Nigel Farage’s shock decision to stand in the General Election continues to cause reverberations on our Letters Pages.
On Saturday, one of our readers posed the question of whether Mr Farage would suffer an eighth consecutive defeat.
Read that letter here.
That question was emphatically answered yesterday by a letter writer who wrote that the Reform Party leader would triumph because he “articulates the concerns of many, perhaps the silent indigenous majority”.
Read that letter here.
That prompted a concerned response from one of our correspondents today.
Subscribe to The Herald for only £1 for 3 months
Trudy Duffy-Wigman of Crook of Devon writes: "Alan Fitzpatrick argues that Nigel Farage represents the silent majority because he will put pressure on any future government to curb immigration. Apart from the fact that many, maybe even the majority, of the people, have little or no problems with immigration, he uses a phrase that is an absolute red flag to me: the indigenous majority. Would he care to explain this rather nebulous expression? A proud name like Fitzpatrick suggests Irish-Anglo-Norman heritage: so when exactly do you become indigenous?
"I am a proud new Scot from the Netherlands and my Irish-Dutch children have grown up here. Are they indigenous? Am I, after 27 years? Like many non-Scottish nationals, I have put roots here; have contributed to the social and economical fabric of this country.
"The problems mentioned by many people who want to curb immigration are real. However, they are not caused by immigration but by structurally underfunding vital services in this country; raising profits that go directly into the pockets of wealthy people.
"I hear so often: it is not you we have problems with; you are integrated and speak the language; you know the customs. But there is a darker side to this, and it is time for Mr Farage and his ilk to come clean: what they mean by being 'indigenous' is in fact being white and non-Muslim."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel