instance a voter puts Alba, Green, SNP, Labour … then if the Alba candidate is the lowest, their vote gets passed on to the next which is Green, and if Green is then the lowest, it goes to the next – SNP in their case.
If that candidate exceeds the quota, then excess votes are proportionately used to go to the next on the list – if they have one, Labo,ur in their case, for instance 0.23 of a vote. So that 100% of their 1 vote is actually used in decimal terms. Same goes if any party has more than 1 candidate as some will.
So anyone putting Alba first, does NOT deny the SNP a seat – unless Alba actually win which at 0.8% in the last opinion poll, is unlikely generall.
Here’s a more detailed maths for the STV from the same site:
I haven’t checked this as I’m up to October 1830 and will soon be issuing 2 or even 3 bonds and connecting Edinburgh and the rest of Scotrail to Newcastle and Middlesborough in Railroad Tycoon 3, and there’s dinner and a glass of Grimes almost ready to welcome me after 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understand and sympathise with your frustration, Peter. I, too, have been chastised for being overly critical. It is not that people are stupid or idiotic, but that they have lost the will to make the changes that are necessary to move forward. Personally, I have screamed at every failure to put a mandate into operation, at every deliberate closure of an alternative route to independence, at the abject failure of the SNP hierarchy to care two hoots about its membership and the wider electorate, and about Scotland’s situation. It, the leadership and hierarchy, will pay for that negligence, Peter, and pay heavily. It will pay also for what it is trying to do to women – in the name of virtue signalling lies and propaganda.
I would never vote SNP again – ever – unless it ditches those who have brought us to this pass. That is, the leadership and hierarchy and the pseudo ‘wokerati’. In order for that to happen, what comes along to unseat them must offer a whole new approach, so I can also understand your problems with ALBA. However, you will not force folk back to the SNP, I’m afraid or even persuade them that the wider YES movement can turn the clock back now. It is too late for that. There has to be a clear-out of these people who have betrayed everything that they were elected to do and who have betrayed the very people who put them where they are.
The Denton’s Document explains very well why all this stuff gained traction under the radar and why independence was stalled in 2015. You should read it, Peter. Read it and weep for all that might have been but for these infiltrators with their own agenda. They are the reason we are in a state of stasis, why no push forward after 2014 took place. They ensured that the colonial project could continue apace. They, or at least, those behind them, the corporate and political interests, are not interested in Scotland except as the stepping stone to England and the UK, the UK as one entity having always been its main target, then the rest of Europe, then the West. The ‘puir wee sowels’ we see who claim victim status (and womanhood) are just the unwitting foot soldiers (most of them, not all) who have been bought with unlimited porn access, the sweetie bag of idiocy, if you like. They already have all their human rights, and they want ours, too, but it’s a good disguise, if the numbers of the captured are anything by which to judge. We, the Scots, Scotland, are incidental, and our independence is a distraction from the bigger project.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I find myself with an ever-growing list of reading that I’m supposed to catch up on, Lorna. I suspect you’ll know what I mean. I’ve put Denton’s Document at the top of that list.
LikeLiked by 1 person