THE local authority elections are turning out to be much more interesting and potentially constructive than seemed likely till recently.
The international picture has forced a review of the entire range of political relationships. Sweden and Finland are looking at Nato favourably and it is unlikely that Scotland when independent would not do the same. Macron’s success has stabilised the EU and made Brexit seem even more hare-brained both from the wide spectrum of Western democracy down to the detailed fissures opening up in Ireland – described by George Kerevan in The National (Why Yes supporters should keep close tabs on May’s Stormont election, Apr 25). Ukraine’s unity under stress has shown again the advantage of those fighting to defend their home and the implications of what constitutes national sovereignty.
READ MORE: UK's cycle of austerity and racism cannot be broken without independence
But all these are dwarfed by the clear message that Putin is profoundly ignorant of the human race’s need to make a step from its primitive emotional stage to an understanding of its role in a balanced use of the planet’s resources. His use of old technologies like tanks and artillery shows this. Even more clearly it has shown the insanity of the nuclear threat. Most vividly it has shown the reliance of the West on Russian fossil fuel and artificial fertilisers. The political philosophy which encompasses a considered answer to all this is that know as “Green”.
Green ideas are are for international good neighbourhood, but are concerned with ensuring that local decisions are made locally. They are against all technologies which despoil the environment.
Thoughtful writers in The National such as Elliot Bulmer and Gerry Hassan argue from green principles in supporting small-scale democracy. It is to be hoped that voters understand this and the Green Party benefit from their sound policies of democracy, equality, sustainability and devolution, these being the keys to better local, national and world government.
Iain WD Forde
Scotlandwell
IN Tuesday’s National the Green candidate Jill Belch made a number of statements about Ward 2, Strathmore, in Perth and Kinross which are not correct (‘Five years and no new ideas’, Apr 26).
Firstly she asserts that her party won the biggest number of second-preference votes in 2017. This totally wrong! Indeed, the second preferences for the Green candidate were the lowest of all seven candidates. Her party received 317, which is less than one-third of the number picked up by both the Conservative and both of the SNP candidates.
She also goes on to say that “Historically we have always returned two Conservative candidates [in Strathmore]”. No, we have not – the SNP normally picks up two seats and 2017 was the exception. In fact, in 2012 both SNP candidates were elected in round one with a total of 41.7% of the vote. Interestingly, the LibDem and Tory candidate were also elected in round one – a rare occurrence in any ward.
READ MORE: Can the SNP depose the scandal-ridden Tory trolls running Angus council?
The turnout in council elections is always poorer than for Holyrood or Westminster elections. If your readers want see the removal of Tory etc candidates then they can help by signing up for postal votes. Fortunately, a lot of effort has been made in this respect in Perthshire North, and John Swinney out-polled the Tories with postal votes in 2021 for the first time. That will help in the upcoming council elections.
Another really important way for party members to become actively involved is by doing “knock-up” on May 5. They could do so by popping “Vote TODAY” cards through their supporters’ doors and even more importantly, chapping on these doors later on to check if they have voted. It is so effective when some people think they cannot vote because the have lost their polling card; they don’t need one. Just call your local party office to find out how to help.
Neil Myles
Scone
J FARRELL’S fascinating article on “The history of collapsing societies and what the modern world needs to learn about them” (Apr 17) was a thought-provoking piece, comparing the fate of Knossos circa 4,000 years ago to the potential of apocalypse today. I happily bow to his knowledge of Knossos, but his description of an apparently harmonious society brought down by its lack of ramparts and weaponry does raise serious doubts in my mind. A “stable ... civilisation” it may have been, but “admirable”? Was it not an extremely hierarchical society, ranging from elites that could build extraordinary temples to widespread slavery? Might not the fall of that civilisation have been internally determined, revealing that it was not “stable” over time?
And therefore, to conclude that global harmony requires a “ balance of power, or terror” is seriously miscued. “Apocalyptic arsenals” are never harmonious, far less static. They lead, inevitably, to arms races with an eventuality that is both predictable and destructive to civilisation. Far better for the future of civilisation and of the planet would be to address the societal inequalities that have justified conflict throughout history.
Ewen Smith
Glasgow
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 here