I ALWAYS read letters from Julia Pannell with interest because they are thoughtful and logical, but I am afraid I must respond to her latest submission (Letters, May 29) as the narrative she seeks to establish must not be allowed to go unchallenged.
This argument is gaining traction as it seeks to become the dominant narrative, but is in reality a classic case of attempting to rationalise the irrational and honour the dishonourable. It is also highly ideological and therefore quite dogmatic.
It is beyond debate that the EU result was a fraud perpetrated by a catalogue of lies and deception, but this misleading narrative insists that I must honour it. This week we read that Boris the Spider is to appear in court for possible misconduct in public office by lying and misleading the public to secure a result that Ms Pannell still insists that I should honour.
As any sensible person with a sense of justice will reply: that will be chocolate.
It also escapes Ms Pannell that another of the assurances we got from the Westminster pigsty was that the EU referendum was consultative and not binding, but has now morphed into a “thus saith the lord” that we are all duty-bound to respect on pain of eternal damnation because it went the way that the Pannells of the world wanted it to.
Leave voters always take umbrage at the suggestion that they did not know what they were voting for, but the simple fact remains that they didn’t, regardless of how offended they become at that fact.
“Leave means Leave” will surely enter the annals of history as the most meaningless phrase ever invented. That is demonstrable because no-one – not May, Corbyn, Boris or Nigel et al – can still explain it after three years. All that anyone can be sure of is that it will bring chaos and disaster as all of the assurances and predictions we were given prior to the referendum have evaporated and the leading Leavers have all been reduced to the position of saying “you really didn’t believe that did you?”
Thus, the Leave position was not only mendacious, it was all propaganda. Yet I am still required to honour this dangerous and deceitful nonsense.
Now, if that were not bad enough, Ms Pannell has given her vote, and therefore her support, to some of the most odious and disreputable people on the planet, who are also, paradoxically, the very elite that they themselves rail against.
How anyone can vote for Nigel Farage, Ann Widdicombe, Rees-Mogg’s sister, to name just a few, genuinely escapes me. Does she really think that such people will give Scotland a second’s thought or seek to honour our wishes should they ever take office, that they really identify with ordinary working people, or have any concept of democracy?
These people are the epitome of English nationalism, of the dominant establishment and the standard bearers of free-market fundamentalism.
These are the people who will sell the NHS and privatise everything that moves, who fantasise about the no-deal that Ms Pannell assures us she does not want.
These people ARE the Westminster elite. Not only is their argument a lie, but they are a lie.
Anyone who follows events must surely be aware that Farage and Aaron Banks are being investigated, that Farage is a disciple of Steve Bannon and is following the Trump playbook, and that a Farage-led government would turn us into the 51st state of the USA.
No, Ms Pannell, I think I will stick with the devils I know.
Peter Kerr
Kilmarnock
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel