Has the world gone mad?
What on earth is wrong with people these days?
It's time independence supporters got wise, stopped feeding the trolls, stuck up for each other and prepare for what's coming, cause I believe things are going to get a lot worse.
You need to read this article:
DEFIAYE IS IN HOSPITAL TODAY. SHE HAS BEEN THE VICTIM OF HOMELESSNESS AND ‘AUSTERITY BRITAIN.’ SHE HAS ALWAYS KNOWN WHO WAS TO BLAME, BUT THE ONLINE BRITNAT TROLLS WHO HOUNDED HER ARE ONLY NOW SHOWING US HOW LOW THEY CAN GO.
DefiAye, a brilliant young artist and a star of the independence movement, posted on Twitter yesterday: “I’m so sorry. I had to do it. I’m being accused of benefit fraud. I can’t live in this world as it is.” Within the hour her friend Simone called the Police. She was discovered at her home and rushed to hospital, where she is now recovering in intensive care. Those who know DefiAye and follow her on social media will know she has only recently gotten out of homelessness and into a house of her own, and that, as a sufferer of a chronic and debilitating illness, she was recently summoned for a medical review that threatened to cut off what few benefits she had coming in.
So, it looks like we are going to have another referendum - #scotref
I found this article on WingsOverScotland which is worth a read:
With the lies and manipulation from the Better Together Campaign, and now also from Scotland In Union. A certain person who was involved in both groups, is not what he seems.
This article was found on: http://ericjoyce.co.uk/2016/10/the-anti-independence-professor-who-isnt-quite-what-he-seems/
University academics have a special place in the public dialogue around Scottish independence. They sometimes venture personal opinions and reach out to the wider population, but this is invariably placed by readers and listeners into the context of their assumed scholarship.
As we’ve written before, it’s critical that academics make it clear when they’re veering off their area of expertise and this does not always happen. However, there’s little doubt that authentic academics are important because of the methodology, method and knowledge which informs their public utterances.
Universities today don’t simply serve as ivory towers, though. They work with local people, and often national figures, of experience and interest. They ask such people in to talk to students about their work and ideas. This enriches everyone. Such visitors are sometimes accorded the title ‘visiting professor’. When they are at the university they called ‘professor’ as a courtesy.
Of course, it is essential to the integrity of universities, indeed that of academic study itself, that there is a clear distinction between a recognised scholar and a visiting professor. They each serve very different purposes. Other institutions have similar practices, too. The British Army, for example, invites lucky civilian recipients to become ‘honorary colonels’ and to attend dinners and events, but does not expect them to lay claim to being senior military officers. Similarly, by tradition, the army appoints ponies and goats as non-commissioned officers but it would be a mistake to ask one to lead a section battle attack.
And so it is of great public interest that it seems that a Scottish ‘professor’ often cited by the media as“an eminent economist”, ‘law professor’, ‘professor of government’, ‘politics professor’ and ‘leading constitutional expert’ (odd to be all of these simultaneously, no?) seems never in fact to have held a salaried academic appointment at any level. He is not a trained economist. Nor a practising lawyer. Nor a renowned constitutional scholar. He is not a professor at Oxford University as he appears to imply and as genuine Scottish academics believe. He does not appear to publish peer-reviewed academic papers, nor supervise doctoral students. In fact, he appears to be precisely the kind of visiting professor universities ask to present to staff and students because of their non-academic experience, while urging them not to masquerade as a professional, or tenured, university professor.
Jim Gallagher is a former, fairly senior civil, servant who describes himself as “a professor based at Oxford and Glasgow Universities”. He was secretary, but not a member, of The Calman Commission. He has written a small number of accessible pamphlets and has co-written a book with a tenured academic. He writes newspaper articles. He dabbles as a study group member alongside professional academics and helps them understand more about how the civil service thinks. This all makes him an interesting person to listen to and for academics to take advice from. However, it manifestly does not make him an ’eminent economist’, nor a Glasgow or Oxford professor of the highest scholarly standing.
His public placing of Oxford ahead of Glasgow, where he holds honorific status as a visiting professor (when he is actually visiting Glasgow University only) is striking in view of his legally stated (scroll down) residence in Scotland. Interesting, too, is his careful use of the word “based”. His carefully written Wikipedia page, reflecting other identically-worded sources, describes him as “a fellow in Nuffield College, Oxford University” (NB: this page was updated to remove all references to academia just before midnight the day after this article was published). The eagle-eyed might spot that being ‘based’ at Oxford technically doesn’t represent a claim of being an Oxford professor; being a fellow ‘in’ Nuffield College can in theory mean something different from being a fellow ‘of’ Nuffield College.
In fact, Mr Gallagher is simply an ‘associate member’ of Nuffield College, although he does not appearon the College’s list on-line. A person may apply for associate membership if they have some association with the college; this does not necessarily mean an academic one. Such membership gives access to social and other practical facilities. It manifestly does not confer academic status of itself. A Nuffield College spokesman said today that Mr Gallagher’s; “association was extended in June 2016 until September 2017”, and explained that this was done normally on the basis of collaboration with a fellow of the college.
And indeed, Mr Gallagher does collaborate with a fellow of the college as a member of a study group there. This is the study group. Its explicit purpose is to encourage academics – like the aforesaid fellow of the college – to work with experienced former civil servants like Mr Gallagher. By definition, therefore, the study group includes people who are not academics. Members of this study group, Mr Gallagher says, are confusingly also called ‘fellows’. And so, Mr Gallagher is a ‘fellow’ OF a mixed-group of academics and non-academics IN Nuffield College. Angels may dance on the head of a pin.
For the avoidance of doubt, an Oxford University spokesman said: “Jim Gallagher does not hold a professorship at Oxford. His (only) affiliations are those listed by the spokesman for Nuffield College”(see above).
Meanwhile, Glasgow University confirmed the role and status of visiting professors and that this is Mr Gallagher’s (visiting professor while at Glasgow University) status:
“The university of Glasgow benefits from the expertise of many visiting professors of whom Professor James Gallagher is one. Visiting and honorary professors are entitled to use that designation. Professor Gallagher has contributed to a number of events and lectures, including one last week under the auspices of Policy Scotland. He was clearly titled as Visiting Professor of Government, School of Law, University of Glasgow”.
Genuine Scottish professors we asked this week believed that Mr Gallagher is indeed an academic fellow of Nuffield College with a professorial appointment there. Some assumed that his Glasgow visiting professorship was simply a small addition to a distinguished Oxford professorship. They did not think for a moment that his widely-used professorial title extended from that Glasgow courtesy title alone. Glasgow University’s own rules show why they may very reasonably assume that (see point 1 under ‘Visiting Professorships’). As one Scottish professor said, there is a growing trend for professional people in late-career to enter academia as full, tenured professors. This happens for various reasons – lawyers who may have published extensive legal papers, or novelists who may have published successful novels. But this is not the case with Mr Gallagher. He has simply allowed it to be ‘assumed’ given the highly nuanced presentation of public information about him.
Until now, Mr Gallagher’s apparently high scholarly and academic status has been treasured by elements of the Scottish media because this status raises his views above those of politically partisan commentators. He gives extensive interviews with the Scottish media about diverse issues of economics, law, the UK constitution and politics. In turn, the Scottish media describes him as “an eminent economist” or a renewed professor specialising in constitutional matters. In fact, he seems happy to be described in any way which fits any story.
Yet if it might be felt that he is not responsible for how he is reported in the media, he has been reported on repeatedly by the same journalists and publications and has had many opportunities to disabuse and correct embarrassing and aggrandising misdescriptions. Journalists cannot be blamed for how Mr Gallagher presents himself and in turn allows himself to be presented. For a person with a trusted association with famous academic institutions, his self-presentation appears audacious.
Over time, Mr Gallagher has proven to be a consistent and somewhat conservative opponent of independence. He is a board member of Scotland in Union and was an adviser to Better Together. He is quite obviously politically motivated. His language is peppered with emotion. Most recently, he compared current SNP MPs to Charles Stewart Parnell’s; “holding a knife at the throat of the British establishment” – a comment which of course came before years of pre-independence and much post-independence violence on that island. Today, this is an enormously sensitive matter. He is entitled to put his arguments in public, of course, although they do have the whiff of reverse engineering – producing research and arguments to fit his prejudices. This latter style is of course precisely the opposite of the method and methodology of the professional academic.
However, as a visiting professor and even as a junior associate of a college, he is under a powerful obligation to avoid at all costs the public perception that his words are those of a senior and eminent academic talking within his field of academic expertise. A failure to do this risks making public debate dishonest, and it risks marginalising the views of genuine scholars. Authenticity, transparency and integrity amongst those taking part in public debate is essential if the wider public interest is to be served.
It is to be hoped that Mr Gallagher, or visiting professor Gallagher while in his occasional role at Glasgow, will actively avoid being presented as something he is not in future. This may help with his application next year for continued associate member status at Nuffield College, and indeed in future as a visitor at Glasgow University. Insiders at each learned institution have suggested that his coat might be on a shoogly peg.
The screenshot below is on the Scotland In Union site dated the 10th October 2016.
Nicola Sturgeon should declare independence if the UK votes to leave the EU but Scots back staying in, a former SNP leader has said.
Gordon Wilson said the First Minister would have a mandate to break up the UK if she announced her plan in advance.
David Cameron has promised an in-out referendum on the UK's membership of the EU if the Conservatives are in a position to deliver one after the General Election.
In tomorrow's National Newspaper: