I LIKE to think that I have an open mind and, cards on the table, I voted to stay in the EU. All the same, there was a majority Leave vote and I have since tried to find the positives in this. When I dig through the Leave arguments, particularly those of the hard Brexiters, I struggle to find many concrete benefits. Other than the debatable benefits of more control on fishing, the Leave arguments seem to boil down to being unhappy about loss of control, having laws passed by unelected bureaucrats and loss of control on immigration. There are sometime vague references to trade deals with third-party countries but absolutely no specifics on how much they will benefit us, if at all, and when such deals might be struck.

I do accept the desire by many Leave voters to take control, but I find it interesting that the ire of the Brexiters is so exclusively focused on Europe. As an individual I live in a world where decisions that have the potential to affect my life are made by businesses, local authorities, transport providers, educational establishments, the Holyrood Government, Westminster Parliament and the House of Lords amongst others. Often, I may be unhappy with the decisions they make, but what can I do, I am but an individual? For some of the above institutions I get a vote, but even so, my point of view is almost never taken into account. Why therefore are the EU institutions singled as the major element over which we have no control? We shouldn’t kid ourselves, none of us have much control on our lives and leaving the EU will never change that, but merely serve to impoverish and make our lives harder by removing us from the biggest trading block and free travel area that ever existed. I hope that sanity prevails and we can at least agree to stay in the single market and customs union.

If you truly believe that totally leaving all the EU institutions is the right strategy, please write back here and tell us the concrete benefits. And please, do not bother to mention “popular mandate”, “taking back control” or “controlling immigration”. These put no dinner on the table.

Bob Downie,

66 Mansewood Road, Glasgow.

BREXIT didn't create the faultline that runs through Britain today, it merely revealed it. EU membership is a political football in a cultural civil war that has been simmering ever since the sun set on the British Empire.

When the Common Market was first established in 1957, Britons – of all political persuasions – dismissed it as "the assembly of the defeated" and promptly set up a rival free trade area to prove that Britain was still Europe's premier state. When the European Free Trade Association (Efta) was hopelessly out-competed by the Common Market we begged to join but found, in President De Gaulle, an implacable opponent who vetoed our applications throughout the 1960s by deriding Britain as "an American satellite with delusions of grandeur". The whole sorry Brexit saga has proved De Gaulle posthumously correct. We are an American satellite and we do suffer from delusions of grandeur.

One ironic symptom of our post-imperial malaise is that "Little Englandism" – originally an expression of anti-colonialist sentiment – has become the last refuge of those who mourn the Empire's passing. Polls have shown that three-quarters of English Tory Party members regard Scotland and Northern Ireland as disposable baggage when compared to Brexit.

Now that the Empire has been restored to its rightful owners the Rule Britannia crowd want to rule out Britannia by cutting off the Celtic fringe in favour of a Little England redoubt where they can wallow in imperial nostalgia and national self-pity. Europe will be better off without such a neurotic basket-case and Britain's battle with its imperial past will continue for another generation at least.

Sean Pigott,

Flat 2/L,

13 Wilson Street, Largs.

THE problems with Brexit just keep coming. As all this is taking place, we have the SNP waiting on the sidelines to strike when the UK is at its lowest point and demand another shot at independence.

The SNP is ignoring a few extremely pertinent facts in this quest. We are bonded to England by geography, culture, history and commerce. If breaking a 40-year bond with 27 different countries, many of them previous adversaries, with many different languages, a different currency and a different way of life is proving very difficult just how is breaking away Scotland from the rest of the United Kingdom going to be actually achieved?

Scotland and England are like Siamese twins. Splitting them apart risks losing the weaker one. Given the sheer scale of difficulties we are currently encountering right now, even with simply the time frame, it makes a mockery of Alex Salmond's claim of attaining complete independence in 18 months, quite apart from the realisation by the SNP's own Growth Commission that financial independence is going to take years to achieve, if ever. Scots need an awful lot more clarity from the SNP on just how it is going to manage the Herculean task of independence and what absolute gains the EU offer us as opposed to the UK before giving it any chance of permission to try again. 2014 was, in hindsight, a let-off for Scotland. The SNP may have in excess of 120,000 members in Scotland who are currently on side and are happy to march, wave flags and believe in its wisdom. That just leaves five million Scots who are yet to be persuaded.

Dr Gerald Edwards, Broom Rd, Glasgow.

ALEXANDER McKay (Letters, October 19) attempts to appear detached with his statement that he voted Remain and accepted the results of the referendums in 2014 and 2016 as being the will of the people in the UK and Scotland; one must think he is completely unaware that Scotland voted 62 per cent to 38 per cent to remain, but must be overruled by England and Wales, who are only now starting to realise what a dog’s breakfast they have created.

Mr McKay has movable principles. His heroine, Theresa May, has moved her principle from Remain, so he is slavishly following her example.

Jim Lynch,

42 Corstorphine Hill Crescent, Edinburgh.

READERS can depend on Ruth Marr to recite simplistic arguments for Scottish independence, the latest being comparable population figures in Finland, Malta and Monaco (Letters, October 19). I am sure the citizens of these would welcome Ms Marr's explanation as to why they should consider themselves extremely fortunate to enjoy nationhood.

Duncan Macintyre,

2 Fort Matilda Terrace, Greenock.