Sir: I have enjoyed reading the SPECTATOR for over ten
years, until a fortnight ago, when I was ap- palled by your leading article on the Common Market.
For a publication of your stan- dard to state that 'its position is unequivocal. It has been for some time, and remains, opposed to any attempt to join the European Economic Community' is to trans- late yourself from a thoughtful journal into a political broadsheet. In passing, it is interesting to note that you do concede the fact that you were not always against our joining. Your above-quoted statement means that, during the months and years that lie ahead, there will be no intelligent contribution from you about the pros and cons of joining, but merely the repetitive thump, thump, thump of a closed mind.
I will make my position abso- lutely clear. I am as biased in favour of going in as you are for staying out, but this is the right of an individual and not of a pub- lication with the tradition and heri- tage of the SPECTATOR. You should be for argument and thought, not for propaganda and bias.
It is not the object of this letter to set out what I believe are the political, economic, social and other reasons for joining, but to point out that you are about to make it very difficult for people like me, and there must be many among your readers, to endure your views on this subject while the negotiations and the debate unfold. It may even try severely those in genuine doubt, who can go elsewhere for bigotry and cant, but expect debate and reason from you.
Russell Fairgrieve Pankalan, Boleside, Galashiels
Mrs McLaughlin's 'facts' are her opinions, to which she is entitled, and indeed welcome. She ought to read the article again. So should Mr Fairgrieve.—Editor, SPECTATOR.
Previous page
