Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1092

One of the Angus councillors I wrote to about this matter, a senior official of the "Angus Alliance" which took over in May with a one-vote majority, has written me a lengthy reply. He says "I really enjoyed reading your letter and respect your arguments on the inappropriatenes of aspects of the flag historically. However, one has often to compromise in order to preserve unity and if that means watering down one's principles, then that is the reality we have to learn to live with in coalition politics".

Regarding taking down the Saltire, he says "that was never our intention. Instead, we take the view that the Saltires should remain and over a period of time the Angus flag could, eventually, fly alongside the Saltire. There is, of course, a cost to be met in doing this, and I think personally that the money to provide the additional costs involved should be met by the Alliance councillors out of their own pockets".

So, he is saying that he would be willing to help to meet the cost of this out of his own pocket, as long as his colleagues in the Labour/Tory/LibDem/"Independent" Alliance do likewise. I wonder how they will react to a senior member of their own alliance proposing this???!!!!

Although this councillor is saying that taking down the Saltire "was never our intention", the Council leader, Bob Myles, did indeed originally state that the intention was to "replace" the Saltire with this so-called "Angus flag". So it sounds to me like there has indeed been a shift of position there. Or perhaps it was Bob Myles's intention to "replace" the Saltire, but some of his colleagues never intended this?

Okay, I still don't like the idea of having a flag consisting of the coats-of-arms of a quartet of robber barons flying over us. But if it really is the case that the Saltires are not going to come down, and if the councillors really do have to pay for any new flags and flagpoles out of their own pockets, I would count that as a success.

However, until such time as we get a definite statement from the Council as such on this, there is every reason to keep the pressure on.

Aventinian · Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:10 pm Post subject:

And to think some people say the saltire isn't becoming a political banner...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7069832.stm

You couldn't make this s**t up.
_________________
The resident pantomime villain.
'Socialists cry "Power to the people", and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean—power over people, power to the State.'

carol · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:51 am Post subject:

our nation's flag is not political Confused

why not promote the saltire and St Andrew via the educational route? when it comes to Scottish History, schools are still dragging their heels. It's good see Scotland being put first for a change, instead of having Britishness rammed down our throats

a few examples (funnily enough leading up to elections)

http://www.theirpast-yourfuture.org.uk/ a national project rolled out through schools and local communities. I remember being at a local steering group and another person complaining why all this money 60 years on, it would've made sense to have 50th celebrations not 60th Confused

Celebrating the Battle of Trafalgar in Scotland Confused

Edinburgh Tatoo http://www.edinburgh-tattoo.co.uk/news/pressrelease43.html

and planting trees http://www.treeforall.org.uk/Scot...2005news/Trafalgar+Remembered.htm

It's about time Scotland's heritage was put first

Aventinian · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 1:09 pm Post subject:

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1092

Carol wrote "our nation's flag is not political".

ALL national flags are political. They symbolise a particular polity. Many national flags make what are clearly political statements. The Union Jack, for instance, consists of the crosses associated with Saint George, Saint Patrick, and Saint Andrew, with the cross of England super-imposed on the other two. Clearly a political statement. The "stars and stripes" of the USA makes several political statements. First of all, it follows the Union Jack in being red, white, and blue, these being "patriotic" colours in the USA long before there was such a thing as the USA. Secondly, the number of stripes symbolises the number of the founding member states (thirteen). Thirdly, the number of stars symbolises the number of present-day states. The number of stars can change, the number of stripes always remains the same. To begin with, of course, there were just thirteen stars. These symbolised the fact that these squabbling colonies, some of which had actually went to war with each other in the not-too-distant-past, were now UNITED. You can't get much more political than that. The flag of Saudi Arabia has written on it "There is no God but God and Mohamed is His Prophet". A statement of religious belief, certainly, but also a statement of political intention, about how society should be run. Many other flags also make clearly political statements. But even the ones that don't make statements are political. You can see this at borders, where you get two different flags flying within a short distance of each other. The flags say "here, OUR polity begins". A statement of political possession.

I disagree with Aventinian that Scottish History is well enough taught. I agree with Carol that we should have more and better teaching of Scottish History in our schools. Where I would quite probably disagree with Carol is about what would be "better" teaching of Scottish History. Aventinian is right that Carol is a nationalist, and sees history from a nationalist perspective. (Of course, Aventinian is a nationalist too, a British one.) Now, of course, all history books are written from somebody's perspective, there is no such thing as totally unbiased history. But whether it's the schools of the Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin teaching children about "The Great Patriotic War", or the schools of the USA teaching a ridiculously American Nationalist version of history, I am not too keen on state-sponsored nationalistic history of any kind.

Aventinian · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 7:01 pm Post subject:

carol · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:42 pm Post subject:

Dave unfortunately I was brought up under British rule (an army brat), waved UJ's at the Queen, stood up to the anthem Shocked

celebrated her birthdays Rolling Eyes

Av the 'Their Past, Your Future' project would've been flying UJ's in community halls, schools, museums, in the streets etc all over Scotland, targetting all, including schoolkids, looking at the site i think they're still rolling out the millions of pounds on the project. I think their boats were scuppered in my local area most events were poorly attended.

Carol

agentmancuso · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 8:53 pm Post subject:

carol · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 9:18 pm Post subject:

Aventinian · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 9:42 pm Post subject:

carol · Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2007 9:56 pm Post subject:

http://www.theirpast-yourfuture.org.uk/

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1092

Carol says "Dave, how can you disagree with something I haven't even said".

I just said I thought it "quite probable" (based on some things I seem to remember you did say) that we might disagree about what would be better teaching of Scottish History.

But let's not rely on my admittedly imperfect memory. Here is something you definitely said.

"why not promote the saltire and St Andrew via the educational route".

As somebody pointed out, Saint Andrew has nothing to do with Scottish History. He was born in the Middle East and he lived his entire life in the Middle East, and the furthest West he ever travelled was to Greece, where he was crucified. Like the majority of the members of Angus County Council (now!), I am in favour of keeping the Saltire flying from public buildings here in Angus. But I'm not really in favour of too much flag-waving. Okay, so we have to do it to some extent at present in opposition to the British flag-waving, but I certainly wouldn't want us to get into the sort of situation they have in the USA, where American schoolchildren are expected every day to "pledge allegiance to the flag". I wouldn't want us to get into teaching myths instead of history. And when you talk about "promoting the saltire and St Andrew via the education route" that sounds to me like it could possibly be heading in the direction of mythology instead of history.

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1092

Agentmancuso wrote

carol · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:44 am Post subject:

strange I thought the 'background' of Determination's 'logo' was a saltire. IF had mini saltires made up and handed out at a march, both nothing to do with swearing allegience, yet still 'waving' the flag

The Saltire and St Andrew is part of our heritage and our identity

Also I have never discussed the 'better' teaching of Scottish history

agentmancuso · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:10 am Post subject:

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1092

Carol wrote "strange I thought the 'background' of Determination's 'logo' was a saltire".

It is indeed. Like I said, I'm not really in favour of too much flag-waving, but we do have to do it to some extent at present in opposition to the British flag-waving. However, what I certainly wouldn't want us to get into is the sort of situation they have in the USA, where American schoolchildren are expected every day to "pledge allegiance to the flag".

"IF had mini saltires made up and handed out at a march, both nothing to do with swearing allegience, yet still 'waving' the flag"

Like I said, we do have to do a certain amount of flag-waving at present, in opposition to the British flag-waving. But what about when we are actually independent? The USA has been independent for two hundred and thirty one years. You would think they would have got used to it by now. Yet you STILL get this Nationalistic ritual of schoolchildren in American schools "pledging allegiance to the flag". When Scotland becomes independent, I wouldn't want us to have anything like that.

"The Saltire and St Andrew is part of our heritage"

After working in the building industry most of my life, very late in life, I went to university, and I finally graduated with an MA (Honours) degree in History. I can assure you that, if there is one thing absolutely gauranteed to make any trained historian screw their face up with distaste, it is that word "heritage". No, I don't just mean "unionist" historians, I mean ANY trained historian. The heritage industry and the scientific study of history are two completely different things.

"I have never discussed the 'better' teaching of Scottish history".

No, but you did say ""why not promote the saltire and St Andrew via the educational route".

I have given you a reason why we should not "promote" Saint Andrew via the educational route. Because the nearest he ever got to Scotland was Greece. He was one of Jesus's twelve apostles which may be a reason for Scottish churches to take a particular interest in him. But he had absolutely nothing at all to do with Scottish history.

Unlike Aventinian, I am in favour of more, and better, teaching of Scottish History in our schools. It will be "better" history if we place less emphasis on "heritage". It will be better if we teach kids to understand the difference between opinions and verifiable historical facts. Such as the verifiable historical fact that the nearest Saint Andrew ever got to Scotland was Greece.

carol · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:46 am Post subject:

assurances I do not fly or wave the saltire in opposition to the British flag waving, I fly it because I'm proud to be Scottish and the saltire is part of our identity, and come independence there will be a sea of saltires in the streets, cities of Scotland. It's nothing to do with swearing allegience to it, you're in cuckoo land Dave.

Your 'vision' of the future is a load of nonsense

Dave Coull · Independentista Joined: 07 Nov 2006 Posts: 1092

Carol wrote

"come independence there will be a sea of saltires in the streets, cities of Scotland"

Yes, of course there will. That is obvious. But eventually that flood tide of saltires will ebb, and things will return to what is "normal" for an independent country. And the thing that is "normal" for an independent country is that they take the fact that they are independent as being "normal". In this respect, the USA is not a "normal" independent country. It is not "normal" to have schoolchildren pledging allegiance to the flag every day TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY ONE YEARS AFTER INDEPENDENCE. Yet when I point this simple fact out, I am accused of being "in cuckoo land".

Carol made two statements which I felt displayed an un-historical attitude towards Scottish History.

The first statement from Carol which I felt displayed an un-historical attitude towards Scottish History was

"why not promote the saltire and St Andrew via the educational route".

and I have given a perfectly reasonable answer as to why we should not "promote" Saint Andrew through the educational system: I have nothing against Saint Andrew, but, statement of fact, he is not part of Scottish History because he never even visited Scotland.

The other statement of Carol's which I felt displayed an un-historical attitude towards Scottish History was

"The Saltire and St Andrew is part of our heritage"

The Saltire is certainly part of our history. Saint Andrew isn't, for reasons already explained. And ANY historian would feel the same as I do about the use of that word "heritage". Its use has the ring of pseudo-history. The heritage industry and the study of history are two completely different things.

Carol now says "you're in cuckoo land Dave".

Because of what I said about the word "heritage"? ALL historians would see my point regarding this. In fact, you would not be able to find one single trained historian who would say I was "in cuckoo land" in seeing "heritage" as being a very different thing from "history".

Because I said that Saint Andrew was born in the Middle East, spent his life in the Middle East, and the furthest west he ever went was Greece? I don't think you could find a single historian who would disagree with me about that.

carol · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:09 am Post subject:

as usual you've manipulated my post for your own means

you're in cuckoo land to think that the population of Scotland will swear allegiance to the flag

In relation to the cross on the saltire St Andrew is part of our history, beg to differ if you wish. The only opinions you value are your own. More often than not in your own eyes everyone elses opinion is beneath yours

agentmancuso · Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 1:11 pm Post subject: