STEVE Arnott’s long letter in Saturday’s National was like a breath of fresh air in the somewhat stale atmosphere of the debate on the Scottish election next year.
As Steve says, the logic of maximising the Yes vote in the list section of the ballot is well understood, at least by people in the Yes movement. We who support independence, as our primary objective, should vote SNP on the constituency section of the ballot, but we need to select another independence-supporting party for our list vote, or that vote could be discounted much to the advantage of the Unionist parties.
READ MORE: Keep an open mind about the idea of a Yes alliance for 2021
Steve is right that we must approach this in an open, fraternal and rational way and try to ensure that the huge number of Scots who support independence is reflected in the list MSPs elected as well as in the constituency section. This will then reflect a significant majority for Yes in the new Scottish Parliament.
Of course British Unionist policy will be to “divide and rule” – nothing new or surprising about that, it has been employed by the Westminster establishment in the British empire for 300 years, and people have fallen for it again and again with devastating consequences for the people who fell into that trap.
Anyone with an ounce of political acumen can predict that the SNP will win almost all the constituency seats, particularly if all Yes supporters vote SNP and no other parties try to split the Yes vote by standing in these seats with no hope of winning, as some might be tempted to do. If this does happen, then voting SNP again in the list section is virtually to throw your vote away, which would be very helpful to the Unionist parties. We must not fall into that trap again.
We must have the debate Steve is calling for. The Yes movement is, and indeed needs to be, a broad church with room for a wide range of opinions, and indeed parties such as the Greens and the SSP.
What is essential to the independence movement is that we make full use of the energy and talent in an organised way to invite all Yes supporters, including SNP supporters, to vote to ensure that the alliance takes most of the list seats.
In this coming election the Unionists will have considerable financial support, plus the support of most of the media and the UK establishment, but if we adapt an intelligent approach to organise ourselves in a sensible way we can soundly defeat them in the election, and this we must do if we are serious about independence.
Andy Anderson
Saltcoats
OH dear, it’s so sad that all these folks with ideas of how to do it better are aiding and abetting the contingencies that would see Scotland remain shackled to the out-of-date notion of a United Kingdom. Has-beens who feel that their opinions are gold dust, rivals who feel they have the best way of doing it, moaners who just love to moan – please, folks, INDEPENDENCE is our goal.
You are feeding the press with soundbites and making the notion of a split in the SNP seem a reality! Stop the playground stuff of “I can do it better...” Our FM is doing a great job, and needs all our support in these difficult days.
Get your heads down, button your lips and join the grassroots push for independence.
E Ahern
East Kilbride
RUTH Wishart describes brilliantly the opportunities and dangers that lie ahead of the independence movement at this very delicate moment in its history, just as a majority of the people of Scotland seem to be turning in our direction (SNP MPs now need to spend more time on the home front, February 25). I would beg all of us to think, speak and act very carefully, and most of all to remain together in our common aim. So many will rejoice if we don’t.
Jean Anderson Hall
Edinburgh
READ MORE: Ruth Wishart: Ignored and impotent SNP MPs should spend more time in Scotland
ROSEMARY Smith (Letters, February 25) says “I haven’t heard of a crusade of secularists yet; in fact I don’t even think they have formed a group”. She might be interested to know that the National (sic – it’s UK-wide) Secular Society (www.secularism.org.uk) has been in existence since 1866, and its Scottish counterpart (www.secularsociety.scot) since 2013. I joined the SSS in 2014 when they came out in support of independence.
Secularism, of course, does NOT equal atheism; there are plenty of people of faith who concur that the separation of religion and state, so that no-one is either advantaged or disadvantaged because of their beliefs, is desirable – and that is what secularists campaign for.
S Fisk
East Ayrshire
SARAH Glynn’s (Why the Kurds were branded ‘terrorists’, February 22) attitude towards terrorism and PKK does nothing but undermine international fight against terrorism.
Likening terrorist leader Ocalan, who has in his hands the bloods of tens of thousands, including civilians with children among them, to Nelson Mandela is just absurd. Let me remind you that the European Court of Human Rights overturned Ocalan’s applications as well.
READ MORE: Sarah Glynn: Why the Kurds were branded 'terrorists'
One armed group can’t be a terrorist organisation attacking civilians one day and not be terrorists anymore when they attack security forces only the next day. PKK, not the Kurds, is an armed terrorist organisation and re-imagining it as a thorny rose or any other twisted analogy that might be drawn will not change that fact.
There is no good terrorist vs bad terrorist; “someone else’s terrorist is free to do whatever they like as long as they don’t operate against me” is an attitude which will hurt everyone. As the international community, what we need is a common stance in the face of terrorism which is “zero tolerance” against it.
Nafi Cemal Tosyalı
Turkish Consul General in Edinburgh
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