I was as perplexed, as many other Scotsman readers must have been, by the article, “No vote is nae threat to a smug London elite”, by George Kerevan (Perspective, 27 September).
I read it with a feeling that the writer lived in a parallel universe, as strange observations were made about the nature of how we describe ourselves.
He creates a “new, rancid definition of Britishness”, which is as bogus as… well, Braveheart is an example that comes to mind.
However, he delights in confusing himself, as well as his readership, by saying: “Down south, Englishness is being replaced with a new-fangled national identity called British. Not the old Britishness… which we used as a synonym for Englishness.”
Speak for yourself, Mr Kerevan. British is British and English is English. Most of us know the difference, even if you don’t.
Deep down, the game plan, which is the main aim of the SNP, of which Mr Kerevan, I discovered, is a standard-bearer, is to talk down and demean the UK. Casting aspersions is the least of it and Mr Kerevan uses it with barely concealed delight.
He asks: “Would you want to be in a UK run by the likes of Nigel Farage?” to which one might counter: “Would you like to be in a separate Scotland run by Alex Salmond?”
Under Mr Farage, we would at least have no unaccountable Brussels eurocrats.
Under Mr Salmond, we would have “guardians” sticking their noses into our family affairs, the mother of all databases keeping an eye on us (again), huge numbers of foreign immigrants, everything in Gaelic and a cordoned-off land border with England. One’s blood freezes at the thought.
However, I agree with Mr Kerevan that a No vote will not extinguish Scottish national identity. As it is, we see a lot of it in a completely British context, so, for all his anti-English and anti-British vitriol, Scotland is very much in evidence in the UK and the support for the positive, Better Together campaign continues to dominate opinion polls in Scotland. Long may it continue to do so.
Andrew HN Gray