Kennedy's Scotland
Sir: Mr Ludovic Kennedy's article on Scotland is so full of false analogies and unsupported generalisations that it is impossible to deal with all of them in a brief letter and I therefore confine myself to noting one or two.
He writes, 'England has always liked to keep her offspring close to her apron-strings' and then goes on to talk about Cyprus and India as if Scotland, Cyprus and India all shared the condition of being 'offspring of England'. It is only a Scottish Nationalist who could write such rubbish.
His answer to people who say, 'What are you going to do about the British National Debt, North Sea oil, the Scottish pound and so on ?' is incredible: 'These are complex and controversial questions, but in the broad view they are really irrelevant.' What, in Mr Kennedy's view, is a relevant question ?
Another of Mr Kennedy's wild assertions is that if independence is acceptable in legal and religious affairs then why not politically too? One has only to read the statement to see it for the nonsense it is, a complete non sequitur. And how little Mr Kennedy knows his own people when he says that the characteristic which distinguishes the Scots from the English is their 'deference'. I can only interpret this as showing Mr Kennedy's contempt for the great majority of Scots who are against separation and who therefore in his eyes show 'deference' to the English when they are really being hard-headed.
John A. Hall 59 Shedden Park Road, Kelso, Roxburghshire
Previous page
