Left Wing Clubs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

Could someone tell me how Che's image isn't a symbol of capitalism at this stage? Read this before answering please

---

The article doesn't write anything more than the image of Che becoming a fashion icon.
The 2 most famous graphic images of Che are "free property", the one big commercial attempt to use the Che image to sell Vodka was successfully challenged in the courts by that photographer.
Other than that, there is just talk by advertising guys on how marketable his name would be and why his image appeals.
No, the image of Che is not a symbol of capitalism,
for the most part he is symbol of a revolutionary being used as an icon for the most part by young people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lim till i die

While I'm at it, anyone who identifies with Irish Republicanism in the Sinn Fein understanding of it can't class themselves as left wing. What's left wing about hating someone else because of their creed?? Or having economics policies written largely in crayon??

The fcukin stupidity of anyone claiming an exclusionist business like Celtic (And yes I know they are not as exclusionist as Rangers blah, blah, Jock Stein Prod blah, blah) is some paragon of far left virtue is baffling

Tell you what Da Real Rover, next time your over in Paradise inc. start singing James Connolly in the stand see how far you get.

Left wing my hole

The Old Firm. Two clubs who grew fat off sectarianism and now that it's no longer hip are trying to wash their hands of all association :rolleyes:

---

Clearly you dont believe what I say, so research the Green brigade. Look at their photos etc, see their political leanings. As for the CSC and the CCS fighting skinheads and the like, well the teenagers who were running around with them mobs back in the 80s are now the primary leaders in the resurgent firms so chances are they have maintained something of there predecessors former beliefs. Also I dont buy into the Sinn Fein model of its warped republicanism, like you said, the sectarianism. I despise it and I despise Sinn Fein for its traditions in Sectarian violence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lim till i die

Well there was a socialist council elected in Liverpool at the time :rolleyes:

Besides 80s being a key bit again. It's the year 2007.

D'uh.........



You don't read your own posts?? :eek:



I fear any attempted explanation without the aid of sock puppets would be futile

---

As for this post?? Trying to deflect your lack of knowledge on this issue with sarcasm. If your going to argue with me on these topics can you please be capable of conducting yourself in a mature manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geysir

The article doesn't write anything more than the image of Che becoming a fashion icon.
The 2 most famous graphic images of Che are "free property", the one big commercial attempt to use the Che image to sell Vodka was successfully challenged in the courts by that photographer.
Other than that, there is just talk by advertising guys on how marketable his name would be and why his image appeals.
No, the image of Che is not a symbol of capitalism,
for the most part he is symbol of a revolutionary being used as an icon for the most part by young people.

---

Ah yes, so all the companies producing Che posters and T-shirts to sell to students are totally committed to left-wing revolutionary politics and aren't at all interested in making a quick buck.

So what, doesn't mean Che is the symbol of capitalism, no more than most of the people who wear his image have a clue about Che.
Nothing stronger that irony.

I would have to agree with lim till i die in that the image of Che Guevara's has become the symbol of Capitalism's (hopefully temporary) victory over Communism and more committed forms of Socialism as much as is the concept of "New Labour" a political example of the same.

While I'm not trying to deny that the likes of Macdonalds produce a far more virulently capitalistic stench, the Che image is hand in glove with Macdonalds as it allows the potential protesters, the ones who slip the Macdonalds net, to be able ot buy into the grand consumption for the sake of consumption. This is much in the way that the likes of Gap and Starbucks grew up as conceptually "Green" corporations - there will always be contrarians - how can we harvest from this fact. So the people who think that they are bucking the capitalist led consumerist culture are subscribing to it by the very act of buying something that reassures consumer capitalism's place in their lives: and before we hear the argument of purchase location, it is generally mass produced in a way that perpetuates the labour exploitation cycle, especially when it is bought from a seemingly black-economy style stall.

Indeed, if I am not mistaken, the most commonly used image was a likeness that Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick made, and was never paid for - further example of the march of capitalism's grubby impact

It is yet another example of what you could call Marketed-Leninism (as opposed to Market-Leninism) - the nostalgia dollar being eeked out of pseudo-soviet bars like Pravda for the upper orders of the Hamburger classes, the souvenier hats and medals hawked as trophies to the historically conscious travellers, and so forth.

The revolution will be downloaded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebeard

I would have to agree with lim till i die in that the image of Che Guevara's has become the symbol of Capitalism's (hopefully temporary) victory over Communism and more committed forms of Socialism as much as is the concept of "New Labour" a political example of the same.

While I'm not trying to deny that the likes of Macdonalds produce a far more virulently capitalistic stench, the Che image is hand in glove with Macdonalds as it allows the potential protesters, the ones who slip the Macdonalds net, to be able ot buy into the grand consumption for the sake of consumption. This is much in the way that the likes of Gap and Starbucks grew up as conceptually "Green" corporations - there will always be contrarians - how can we harvest from this fact. So the people who think that they are bucking the capitalist led consumerist culture are subscribing to it by the very act of buying something that reassures consumer capitalism's place in their lives: and before we hear the argument of purchase location, it is generally mass produced in a way that perpetuates the labour exploitation cycle, especially when it is bought from a seemingly black-economy style stall.

Indeed, if I am not mistaken, the most commonly used image was a likeness that Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick made, and was never paid for - further example of the march of capitalism's grubby impact

It is yet another example of what you could call Marketed-Leninism (as opposed to Market-Leninism) - the nostalgia dollar being eeked out of pseudo-soviet bars like Pravda for the upper orders of the Hamburger classes, the souvenier hats and medals hawked as trophies to the historically conscious travellers, and so forth.

The revolution will be downloaded.

---

Even though Che's image is being harvested by certain corporations and the like i do not agree with the sweeping statement that Che is now just an image of corporate capitalism. Your argument may stand up in the consumerist market in the west, but do you really think that in Africa, Asia and Latin America that Che is just another marketing tool? He is recognised as the revolutionary of our time by the vast majority of people and if certain segments of the wests population see's him as a marketing tool it in NO way means that is the only image he has. You could say his image has developed into a dual identity, those that still recognise him as the revolutionary and those that recognise him as another marketing tool.

But for the purpose of this debate the clubs who do unveil flags and banners of Che are not doing it for the consumerist market or any capitalist driven marketing campaign, they do it because he is an icon of Revolutionary Left Wing Politics.

Superbly put.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da Real Rover

...i do not agree with the sweeping statement that Che is now just an image of corporate capitalism.

---

I wouldn't imagine anyone would agree that Senor Guevara's legacy in this will only be as an image of capitalism. In fairness, the question asked was;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jebus

Could someone tell me how Che's image isn't a symbol of capitalism at this stage?

---

That is a question you implicitly agree to in your post, saying he effectively has a dual identity. It is clear that he is both used as an inspiration for revolution, and, unfortunately, his memory is trivialised by the use of his likeness as a marketing ploy. In other words, the main point is that his image has proliferated because it is iconic. So the question then becomes, is it iconic to the extent it is because of his revolutionary status or because it is seen as being cool by people who have no idea about the man himself? Obviously originally it was because of the political inferences but I think things are very much blurred now and personally I think his image has propagated so much at this stage that it is hard not to think that someone who buys a product with his image does so as they think it's cool as opposed to making a political statement. I agree though that in certain environments (football matches) his effigy is most logically construed in a political guise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da Real Rover

do you really think that in Africa, Asia and Latin America that Che is just another marketing tool?

---

Not just a marketing tool of course but I think you would be naive to believe companies, whatever the location, do not play on his popularity for their financial benefit. As an example, there is a brand of cigarettes in Peru called El Che with his image adorning the top of the box and near the butt of each cigarette. Clearly he is a marketing tool in that situation. It worked on me anyway! Nice and strong they were too. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebeard

Indeed, if I am not mistaken, the most commonly used image was a likeness that Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick made, and was never paid for - further example of the march of capitalism's grubby impact

---

Are you referring to him never being paid for the service or never being paid for the use of the image? Artistic and intellectual property is not a bastion of communist ideology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da Real Rover

Ahh but that was when Left Wing political activism was highest in Britain and is thus easier to identify the grass roots politcal leanings of British Clubs. They are still clubs of left wing leanings, which is why the CSC and CCS refuse to join a Scottish national firm with Hearts, Rangers and Airdrie because of there far right leanings. Many members of each being involved in The BNP and The National Front.
If you still refute them being Left Wing Clubs have a look at some of the photos of the green brigade. Many flags of Che Guevara etc. So in conclusion, Hibs and Celtic are where the grassroots in the majority identify themselves with the left of centre.

BTW who are on a first strike policy.

---

Misty-eyed socialist nonesense from someone who endorses the political wing of the INLA.

Liverppol and Everton would have more a left-wing heritage than Celtic would. Who gives a fcuk what haoppened in the 1980's. I've no doubt you'll find a higher percentage of left-leaning voters and trade union members amongst Derry City's support, for example, than Celtics, but that doesn't make City modern-day Stalinists.

Bottom line is that British politics has resoundingly rejected left-wing politics, as finally has Scottish politics about 20 years later (e.g. note the decimiation of the Scottish Socialists in this year's Assembly elections). Politics has moved on, and so have football fans with it. The 1980's may as well be the 1680's for all that it matters now.

Some countries have a fundamental left-right political split in their football teams.

Cypriot football is extremely politicised. It's roots go back to the Greek civil warc after WWII, as supporters and players of various clubs took sides. APOEL Nicosia is considered the main right wing club, with Omonia the main left wing one. Omonia was estabnlished byp[layers expelled form APOEL for not backing the right-wing side in the Greek civil war, and has been left-wing form the start.

Israel like-wsie has a left-right split in football that refelctes the politics of the country. Hapoel Tel-Aviv, for example, have always been a let-wing team ('Hapoel' is Hebrew for 'workers'). Beitar Jerusalem have been associated with the Israeli-right since the club was founded by the leader of a youth right-wing movement ('Beitar'). Their fans are very anti-Arab, and are associated largely with the Likud party. Hapoel Jerusalem were Beitar's traditional footballing and political rivals, but they've been outside the top league for some time.

Football reflects society. Hence - where you have serious left-right splits in the politics of society, it is likewise carried over into football. Despite what some way want to believe, Britain and Ireland has never had a serious left-right political split - certainly not to the extent that a lot of other European countries did. Hence, pinning certain political labels on English or Scottish clubs is contrived and fairly meaningless. Football in England and Scotland has not existed in some surreal parallel universe where politics has been dramatically more important than within the society in which it operated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poor Student

Are you referring to him never being paid for the service or never being paid for the use of the image? Artistic and intellectual property is not a bastion of communist ideology.

---

If I was referring to the latter, you would of course be right. However, if I am correct in what I have been told (which I may well not be and would liek to be put straight if I'm not please) I am talking about the worker (in this case artist) being exploited by being restricted from access to the profit and benefits derived by his work, i.e. the image.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

Misty-eyed socialist nonesense from someone who endorses the political wing of the INLA.

Liverppol and Everton would have more a left-wing heritage than Celtic would. Who gives a fcuk what haoppened in the 1980's. I've no doubt you'll find a higher percentage of left-leaning voters and trade union members amongst Derry City's support, for example, than Celtics, but that doesn't make City modern-day Stalinists.

Bottom line is that British politics has resoundingly rejected left-wing politics, as finally has Scottish politics about 20 years later (e.g. note the decimiation of the Scottish Socialists in this year's Assembly elections). Politics has moved on, and so have football fans with it. The 1980's may as well be the 1680's for all that it matters now.

---

Thank you very much for saving me from further banging my head against a wall :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dodge

So only the working class count as people now? ;) Surely if the majority of the people are middle class the club of the middle class would be the clubof the people?

---

Good answer Dodge, saw that coming :p

Quote:

---

Visible but still tiny (in numbers). There's no real need to crush them as they're pretty redundant at this stage

---

In fairness you'd be one of the first to give out about the BSC even though they make up a far higher percentage of Bohs' support

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dcfcsteve

Misty-eyed socialist nonesense from someone who endorses the political wing of the INLA.

Liverppol and Everton would have more a left-wing heritage than Celtic would. Who gives a fcuk what haoppened in the 1980's. I've no doubt you'll find a higher percentage of left-leaning voters and trade union members amongst Derry City's support, for example, than Celtics, but that doesn't make City modern-day Stalinists.

Bottom line is that British politics has resoundingly rejected left-wing politics, as finally has Scottish politics about 20 years later (e.g. note the decimiation of the Scottish Socialists in this year's Assembly elections). Politics has moved on, and so have football fans with it. The 1980's may as well be the 1680's for all that it matters now.

---

If you have a problem with my political leanings, PM me because this isnt a debate on politcal parties.
Everything you said there is your own personal opinion, no facts. Untill you can give me some solid facts on Celtics political leaning what you said is irrelevant. Anyone can make your sweeping statements and not have a clue what they are talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da Real Rover

Untill you can give me some solid facts on Celtics political leaning what you said is irrelevant.

---

Irish Republican :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Da Real Rover

If you have a problem with my political leanings, PM me because this isnt a debate on politcal parties.
Everything you said there is your own personal opinion, no facts. Untill you can give me some solid facts on Celtics political leaning what you said is irrelevant. Anyone can make your sweeping statements and not have a clue what they are talking about.

---

Firstly - berating me for mentioning that your signature promotes the political wing of the INLA in the midst of a discussion about the supposed political leanings of football clubs is laughable. My point was hardly off-piste - get over it.

Secondly - I will re-direct everything you said back to yourself. You were the one who made the initial declarations of fact without evidence. You are saying something exists (e.g, Celtic's left-wing leanings), without providing the evidence. Conversely, it is extremely difficult for me to provide evidence that something doesn't exist.

So bar the odd isolated thing from over 20 years ago, please provide evidence regarding the supposed left-wing leanings of the Celtic football club and even a sizeable minority of its fans. I gave examples of clubs in Cyprus and Israel who have very strong and clear political leanings/connections. Let's see the same for Celtic please.

Anyone can make your sweeping statements etc etc etc.... :rolleyes:

I read a book a few years back on Scottish football and politics, sectarianism, the divisions, history etc etc. Can't remember the name of it now but it was done by some academic from Aberdeen University. There were some interesting polls on supporters political opinions, quite a few i think, but one of the ones I remember concerned who supporters of whatever club voted for. Celtic's support voted something in the region of 90% Labour. Rangers two highest were both conservative and labour at about 40% each.

Now I know it doesn't really prove much , 'new labour' and all that, but as a mark of the traditional left in mainstream politics Labour were it and Celtic supporters have traditionally been also labour supporters. I have read many other books/articles/anecdotes to support this fact. I know its not ultra left anarchist stylee, but left anyway.

By the way I couldn't really give a damn about the left, and I'm not trying to score any type of trendy lefty points for the club I support, but I would see them as a mildly left wing club(i.e the support) more than not.

I couldn't give a toss about this debate other than pointing out that leaning to the left hasn't been 'trendy' for three decades. Modern 'trendies' are right wing, even extreme right wing, and use the term 'trendy' as an insult; which only goes to show how stupid most people are at this juncture.
Being stupid is very 'trendy'.