It seems that I’m far from alone in that view. Today’s Scotsman is running an editorial entitled “Clarkson apology does not go far enough” and a report that Labour MSP George Foulkes has denounced the supposed apology as “half-hearted” and “mealy-mouthed”, calling for the BBC to “take swift action to deal with these kind of racist remarks”.
The SNP’s Christine Grahame, someone with whom I rarely agree, also hits the nail on the head:
“It is just abuse. It plays to the lowest, lowest denominators of society. You cannot make these racist remarks. If you were to substitute the phrase with ‘one-eyed black idiot’ or ‘one-eyed Muslim idiot’, I’m sure things would be different.”Alex Salmond’s spokesman spectacularly misses the point, calling Clarkson a “clown” (fair enough) but saying that “at least now he is an apologetic clown”. Not in my book, he isn’t!
But worse than that predictable failure to appreciate the actual issue is the BBC’s reaction. When challenged over the nature of the so-called apology, a spokeswoman for the corporation said:
“Jeremy was aware what part of his comments were offensive and that’s what he has apologised for, and the BBC has accepted that apology.”Clearly that’s untrue. Worse, can he really be unaware that he has offended Scots? And asked if this meant that the BBC condones Clarkson’s use of the pejorative term “Scottish idiot”, she said:
“He has apologised in full, and we have got no further comment to make.”Again, entirely untrue. Hence my post title: the BBC is now complicit in Clarkson’s racial insult.
This is just revelling in some perceived victimhood. If someone makes 'racial insults' like that towards a group I'm within, I really couldn't care less.
Clarkson makes a living out of taking the piss out of people. How come it's only when it's directed against Scotland does it become an issue? In fact, why is any criticism of anything Scottish immediately attacked by at least one servant of the state? A little maturity, please.
No victimhood or immaturity. I've criticised anti-Englishness from certain ScotNats often enough, and this is the flipside of that coin. For the BBC to tacitly condone such language is disgraceful.
As a Scot I not only don't mind about jokes alluding to Scottishness (meanness, idiocy, what do u wear under your kilt, etc, etc) I actually find them quite amusing. Maybe this is just because I am a masochist? - lol, well no, actually I'm not. Good-natured jibes of 'wingeing poms' don't bother me either, nor do I mind being called 'English' by most people I meet outside the UK, who neither know nor care about the subtleties of our political and social history. I accept a lot of Scots DO find this offensive, but please don't lump us all in with your hang-ups. There are many more important things for me to worry about - like how this country (UK/Scotland/England/Wales/NI, whatever) is going to survive with such an i.... (sorry) fine gentleamn as our Prime Minister and determined to continue with the same failed and failing policies. I am, as it so happens, a committed 'unionist', who is 'British' first then 'Scottish', but equally happy with either label.
As for making fun of GB's eye disability that was quite uncalled for and Clarkson shouldn't have said it. Just as Carol T, once I heard about the true context in which it was used (i.e. not about a bushy-haired Scot, but about a mixed race French tennis player) should not have referred to him as 'golliwog' or likened his hair to that of a 'golliwog'. I well remember collecting tokens off Robertsons jam as a child so I could get an enamel brooch, but things have moved on and I would no more dream of referring to someone as a 'golliwog' than I would dream of using the 'n ..' - I accept by this logic I should also object to jokes using Scottishness as the peg, but I simply don't.
Bill:
No hang-ups either! If I get a chance later I'll scan the forum threads on this story and pull out a few choice morsels that indicate the political fallout from Clarkson's comment. I can guarantee you that some of the CyberNats will have been working those threads, trying to portray all/most English as racist against Scots. It's a masterful strategy with two desired outcomes: increasing anti-English feeling in Scotland and antagonising English readers, perhaps to the extent that they'll start to look more favourably on separation.
A few examples...
Calum Crubag: “the English have no time for them or Scots in general. In fact, the English have no time for any foreigners.”
Onward Motion: “the ani-Scottish racism in England is institutionalised.”
Gorach: “Comments like this are common amoung the English..”
McGubbligan: “Clearly there are lots of English people making jokes about Scotland and the Scots which receive no publicity in Scotland. Problem is, they are not joking.”
Dougie1976: “Sometimes I wonder if there is anyone left in England who doesn't harbour racist anti-Scottish views. It seems endemic.”
Newtyle Railway: “Lets face it the English of all classes are racist to some degree.”
larryt: “Clarkson's anti scottish jibe is not at all uncommom. It's mild compared to other exaples of english racism against scots.”
Jamieson: “Clarkson is typical Inger minger and an oaf. A typical product of a minor English private school.”
grow up and get over yourselves.
This incessant chippiness is why ever larger numbers of english people look forward to scottish independance with great joy.
Have to say, SU, that Clarkson's remarks were offensive on various levels, but that the use of the word 'Scottish', as also with his remarks about French stuntmen took him into an unfortunate area.
There are people in all countries who, for whatever reason, view themselves substantially through a prism of their dislike for those of another nationality, or race, or religion.
In this regard, no nation has a monopoly of guilt or innocence.
I remember receiving the foulest and most xenophobic attack I've ever experienced from a chap from Birmingham.
Being a sensitive soul, i was deeply upset.
But to hate a nation because of one slight from one rather moronic individual is in defiance of all logic, so I didn't decide that all English people were like him.
Rather, he was just a particularly nasty and ignorant individual who was unrepresentative of all the many English people I know.
Yes, Clarkson is an unpleasant self publicist who is firmly wedded to the lowest common denominator, but I daresay he knows his audience, and believe me he's welcome to it.
Pete:
You call it chippiness. I call it a refusal to accept racial smears.
Calling someone a "Scottish idiot", "English prat", "French fool" or whatever is racist. As someone pointed out on the Herald forum, if you put an adjective before a pejorative noun then the adjective becomes pejorative too.
Point of information: "ever larger numbers" of English people do not favour Scottish independence, as the polls clearly show.
Andy:
Thanks for the icebreaker!
If I get a chance later I'll scan the forum threads on this story and pull out a few choice morsels that indicate the political fallout from Clarkson's comment.
I see you did just that; for myself I have much more productive uses for my time than to scan exhaustively (obsessively?) the comments of those whom you charmingly describe as 'cybernats'. I glanced through the list and they all seem 'cranks' to me; I don't share their crankiness, for good or ill. I just cannot get at all worked up about this; most of my English friends (some of whom were amongst a 'mixed' group of Scots and English with whom I dined most amiably last night) are just as relaxed about this 'cyber-provocation' as I am.
As a matter of interest, one of the topics of conversation last evening was the ridiculous spread of compulsory dual English/Gaelic roadsigns even into parts of Scotland which have no history, ever, of having spoken Gaelic; the one fluent native Gaelic speaker at the table was just as opposed to this as some others present, particularly as he has become heartily fed-up of being used at work as an unofficial translator for pointles 'box ticking' translation blitzes to meet some artificial deadline or other, all in the name of 'Scottishness', imposed by the 'Gaelic Mafia' it seems impossible to speak out against.
Finally, to be flippant, if and when we separate ourselves from the rest of the UK, something I have no desire to see ahppen, I hope that awful, mournful dirge 'Flower of Scotland' is not chosen as a national anthem; I know there are more important aspects to that awful possibility ('separation'), but for me that would be the absolute end.
I'm English and lived in Scotland and I visit Scotland now three or four times a year for both work and holidays.
I'm always happy when I cross the Border. However, I do get brassed off when I hear anti-English insults. (I was also called a Fenian bastard going to a football match with some friends who were Hibs supporters). As a Unionist English methodist I just thought that was funny.
When Scot Nats imply that English people are effeminate and racist, I find that offensive.
However, I live with it and as a northerner take the mick out of them about Neville's Cross and Flodden.
I don't think Clarkson was implying that there was a link between Scottishness and idiocy I just think he was using it descriptively.
I don't believe there is any nastiness in Clarkson he is just a high class stirrer who enjoys being controversial for the sake of it. I also believe that in the Sun this morning he apologised for calling Brown one-eyed and Scottish, but maintained he was a lying idiot.
I think even the Nats would agree with that.
Ann
So it would appear:
“The Sun says Jeremy Clarkson is happy to apologise for calling Gordon Brown both one-eyed and Scottish.
But as for the "idiot" bit, he is quoted by the paper as saying "there's no chance I'll apologise for that."”
If that's true, the matter would appear to be closed.
This was dealt with about ten years ago when The Sun called an individual - whose name eludes me - an "Arab pig". The P.C.C. dismissed complaints on the grounds of it having been factually correct that the individual was an Arab, and "pig" being an excusable pejorative.
Same here. Brown is indisputably two of those (and, personally, I agree with the latter most of all), and it was not implied that because he was Scots or blind in one eye that he was an idiot.
Clarkson is not employed as a news reader or expected to present a dispassionate view. He's a shock jock (hoho) and this is what his viewers expect. If he pushes the envelope too far, an apology should be sufficient (as, notably, did not occur with Carol Thatcher's lack of contrition).
Of course, The Sun then spoiled it by running a 'toon of pigs descending on Fleet Street with the caption that even they were objecting to being called "Arabs"; the ensuing complaints were upheld.
Scottish Unionist: most of your supposed examples of anti-English racism are simply Scots complaining about anti-Scottish racism. This is not the same as what Scots have to deal with - namely the use of pejorative terms (jock, scotch sweaty), racist stereotypes (we are drunken, violent & scrounging), bigoted comments ("go back to Scotland if you love it so much", "Hadrian's Wall should be rebuilt"). There are daily anti-Scottish attacks on websites, in England's newspapers, on the BBC etc. etc. There really is no anti-English equivalent.
And if we dare to complain we are just "whinging jocks" with "chips on our shoulders".
To be honest, like the people you quoted, I too wonder how deeply ingrained anti-Scottish racism is in England. It certainly appears to sell newspapers and rarely does any English person object to hearing it in the way Scots like yourself speak out against anti-English attitudes.
Ah yes, the familiar ScotNat argument that anti-Englishness is inconsequential and that even where it exists, it's only as a legitimate response to prevailing English attitudes. Sorry, I don't buy it - and various surveys support that view.