Why Clarkson's cracks about Scotland make him a bloody idiot

The expression "word salad" is often linked to disordered discourse. Eliot Higgins, who runs the investigative journalism outfit Bellingcat, has been discussing it, and seems to be on to something.
We talk about living in the post-truth age. Indeed, we've transited through the post-truth age to the post-reality age where disparate groups share no common ground.
The death of any shared reality reveals itself in thoughts and ideas – discourse – which seem truly bizarre, or disordered.
We hear comments today that frankly would have seen you jeered from the public stage a decade ago.
The disorder is a two-way street afflicting both left and right. No group is immune as the very nature of being in a group today – a hard-delineated political subset fixed around identity – means estrangement from all other groups.
Estrangement causes derangement, perhaps. The left is guilty, certainly, though it's on the ascendant right where you'll find discourse that's truly disordered.
Read more by Neil Mackay
Among the left, it's primarily on the swivel-eyed fringes where you'll hear people claim that songs like Walk Like An Egyptian by The Bangles are acts of cultural appropriation, or that The Tempest subjects audiences to colonial trauma (in fact, if you've studied the play, it's more accurately interpreted as Shakespeare's critique of colonialism).
On the right, though, grotesque exaggeration, thin-skinned fragility and wild demonisation of opponents is now commonplace.
Check any internet message board – even computer game forums, for pity's sake – if you're in doubt.
Both sides behave deleteriously towards democracy, but the greater danger lies firmly to the right.
Given we now live in a world that's more ridiculous than sublime, it's unsurprising to find Jeremy Clarkson emerging as the zeitgeisty exemplar of disordered discourse.
Clarkson, a newspaper commentator, chose to describe the SNP's scrapping of peak rail fares as 'communism'.
Clarkson regularly boasts about his terrible A-level results, so history and political science were clearly not his strengths.
In theory, communism heralds a workers' utopia. I struggle to see how tweaking train prices ushers in an era of universal brotherly love and income equality.
In practice, communism involves marching your opponents into the gulag and shooting them in the head for thought-crime. I'm pretty sure this hasn't happened in Scotland.
Evidently, blokey old Jeremy will say it's just the bantz. He's only having a larf, isn't he? Well, yes and no.
Firstly, Clarkson is a commentator not a comedian. He can say what he wants, but maybe stand-up suits his talents better than journalism.
Secondly, even Clarkson sometimes makes sensible points about sensible issues. So what he's doing with his absurd exaggerations is blurring the line between what's real and should be taken seriously and what's nonsense.
He's telling us it doesn't matter if you make stuff up as everything you read is just garbage.
At the risk of becoming a po-faced liberal misery, I'm not sure that's wise.
Clarkson plays his part in disintegrating intelligent debate. He also comes across as a bloody idiot, frankly.
I'm pretty old-fashioned in believing that language should be used in a way which at least attempts to reflect reality.
He could have called the rail issue a middle-class bribe, mocked the SNP for constantly changing tack, and said it was all the biggest load of cobblers since the Elves and the Shoemaker.
But communism? Surely, he just makes himself and his argument ridiculous? Disordered. And by doing so encourages his readers to be ridiculous and disordered.
The more we do this, the more commentary becomes meaningless, the more we carpet bomb ways of speaking to each other intelligently.
During the debate about short-term holiday lets in Scotland, an Airbnb host described licensing plans as a "pogrom". A pogrom is defined as the mass murder of Jews.
They debased their own argument; they debased the meaning of pogrom. It disintegrated shared reality.
Boris Johnson just called Keir Starmer the EU's 'orange ball-chewing gimp'. Funny? Yes. In the pub, I'd spit my pint out laughing.
But when an ex-Prime Minister says this he's telling us: don't care about truth, we need no shared way of debating.
Britain is a "police state", Johnson says. Why? Because a woman was jailed for inciting racial hatred after tweeting 'set fire to the hotels' following the Southport murders which sparked mass rioting.
Police state? Or justice you disagree with?
We hear the same in Scotland. The 'Gestapo' and 'Stasi' would arrest you in your home thanks to anti-smacking laws. Just say you want to beat your kids. Don't invoke totalitarianism.
The new Pope, who appears politically centrist, has been dubbed a 'woke Marxist' by leading MAGA commentators.
Boris Johnson, who said Britain is a police state (Image: PA)
But then MAGA owns the disordered discourse crown. Evidently, nothing comes close to telling the entire world Haitian immigrants were eating people's pets.
The same disordered thinking appears in extremist claims that all trans women are rapists, all refugees are economic con-artists, and any criticism of Israel is antisemitic. It's silencing.
British talk-show host Kevin Sullivan said after this week's new EU deal: 'I like standing in the non-EU passport lines! I'm proud not to join the Brussels-gang losers.'
I guess he means he hated the deal, but rather than say that he claims to like wasting his life in queues. Evidently, much of this is attention-seeking.
Much is also motivated by the playground mentality of "owning the libs". Thus you get people attacking the "be kind brigade". Since when was being kind bad? I guess if you're disordered it is.
This all creates a society incapable of intelligent conversation. In Scotland today every issue is a crisis. Remember when a bottle return scheme was going to bring the nation to its knees, even though other nations had the same scheme?
I'm not saying the legislation was right, I'm just saying we could rediscover an ordered way of expressing ourselves.
If you cannot talk to your neighbour, you will hate them, and that way hell lies.
Neil Mackay is The Herald's Writer at Large. He's a multi-award-winning investigative journalist, author of both fiction and non-fiction, and a filmmaker and broadcaster. He specialises in intelligence, security, crime, social affairs, cultural commentary, and foreign and domestic politics.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

5 hours ago

• Daily Mail​

Fergus Ewing's furious broadside as he says he'll now run AGAINST the SNP

One of the SNP 's longest-serving politicians has launched a vitriolic attack on the party for having 'lost its way' as he announced plans to stand as an independent. Fergus Ewing, a former Cabinet minister who has been an MSP since the Scottish Parliament was opened and an SNP member for around 50 years, said he cannot stand for the party again and 'defend the indefensible '. He said that the party has 'deserted' those it used to champion over the past decade and focused on issues 'largely irrelevant to most people's lives'. The politician also said that devolution is presently 'letting Scotland's people down' and the country is in a state of 'managed decline' under the SNP. Following the explosive statement, it was confirmed that the SNP had rescinded his membership - and he was also told he would be evicted from his office in the SNP corridors in parliament and the party whip removed. Mr Ewing, who had intended to remain an SNP MSP until the election before standing as an independent candidate for Inverness and Nairn, condemned the way the issue had been dealt with, saying: 'Fifty years' service, two line missive.' Emma Roddick, a former minister under Humza Yousaf who is on the Left of the party, will now stand directly against him as the SNP candidate next year. In his personal statement issued yesterday, Mr Ewing, whose mother Winnie is one of the biggest figures in the SNP's history following her landmark by-election victory in Hamilton in 1967, said the Scottish Parliament has been 'at its worst' in recent years. He said: 'The SNP has been part of the fabric of my life for more than half a century. Indeed, I believe there has been a distinctive thread of Ewing running through its plaid for even longer. I hope that is never removed. 'But fabrics can become worn. I hope the SNP can repair itself and return to the honour and traditions of those who first wove it in a manner that meets Scotland's real modern needs. 'The failures of the SNP to deliver on its long-standing pledges to dual the A9 and A96 are a major part of that. I cannot stand again for the SNP and defend the indefensible. 'I believe the SNP has lost its way and that devolution itself - presently - is letting Scotland's people down. It doesn't need to be this way.' He heavily criticised recent SNP leaders for choosing candidates who will 'slavishly support them' and for 'choosing the pliant over the talented'. In the decade since Alex Salmond stood down and was succeeded by Nicola Sturgeon, he said the SNP 'seems to have deserted many of the people whose causes we used to champion' on issues including oil and gas, farming, fishing, rural affairs, tourism and small business - and accused the party of 'betraying generations who fought for women's rights'. He said he has tried to act as a 'critical friend' to the party and said he warned Nicola Sturgeon about the 'strategic blunder' of entering a power-sharing alliance with the Greens, and also highlighted that current First Minister John Swinney negotiated the deal. Mr Ewing said: 'These failures - plus a strange preoccupation with issues regarded as largely irrelevant to most people' lives - have all cost the SNP much loss of electoral support but also something else which is priceless. Public trust. 'Scotland is indeed in a state of 'managed decline' as Sir Tom Hunter recently said.' Urging different parties to work together, he said that Holyrood needs to 'grow up'. It was confirmed by the SNP that its constitution sets out that party membership ceases when any individual declares their intention to stand against the party. Mr Ewing confirmed that he was informed yesterday (FRI) that his 'membership was over', that he would be evicted from his office at Holyrood and the SNP whip would be removed. The Inverness and Nairn seat is now expected to be hotly contested next year. In 2021, Mr Ewing secured 48 per cent of the vote for the party, with the Conservatives in second place on 28 per cent, Labour in third on 12 per cent, and the Lib Dems in fourth on six per cent. Edward Mountain, Scottish Conservative MSP for the Highlands and Islands, said: 'It speaks volumes about John Swinney and the SNP's appalling failures in government that even nationalist royalty is prepared to twist the knife in this way. 'By standing as an independent Fergus Ewing has made it clear he simply cannot defend his party's record to voters while out on the campaign trail. 'The SNP have shamefully abandoned the Highlands over their 18 years in power.' Neil Alexander, Scottish Liberal Democrat candidate for Inverness and Nairn, said: 'Fergus Ewing has sat around the cabinet table or on the backbenches for the entirety of the SNP's 18 years in government. He can't just walk away from the big part he has played in their record of failing the Highlands. 'While the two nationalists try to turn our constituency into a battleground for their party feud, I'm focused on what really matters to people here.' Mr Swinney said: 'It was with real sadness and deep regret that I heard of Fergus Ewing's decision to leave the Scottish National Party. 'We have both served the SNP and the cause of independence for many years, and I commend him for all that he achieved while serving in the SNP Government until 2021. 'Fergus had the option of standing at the forthcoming election for the SNP, given his status as an approved candidate. He chose not to accept that opportunity and I regret that he has ultimately decided instead to leave the party. 'The SNP approaches the 2026 election ahead in the polls, with growing support for independence, and I am looking forward to taking our positive, ambitious vision for Scotland's future to the people.'

Scottish Sun

5 hours ago

• Scottish Sun

Major update on benefit claimed by thousands of Scots

The consultation carried out after the move was announced last December received 260 responses CHECK IT OUT Major update on benefit claimed by thousands of Scots Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) NATS ministers ploughed on with plans to scrap the two-child cap despite finding overwhelming opposition among Scots. Three-quarters of responses to a Scottish Government consultation on the move were against axing the limit. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 Three-quarters of responses to a Scottish Gov consultation on the move were against axing the limit Credit: Alamy And ministers were repeatedly told parents should not have more kids than they can afford. But despite the findings, SNP ministers this week said they would press ahead with the £155million-a-year plan from next March. Scottish Conservative social security spokesman Alexander Stewart said the consultation responses 'show how out of touch the SNP are with the ordinary Scots who pick up the tab for the Nationalists' ballooning benefits bill'. He said: 'The vast majority of the public back the two-child cap because it strikes the right balance. 'Social security payments must be fair both to people who are struggling and to taxpayers who have to weigh up their own finances when deciding how many children to have.' The consultation carried out after the move was announced last December received 260 responses. Of these, 190 said the SNP should keep the cap. They were predominantly individuals, while the minority who backed the plan were mostly charities and anti-poverty organisations. One said: 'Having children is a financial choice - it is not for the taxpayer to pay for people's choice to have more children.' Another said 'taxpayers should not be responsible for bringing up children' and 'if you can't afford them, don't have them'. Angela Rayner says lifting 2-child benefit cap not 'silver bullet' for ending poverty after demanding cuts for millions One respondent said the policy was not about helping children but 'about the SNP helping themselves in next year's election', while another said the Nats were 'addicted to benefits' and saw them as 'a great vote booster'. An 'easy read' summary of the consulation, published today, added that 'some people said mitigating the two-child cap might encourage people to have bigger families' or 'make people rely more on benefits and not work'. The Scottish Government is currently spending around £1.3 billion more on benefits than would have been spent in Scotland if devolution of welfare hadn't taken place, due to additional spending decisions, and is forecast to be spending £2.1 billion more by 2029-30. The minority that supported scrapping the cap mostly worked in organisations that work with impoverished families. They highlighted the plight of families struggling to fee their children and the traumatic impact of the 'rape clause' the allows women to claim for addtional children if they were impregnated without consent. Lifting the two-child cap is forecast to cost £155million next year, rising to £194million in 2029-30. Polling in 2023 suggested just one in three Scots think the two-child benefits cap should be axed. The rule was backed by 50 per cent of over-16s, according to YouGov. Only 32 per cent said it should be abolished, with 19 per cent of people unsure. The policy applies to benefits including Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit, and stops parents from claiming for a third or additional child born after April 2017. It does not apply to Child Benefit. Scottish Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville told MSPs this week that the two-child cap 'punishes people for having children'. She said: 'The Scottish Government will deliver the effective scrapping of the two-child cap when Labour has failed to do so.'

Daily Mail​

6 hours ago

• Daily Mail​

FERGUS EWING: The SNP has lost its way...I can no longer defend the indefensible

For 26 years I have had the privilege to be the MSP for Inverness and Nairn. I am enormously grateful for having had the opportunity to serve. Over that time, I have seen the Scottish parliament at its best and its worst. I fear in recent years it has been at its worst. That is why I am announcing my decision to stand as an independent for the honour of representing the people of Inverness and Nairn for the seventh time. I want to help get the Scottish parliament back to its best. I have taken this decision because I love the people of Inverness and Nairn and the people of Scotland more than my party, which I have been in for more than half a century. The SNP has been part of the fabric of my life during that time. Indeed, there has been a distinctive thread of Ewing running through its plaid for even longer. But fabrics can become worn. I hope the SNP can repair itself and return to the honour and traditions of those who first wove it in a manner that meets Scotland's needs. The failures of the SNP to deliver on its long-standing pledges to dual the A9 and A96 are a major part of that. I cannot stand again for the SNP and defend the indefensible. I believe the SNP has lost its way and that devolution itself – presently – is letting Scotland's people down. Holyrood is more fractious and tribal than ever before. Too much power rests unchecked in the hands of party leaders, free to choose candidates who will slavishly support them, rather than stand up for the people who sent them to Holyrood. Choosing the pliant over the talented. I did not join the SNP in order that the SNP run Scotland. I joined to see Scotland run her own affairs. And deliver a better, fairer country. Over the 14 years as a government minister I tried every day to help ordinary people, and to improve their lives. But over the past decade, the party seems to have deserted many of the people whose causes we used to champion. In oil and gas, farming, fishing, rural Scotland, tourism, small business and many other areas of life. Betraying generations who fought for women's rights. It's time for Holyrood to live up to the high expectations people rightly held for it, when my mother, Winnie, reconvened our own parliament in 1999. It came of age some years ago – surely now it's time for it to grow up. Over the past four years on the backbenches, I sought to offer advice as a critical friend, warning Nicola Sturgeon that to enter a pact with the Green Party was a strategic blunder which would only damage us. Then we saw the Bute House Agreement, negotiated by the present First Minister, gradually disintegrate as inherent flaws in its policies were exposed as manifestly impracticable and wholly unaffordable. These failures – plus a strange preoccupation with issues largely irrelevant to most people's lives – have all cost the SNP the loss of electoral support but also something else which is priceless. Public trust. Scotland is indeed in a state of 'managed decline', as Sir Tom Hunter recently said. To arrest that decline the main parties must work more closely together and replace brittle bickering with reasoned debate and the cross party co-designing of, for example, reform of public services and maximising economic growth and opportunity over the next ten to 20 years. Scotland and the UK now face the most serious economic challenges in an unstable world, with absurdly high energy prices threatening industry alongside staggering levels of national debt. To deal with these looming crises the main parties need to work together, whether in a grand coalition or a less formal arrangement. In each party there are people of talent and experience and a Cabinet of all of the best people could best serve Scotland. At present we can and do work together on committees in Holyrood; in cross party campaigns and in the constituency. I have myself sought to do so on every possible occasion both in Scotland and with many UK ministers and politicians. Ordinary people accept that they must work together in their own workplace –with everyone – whether they choose them as friends and allies or not. They don't have a pointless slanging match every Thursday as the supposed 'high point' of their week. It's time for politicians to work together for the interests of the nation. In short: It's time for Holyrood to grow up. We all can and must rise to this challenge. I do not need to stand again. I want to do so to serve the people of Inverness and Nairn and the people of Scotland. I want to use what experience I have to help bring about the kind of Scotland that our people deserve and strive for. That's achievable if we can set aside differences and work for the common weal. For those who say this is but a naive dream, let me ask this: How with just more of the same can we hope to turn around our parliament and help create the economic success over the next decades that in turn will enable quality public services? The same lack of delivery, the same blame game of 'it wasnae me' and lack of humility? It is better to heal division and work together in a national endeavour. Such an approach will be liable to attract far more people to stand for parliament. The most successful session of our parliament in the view of many people was from 2007 to 2011. It's no coincidence that was a minority government, and when cooperation between parties was at its greatest.