Death and Success

At the end of a year of bereavements I have been thinking about death, and hand in hand with death what any person’s life means. There is a story that an old man once when asked if his life was a failure, responded, “I haven’t finished yet!”. In NLP we say that, “There is no failure, only unforeseen outcomes.” How do we evaluate a life? Some yogis and Zen masters apparently try to depart the world leaving no trace of ever having been here, but I don’t believe any of us can avoid leaving footsteps in the sand,

From the moment we are conceived we start impacting the lives of those around us. We may think we have done very little, but by virtue of living we fill many roles. I am a husband, son, grandson, brother, father, grandfather, worker etc. and I have been many things, trades unionist, trainer, massage therapist, telephone manager, so many roles over so many years. I am not one man and I relate to my world in so many ways and impact it in so many ways, many of which are entirely unintentional. My world impacts me differently in my different roles. I am not sure what success is really, but when my granddaughter makes me howl with laughter, and lifts my whole day, is that not success, and is that not enough? Who can say anyone is a failure, we do not know enough about anyone to say.

I think it might be fair to say for most of us our impact on the world is not always positive or, rather, that not everyone perceives us positively. Most of us are an amalgam of positive and negative with the balance generally on the positive. There are some like Jimmy Saville who did so much good he was revered as some kind of a saint ,until details of his abuse of young people was revealed and he was reviled as a devil. Most of us are not composed of such extremes but each of us is a mixture of light and dark. It is also true that different people have different positives, thus a politician may be seen as a saviour by some and an oppressor by others because of the same actions.

And who is it that defines what is success? An actor may leave behind both a glittering career and a string of broken marriages, is he a success or a failure? What matters more, what we have or who we are? Who is the greater success, the person who overcomes severe disability to lead a normal life or the winner of a TV talent show who goes on to compete in I’m a Celebrity? What is it that gives our lives meaning?

I believe that any life that positively impacts the lives of others is a success, however great or slight that impact. Some people like Anthony Nolan have changed the world merely by having lived, and Stephen Lawrence by having died. By any measure of our shallow contemporary world, Jesus (topical reference for December!) was, when he died, an abject failure; although personally I consider anyone with twelve friends a success. There is a story that one character on being asked whether he had any spare change responded, “I don’t know, I’m not dead yet”. So how can anyone be called a failure until they have finished? If even then sometimes, like Oskar Schindler it may be some time after we’ve gone before we are recognised. Best not to assume anyone is a failure, you don’t know what may yet come to light. Best not to consider yourself a failure, you do not know the impact you have had on everyone. Better still just live your life to the utmost and let it go without worrying about man made concepts like success.

Does Scotland really benefit from Britain?

Unionists never tire of telling us that the union with England has been of disproportionate benefit to Scotland, in fact only a small proportion of the Scottish people benefitted from the Union.

Prior to the Union of the Crowns much of the country operated a clan system wherein although the Clan Chief led and protected the clan he did not own all the land upon which they lived, the idea of privatising common land came from England. It is entirely thanks to the Union that land ownership was concentrated in the hands of an elite. It is entirely thanks to the Union that much of the population of the Highlands were driven from their homes to emigrate, or to live in slums in the industrial cities of the lowlands. It was the Union that led almost to the destruction of the Scot's Gaelic language and culture. The ordinary people did not benefit from the union, the Union with England has actively sought to damage Scottish culture and undermine Scottish identity and national pride.

The benefits of living in Scotland do not come from its connection with England. In Scotland at the Reformation John Knox ensured that village schools were set up across Scotland, whereas the English only passed an act to educate the children of the working classes in 1870. It is well known that life expectancy in Glasgow is shorter than elsewhere in the UK another legacy of the Union and that the slums of Glasgow were cleared and its citizens paid a living wage owes nothing to the English, but to the actions of Scottish Trades Unionists like James Maxton, John MacLean, Manny Shinwell, Davy Kirkwood and Willie Gallacher and the thousands prepared to strike for a living wage. When the Clydeside workers did strike the English government response was to send armed troops into George Square. The Union with England has perpetuated poverty and the destruction of individual liberties.

Strathclyde Regional Council made great progress in raising the condition of people in the West of Scotland from the mid 1970s and through the eighties, it used its size and purchasing power to make economies of scale and to impose agreements on contractors to protect working conditions. However it committed two cardinal sins of being both effective and run by the Labour Party so the Conservative government in London abolished it. That it represented an alternative power base is illustrated by the threat of dissolution giving rise to serious consideration of the possibility of UDI by certain parties. The Union  with England has actively denied the Scottish people the right to determine their own futures or run their own lives.

Many countries have used subsidies to support indiginous industries, whereas the UK government allowed the destruction of the Scottish shipbuilding, engineering and coal industries by cheaper imports of foreign goods, primarily to undermine Trades Unionism and employment rights. Importing foreign goods produced by exploited workers not only damages our workers but perpetuates injustice overseas. Now such employment rights as remain are under threat from Conservative legislation in Westminster that will remove Employment tribunal from many workers. The Union with England has damaged human rights in Scotland

The claim is often made that Scotland attracts excessive public spending, but the whole of Scotland received £53 billion of public spending in 2011 compared with £80 billion for London and £64 billion for the South East of England, this doesn't include defense spending of which the majority goes to the south of England. An independant Scotland might not have the defence budget of the UK, but its total budget could be spent at home, supporting Scottish industry. An independent Scotland s threatened by Unionists with the withdrawal of military support by the UK, what they forget is that an independent Scotland could license its deep water facilities, air bases etc to whomever it wished, and there are nations that would be delighted to pay for facilities on the Atlantic coast of Europe. The Union with England does not defend Scotland it merely prevents Scotland from making its own beneficial alliances.

Freed from England, Scotland will probably begin with a reduced income and things may be difficult initially. However a free Scotland will be able to make its own trade agreements, offer its own incentives to foreign investors, be allowed to develop its own industries and establish its own alliances without having to put the interests of English investors before the needs of Scottish workers!

Thoughts on Rangers

I don't follow football, not the round ball game anyway, but I can't help but feel slightly saddened by the descent of the Glasgow Rangers to the Third Division. Even for those of us who care not for football the "Old Firm" is part of our consciousness, it is one of those things that defines Glasgow. Sadly much of the identity of this city belongs to the memory rather than the present, Red Clydeside, the International Brigades, ship building and the UCS work in, Springburn locomotives, it would be sad if the Old Firm were to join them. Somehow Celtic without Rangers is like Laurel without Hardy or Francie withoot Josie. However much they may have inconvenienced us, the Old Firm games were part of the rhythm of this city's life. I don't much care about the financial impact Ranger's demotion may have on the other clubs, when they chose to put Rangers in the Third Division they will have been aware of the financial implications. I feel more sorry for the shopkeepers, restauranters, publicans and coach firms whose livlihood will be affected.

Of course the Rangers' story is not over and I, for one, will not assume this is the end. Given their heritage and support, I suspect we will see a new era for Rangers. Over the next few years they will probably climb back up the league, perhaps with a new emphasis on home grown talent. I certainly would not bet against them becoming once more League Champions within the next decade. I won't pay much attention to their fortunes, but when they do complete their come back I will go to the cinema to see the film of their return, "No Surrender - The Rangers Story". I wonder if they could get Tom Cruise to play Ali McCoist!

Please Check Spelling

I have had enough! I am reading Amateur Gardening and in two pages I've found "scared cow" for "sacred cow", and "prefect" for "perfect". Don't magazines bother to proof read their articles any more?

To be honest, the computer magazines I read tend to be worse than Amateur Gardening in this regard, but the final straw falls where it falls. I am sympathetic, I use Swype and if I don't keep a sharp look out all sorts of strange alternatives to my chosen words jump into my text. A spell check can help but as long as the wrong word is in the dictionary, it will not be picked up as an error.

I recognise that in these harsh economic times people have to eke out their resources, and many writers have to produce several interesting pieces each week, it's a lot of work. I think it is unreasonable for publishers to not only expect writers to produce copy but also pick up all their mistakes (most yes, but not all). However a magazine published with several errors appears unprofessional, however good the content and it's annoying, irksome. Surely it is the responsibility of the editors to ensure the finish of the product? Tim Rumball, I'm talking to you!

I buy magazines for their content, a few spelling mistakes won't stop me from reading, they'll just take away a little of the enjoyment.

Windmills and Motorways

Last weekend my wife, daughter and I drove back to Glasgow from Manchester. Unusually we travelled through Cumbria and the Borders not just in daylight, but in sunshine, I can't remember when we previously travelled that road in daylight. I had expected to enjoy the rugged beauty of the hills, but what my memory had not prepared me for was the wind farms. There is something inspiring in the sight of those giant air-screws gently turning in the wind, I love to see them whether in a Rajasthani desert or on a mountain crest in Cumbria.

I know that there are many people who hate wind farms, who want to preserve the countryside unchanged; however there has never been a time when the countryside has not been changing, primarily through the action of human beings. Progress has its own beauty, but it is predicated upon the acceptance that the urge to progress, to learn, to discover, to improve is essential to the existence of humanity. If we kept – as some would have us – our wild places untouched we would have no agriculture and no settlements. Some claim that wind farms spoil the countryside, that is merely one opinion with which some of us would disagree. Some oppose road building, but would we want to spend a week travelling from London to Glasgow in a horse drawn carriage along rutted cart tracks, which in themselves represented humanity's urge to impose progress and improvement on the land. Who can say that today's resisted project won't become tomorrow's tourist attraction? Were it not for General Wade's hated roads there would never have developed the Scottish tourist industry. The monuments of our commercial infrastructure attract visitors, all the way from the Thames Barrier, across the Forth bridges up to the Skye road bridge, visitors carried on the motorways some consider scars on the landscape and upon the remnants of the magnificent rail network left to us by our Victorian forbears.

Change is inevitable and improvement is essential as long as we want to heat and light our houses, and power industry, and move food and manufactures around the world. It is easy to bemoan the pace of contemporary life, but would we willingly return to horse drawn mail coaches instead of email or candles instead of the electric light? A few perhaps, but all the time? I think not.

You may not like change, you may oppose it, but change is inevitable and life might be easier if instead of resisting you instead learnt to appreciate the beauty of progress because it is not going to be reversed any time soon.

David Cameron suckered by Salmond!

The SNP went into the election with a clear commitment to hold the Independence referendum in the second half of the parliament. The Unionist parties tried to goad the Scottish Government into moving earlier, but uniquely among British political parties the SNP showed a determination to deliver on its manifesto promises although it has yet to do so on several. The unionist frustration at Salmond's determination to move in his own time as promised has goaded David Cameron into precipitate action.

A referendum in the second half of the parliament may well deliver independence so David Cameron has decided that the Westminster Tory Government will force an earlier vote, he may have played right into Salmond's hands. Like Thatcher, Cameron has demonstrated a contempt for the will of the Scottish people and this latest move shows how little regard he has for us. However the referendum will have a legal status that Salmond's one would not have had, it only takes a stirring up of Scottish resentment of English arrogance and meddling for Cameron to have painted himself into a corner. Salmond could not have split the Union, but he has tricked Cameron into doing it for him.