When I wrote my note to Boris the other day, it occurred to me that it was probably very stupid of me to mention that I do not do my work on the basis of making money from it. Of all people, Boris knows the value of money. I could probably wheedle my way into a position of influence if I threw my principles on the bonfire of vanities that is my usual MO.
Here is the problem with money – money makes people insincere – money is a great motivator, but it is also at the root of many significant problems. As I have discussed in previous posts, fear of mortgage payments is at the heart of many significant societal problems. What your average white collar employee would term indiscipline, bad planning, rebelliousness or simple lack of predictability is often what we used to call integrity, back when we actually grew the economy instead of paying for votes.
David Torrance was objecting to criticism on the basis of a mere mention of journalistic impartiality today. When I asked who pays journalists, and that it is entirely obvious that nobody is impartial, he responded by blocking me. So now I am presumably on his list of dangerous radicals.
To save anyone’s confusion on this issue, and evidently David is extremely confused – what do you think would happen if I started spamming the Spectator with offers of a series of posts on Scottish Nationalism? How would the Daily Mail respond if I generously proffered my witty scribblings on the underperformance of the English economy? How would the Express feel about me jotting down my thoughts on petunias and dead disabled people?
That’s correct. I would not get anywhere at all. Despite my being a perfectly normal, respectable person, I would be rejected, laughed at, disparaged. If I then somehow managed to make their contemptuous responses public, there would be howls of disparagement. There is nothing impartial about journalism.
I tried illuminating Loki the rapper on this earlier this week – no response. Asking for money before an ‘honest debate’ merely means that you are offering your opinion for sale. As Loki is likely to concentrate on personality rather than economics, his opinion appears to many to be bought and paid for.
I then considered the issue of Wings – why would it be OK for Wings to do much the same thing? The difference is that Wings made his agenda very clear, and stuck to it. I am not a big follower of Wings, so I would not care to comment on his work, but I am sure it is what it says on the tin. You have what you paid for, in the event that you are a funder.
So, in terms of my work, I do not approach it with the intention of generating money. If my investigations, which tend to be critically affectionate, as with David Wolfe, turn up a good guy I will say so. If they do not, I will say that too. I am a very gentle puppeteer, so I can say that my muses tend to be in very safe hands.
Having said this, the idea of money becoming involved before I do the work is horrifying and would seriously impact on my work, and so it is important that my muse keeps their trap shut until I have done it for best results. Money is helpful, but it is also a bigger influencer in most people’s lives than anything else. Sex, religion, politics all pale into insignificance next to the divine cash.
At least two aggressive unionists, both English, swore, cursed, disparaged and tried to malign me in the course of answering their questions on various formats this week. Both were silenced when I pointed out that Scotland does not vote Conservative, and had nothing else to say. It was that easy.
Be aware that the vast majority of people form their opinions from a cursory look at the headlines, and they have been told that we are insignificant whingers. They have no understanding of the active resistance to allowing foreign investment into Scotland, no understanding of cultural erosion, no concept of income/road/stamp duty/inheritance tax leaving the country and going elsewhere. They have been led to believe that Scotland is trying to steal something that actually belongs to England. Scotland would be so nice without Scottish people.
This continued policy of English domination is backfiring. They do not seem to have an alternative course of action. I see no wooing. Therefore directing your career towards the ‘might is right’ economic domination is not a sign that you desire to become a top level journalist. In other words, individuals who choose to write for money, without stating their agenda, forge their careers on the basis of doing what they are told. I am sure that David and his pals have nice flats, but they have no real fire or depth.
Who are the real whingers? Those of us who would like to take up our tools and build our country, or those of us who see nothing, say what they are told to say, and have no feeling for their own nation?