IN his letter (The EU is not a superstate but it’s heading that way, August 2), Jim Fairlie replied to my earlier letter in praise of EU membership. He sees dishonesty and inconsistency where I see transparent candour in the SNP’s positions on Brexit and on a Scottish currency. He also thinks the EU’s role in securing European peace since the Second World War was “largely fictitious”.
A failure to mention the Warsaw Pact and Nato in my letter drew criticism for Mr Fairlie and it is true that the Cold War which ended almost 30 years ago in 1991 with the disintegration of the Warsaw Pact did oversee an uneasy European, even global, peace. But since that Soviet collapse many of the former Pact’s Soviet satellite states – I believe seven – have joined Nato and the EU, presumably foreseeing that peace, stability and prosperity will ensue. So far, I am glad to say they are right.
European warfare had been habitual and virtually constant for centuries but escalated terribly and became global twice in an awful period between 1914 and 1945. It could not be allowed to happen again. And so the specific structures of the various co-operative European communities of the 1950s and 60s and which developed into the EU were designed to completely discourage individual member states from rearmament. Inter European warfare was to become so impracticable that it would be just about unthinkable. We went from constant war, via all-out global war, to near miraculous peace, and even the Balkan area, so often a theatre for vicious and brutally ethnic warfare, is now joining that progress towards peaceful and beneficial interdependence. Is the peace giving function of the EU since its formation “fictitious” as Mr Fairlie suggests? I think not.
Jim Fairlie wants a Scottish currency and complains that I didn’t address his point. I am more relaxed about currency than perhaps he is. That is because we may have to be rather nimble and adaptable in the changing post-independence landscape. We may run through several of the many options before currency settles down. Robert the Bruce or Marie Curie on our banknotes? It’s all one to me. Our economics and our whole culture will change rapidly and I hope it is all within the peace-enjoying European family of nations.
I fully respect Mr Fairlie’s viewpoint is different and I am happy to agree to differ. But for the next few crucial years I’ll be resisting leaving the EU as much as I’ll be supporting Scottish independence. For me, the success of the latter is so tightly linked to remaining in the former. And oh, how we need the input of our current and future EU students, workers, professionals and young people! The EU offers a bright internationalist future. The future prospects of a Brexited Scotland are dismal by comparison.
David Crines
Hamilton
I READ the National Monday to Saturday. I have noted the suggestion often that the Unionist media reporting is biased against the SNP and indy supporters. I live and work in Aberdeen and read the local paper, The Press & Journal (P&J), also.
On Monday, July 30, I noted that there was absolutely no coverage of the Inverness Yes march, held the previous Saturday. However, on Thursday, August 2, two letters appeared in the letters column. One was headed by a photograph of Inverness marchers, at least it purported that to be so. Both letters were written by persons living in the Inverness area. A third letter appeared on Friday, August 3, submitted by an Aberdeen resident who often contributes to the SNP-bad campaign.
All three letters were of the same tenor ... that the marchers were a rabble and the good folk of Inverness were grossly inconvenienced by the cacophony created.
I had previously believed that the P&J were non-biased in their reporting but I am having second thoughts. I urge Aberdonians who read both the National and the P&J to redress this imbalance by submitting their views in response regularly.
It seems to me that those favouring the Union are orchestrating a campaign of letter writing to denounce and denigrate those who support independence and the SNP Government. It is of course the case that likely many of such letters will not be published but a point will be made to the editorial team.
Peter Macari
Aberdeen
THERE is much wailing and gnashing of teeth over Scotland and EU membership or possible EU membership.
Many far smarter than me write about misinformation from both sides, many claim to believe in independence and both claim to have Scotland’s interest at heart – some even throw the dolly out of the pram.
What I have read is that Scotland would not automatically gain access but the Scottish case would be accelerated.
To my simple mind the one thing that nobody appears to mention is the Scottish people and what they want. Everyone likes to talk about us Scots being sovereign – well, until after independence, this is not a decision that will be up to Scots to make. You would think after independence an election would be called and one of the main planks for parties would be the EU, and failing that a plebiscite on the issue.
Most in the independence movement just want independence from Westminster, so my advice is let’s not put the cart before the horse. Can we just concentrate on winning our freedom first without the “he said, she said”?
Bryan Auchterlonie
Perthshire
WHEN are we going to notice the closures and job losses taking place every day now? Aulds Bakery is in liquidation, with 180 jobs at risk.
To those people, that will be much more important than Wings over Scotland being kicked off YouTube.
David Ritchie
North Ayrshire
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here