Originally Posted by
HFCEighteen75
Complicit? Yes. Equally complicit? No chance, in my opinion.
They are part of the problem, you're right about that. But at the moment, their level of sectarianism is about on par with Hearts'. They've (recently) ramped up the 'orange' this and 'orange' that. Before that, however, Celtic almost never sang anything that was openly sectarian.
People conflate two separate things here, Celtic sing about proscribed terrorist groups. Are they complete tools for doing so? Yes, of course. Are they being sectarian by doing so? No. Some of the most influential members in Irish nationalist history were protestants (Parnell and Childers, for example). And while there were sectarian undertones to some of the Troubles, it was not the primary factor. Well, at least until the UVF got involved and started deciding that catholic = fenian = IRA terrorist.
Rangers used to actually have the high ground in terms of not singing about proscribed terrorist groups, but they have brought some of the older songs back, and now regularly sing about them coming down the road with the UVF and about the UDR Four. So they've completely forfeited whatever sense of superiority they had in that regard.
Here is the fundamental difference, Rangers' songbook is littered with sectarianism:
- "up to our knees in fenian blood"
- "we hate Celtic, fenian *******s"
- "cheer up Alan Stubbs/Neil Lennon, oh what can it be, to a sad fenian *******"
- "Dundee, Hamilton, **** the Pope and the Vatican"
- "**** the Pope and the IRA"
- "we hate Catholics, everybody hates, Roman Catholics."
It is wholly disingenuous to pretend that Celtic's songbook is remotely as bad in that regard. They (occasionally) sing song number three about Warburton/Levein/Gerrard, but here's where the distinction lies. Gerrard isn't "Orange". Gerrard is from a Catholic background. With Rangers, they know and care about which of their opposing managers are "fenians". Derek McInnes and Craig Levein are never told to cheer up, for example. It is reserved for known Catholics - which for the uneducated Ibrox masses usually means "they played for Celtic".
I came to the conclusion that the religious divide in Scotland does not mean the same thing to Celtic fans as it does to Rangers. The dynamic of power between Protestants and Catholics in this country means that many Rangers fans see Celtic (and Hibs') existence as a personal affront to their way of life and their general dominance. Scottish Catholics were, for many decades, subjugated by many and treated as second class citizens. It is, to an extent, the same argument about whether black people can be racist towards white people. You would have to first remove the context of centuries of slavery and hegemony before you could even begin to answer it.
I wouldn't have had any objection to Clarke calling out the Celtic fans for their own sectarianism on Sunday, by the way. They need to curb theirs too, but it is in no way comparable to Rangers'. And until the authorities realise that there is one primary offending party, they will forever be trying to appease both sides. They need to grow some balls and start clamping down on the root cause of this, and that is the superiority culture attached with both Rangers in a socio-political/religious sense and, maybe above all, the Orange Order.