The appeal of the jackboot on the right of politics in Scotland

For someone who often sought sympathy for her experience of depression after being bullied and who complained of the toxic environment for women politicians, the former Tory leader in Scotland seems to have an unhealthy attraction to the language and the images of street violence.

Today in the Herald we read:

RUTH Davidson has said she regrets “not putting the boot in” to the losing side in the 2014 independence referendum. The former Scottish Conservative leader said it was a “huge strategic error” by the Unionist side not to press home its advantage and keep undermining the Nationalist cause.

What sort of language is that? Davidson conjures for us the merciless kicking to death of a helpless victim by thugs. Why can she not find words to describe winning a democratic contest without imagining a bloody-broken face and the heartless brutality of a victor? Does she derive some erotic pleasure from this kind of imagery?

Just over a week ago, she was in the same mood. Less violent but still with a mindset that loves domination by a leader, expressed in words bellowed in a victim’s face, Davidson imagines an implausible relationship between two educated professional women. Do any of us, for one moment, think the FM would even raise her voice after disagreement with an adviser?

There’s a trail. In December 2019, Davidson delights in claiming that Scottish voters refer to the FM as that effing woman. She has no evidence but clearly wishes it were that way. She likes the feel of that word.

A few days earlier, on December 3rd, after an interview with Andrew Neil, the First Minister’s experience was described by Davidson as:

Well that was an absolute doing from @afneil. A doing on the growth report, a doing on the hypocrisy of her Brexit vs Indy position and a doing over her domestic record in health.

Neil was bit over-bearing and shouty but a ‘doing?’ Once again she seems drawn to the words and the imagery of extreme violence.

I dislike Ruth Davidson intensely but I would not wish to see her shouted at in her face, described as an effing anything and I certainly could not watch here get a doing or a kicking. I like to think I might step in to help her.

Is this just more evidence that it is the ‘nasty party?’

20 thoughts on “The appeal of the jackboot on the right of politics in Scotland

    1. I remember posting a few years back, I think in the guardian. The colonel will be in the lead tank, silk scarf billowing(aka thatcher) making its way along Princess st and then down to Holyrood

      Says it all

      Liked by 1 person

  1. Was there ever any doubt at all that Conservatives in their entirety were, and are, the thoroughly nasty party?

    A party that relishes children in poverty. That slavers over sick and disabled having their “benefit” cut, and being left to die because they cannot afford to eat?

    Conservatives, in delriving

    Liked by 7 people

    1. Ahem: darned cat…

      As I was trying to type:

      Conservatives, in depriving the needy of essential survival funding, then proceed to throw billions of £ to non-or low-tax paying million and billionaires; from public purse, which those now deliberately deprived of basics had, probably for years, contributed towards.

      Aye, Tories are the thoroughly vile nasty party.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. The politics of the party says a lot. There is a book written by academics that looks at the effects of austerity. The title is “The Violence of Austerity”.
        The introduction says this:”Austerity, then, is a political strategy based on myth, deception and misinformation. In this sense, it is a moralising discourse that supports a viciously immoral politics.”

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yep indeed well said. the Tories actually deny people bascic needs, which are a human right…they should be taken to court, seriously what they do to the population of their own country, and to Scotland is nothing short of criminal.


  2. “Putting the boot in” doesn’t quite live up to the ‘better together’ billing!

    Ms Davidson can come across as a particularly unpleasant individual. She exhibits characteristics of the sanctimonious as this from the reporting by the Daily Express of her resignation from the Scots Tory leadership in August 2019 exemplifies.

    She is quoted as saying: “Respect is what is missing from our debates and without respect you cannot have understanding and you cannot unite, which is what we in Scotland and in the UK need to do.”

    Forced to ‘unite’ through the use of the boot?

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Hey, Red Tories are REAL Tories also.
      As are the Yellow Tories.
      And the Herod, Hootsmon, the BEEB in Scotland and all the rest of the colonial Tory media.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. “All political careers end in failure”!
    Davidson has been an abject failure, in terms of what she set out to do.
    One policy, an EASY time from the media: indeed a campaign promoting her, from the press!
    So here she is. Forced to quit as she read the runes. Her party composed of inadequetes, biased, racist buffoons.
    We saw her type of politics—her exact type of politics— with the fascist street violence unleashed on peaceful demonstrators in George Square in 2014 by British nationalists.
    Given what she NOW says about ” putting the boot in”, perhaps she should be questioned by the polis.
    She certainly shouldn’t be going to the House of Lords, given her endorsement of violence.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. The Tories in Scotland represent a minority view but are elevated to a position of prominence by HM press.
    It used to be British Labour but they too are now toast.
    Who next,who will pick up the poisoned chalice of British unionism and put the boot into the majority of Scots?

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Utterly repulsive creature in every sense. A tin pot dictator wannabe. Thank fuck she never came close to power over Scotland. More crooked and damaging than a herd of Hillarys.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Davidson is a bit of a thug, with ideas above her ability. Given a platform and a voice by her past employer, she thinks she commands an authoritative audience but has an air of granduer, and most people see her for what she is, an opportunist, and a nasty piece of work. She could have gone far, but is really quite insignificant, in Scotland at least.

    Disgraceful to attempt to instil hatred and divide where no should be, is she still an MSP?

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Hi Everyone, I’m new so please be gentle. Off topic, so I’m sorry about that. I was reading this. , last night, I’m suspicious about it. Can anyone help? The reason is there is attempted murder and actual murder in this and as far as I can find out this person is now against independence. It’s supposed to be the story of how we got Devolution. Would someone who had fought for Devolution for 30-40 years now NOT want Independence? If any of this is true what’s in store for us as we pursue indy?
    Thanks to Contrary for encouragement to ask for help.


    1. I dunno, the site is a bit badly designed for a start, and I certainly won’t be reading their long article there.
      Ignore, or read and contact them…maybe not worth your time, you decide.


  8. Just looking at the headline again, and the deliberate emphasis on ‘woman’
    in negative terms is also really very concerning. When did you ever here a comment about anyone in high office, a high profile politician, referred to as ‘that fk*g man’ etc? What’s Davidson trying to get at? Is she not a woman herself? is she OK with our democratically elected leader in Scotland, being undermined because she is ‘woman’? To use gender as an attack is at best unbecoming of someone who takes a wage from the public purse, at worst, it’s very sinister.

    We could say, about Davidson, ‘that fckg woman’ is that OK untRuth? Because ‘that’s where we’re at now’.

    Ruth Davidson, urgh ‘that fk*g woman!

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Hi Teresa , this article you ask about , electricscotland , it was written five years ago , well I assume it was written five years ago because when you get to the end there is an addition for comments and the comments are from 5 years ago.


    1. Hi, Sorry if this is a repeat, I’m having problems with my internet connections. I ‘m obviously not putting my point across. The link I posted is about Devolution not Independence I know it’s old and a wee bit long but what if some of it is true. How did we get Devolution, was the Council of Europe really involved? Could they be used in the future? Is this why the UK gov want to leave the ECHR because they would have to leave the council of Europe which is not the EU ? I don’t think it’s helpful to just dismiss anything without exploring it. Johnson is infamous for inattention to detail, doesn’t mean we should be.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.