REGARDING the article about the death of Stuart Christie (Anarchist Christie dies at 74, August 17): I first met Stuart in late 1963. On hearing the news, in 1964, that he had been arrested in Spain, on charges of attempting to assassinate Franco, my first reaction was to proclaim, publicly, “Stuart is innocent!” – while, at the same time, thinking, privately, “mind you, it does sound kinda like something he might do”.
We both changed an awful lot over the years. But, as your article says, Stuart never wavered in beliefs that saw him persecuted, jailed and vilified by the British state, and “he was also a writer and publisher of anarchist works which would probably not have seen the light of day without his courage and devotion to the cause.”
READ MORE: Scot Stuart Christie who was in a plot to kill General Franco dies aged 74
However, I think your article was a bit misleading, in saying “later in life Christie disavowed violence”. That is a bit misleading in two ways:
1) It is a bit misleading in implying that, at one time, Stuart was all for violence. Like myself, he took part in non-violent protests against the ultimate state violence of nuclear weapons. Being prepared, as very much a last-resort exception, to take violent action against the brutally repressive regime of a fascist dictator, is NOT the same thing as being in favour of violence in any sort of more general sense.
2) Your statement is also a bit misleading in that it seems to imply that, in later life, Stuart might have rejected the right of the oppressed to fight back. He never did. Sure, “new forms of anti-capitalist protest have emerged, and these are constantly being developed and adapting to the changing situation” and folk are “finding more imaginative and exemplary ways to make the bad guys uncomfortable”; but that certainly doesn’t mean Stuart would have denounced anybody who made an attempt on a fascist dictator, like he did in 1964.
As for here and now, some of Stuart’s friends are involved in the Radical Independence Campaign, and in other non-party-political, but emphatically working class, campaigns, fighting back against the established order. Stuart’s position was quite clear.
Like he said: “Anarchists do not stand aside from popular struggle, nor do they attempt to dominate it; they seek to contribute, practically, whatever they can, and to assist, within the struggle, the highest possible levels of both individual solidarity and group solidarity.”
Dave Coull
Findowrie
I WAS interested to read Martin Hannan’s tribute to the “anarchist” Stuart Christie, in particular his reference to Stuart running “Britain’s most famous anarchist press” in Sanday in Orkney. At that time my husband and I were teaching in the Sanday school, and we would order textbooks for the school from Stuart.
He was always very efficient, friendly and courteous in his dealings with us, as was Brenda. We never heard him talk politics, with us or other islanders – perhaps, busy with the press, Sanday was a less overtly active spell in his political life.
Anne Cormack
Pitlochry
WHILE I remain convinced that Scots Wha Hae is and should remain our historic national anthem, letters in Tuesday’s edition demonstrate the wealth of national music available to us. Other suggestions for our anthem have included Freedom Come All Ye! by Hamish Henderson and A Man’s A Man For A That by Robert Burns.
READ MORE: Highland Cathedral would be a great choice for our national anthem
Flower of Scotland is, for the moment, our unofficial sporting anthem. While it is rightly attributed to Roy Williamson (1965) it is at least partly derived from Va Pensiero, the chorus of the Hebrew Slaves from Verdi’s opera Nabucco (1842) . Psalm 137 contains Hebrew thoughts about exile in Babylon. These were adapted for Verdi’s opera. Roy Williamson justifiably adapted them to a Scottish context for his song.
David Stevenson
Edinburgh
AS has been pointed out, the Conservatives for the 2021 election are likely to try to attack the performance of the SNP in government. One factor will be an attack on education suggesting a drop in standards. Archie Love (Letters, August 17) points out the failings of the statistical global comparisons that is based on.
The Scottish Curriculum for Excellence is based on much more important goals to help young people become “successful learners, confident individuals, responsible citizens, and effective contributors”.
Lisa MacDonald and Jon Southerington (Letters, August 15) put exams results in context, showing the limitation of using these to assess education standards and the capability of individuals. So don’t allow comparisons based on bad statistics to force us back to learning measured on exams judging memory and reactions on a day, which the recent situation clearly indicates has failed.
Rather, allow the education system to help develop well-balanced, rounded individuals with a levelling of opportunity for poorer backgrounds and disability.
The SNP must be more forceful and less apparently apologetic about education in Scotland.
Jim Stamper
Bearsden
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