Because I have been engaging in physical communication and activity, there has been less time to devote to my work, my writing and Myspace, although the subjects for attention have been piling up as I quickly read the writings of others. I am calling this piece a rambling because it is in response to the Blog of a friend. It is interesting that the majority of those with whom I exchange personal emails are Catholics or who were raised Catholics, with others interested in aspects of religions and beliefs across the spectrum. All these Catholics and ex Catholics have one thing in common, they were all idealists and even the most realist would still like to be, and as with all those who are or were of a fundamentalist faith, we all have healthy distrust of imposed authority. My contacts tend to be passionate people who try to make something of their lives and actively participate in trying to make the world safer and more caring places, primarily for the benefits of others, often others who they have never met and never will.
Fortunately most do not have some of my flaws, and I can compensate for these by contributing something of my experience gained from starting as an abused child, becoming a poacher, then gamekeeper, and then turning into a poacher once more but with the advantage of having been a gamekeeper. On regional TV recently the programme featured three individuals of the age of grandmothers who had already been arrested for a protest against the decision to start the process of replacing the Trident under water weapons of mass destruction delivery. They were planning to do what they felt was necessary, to try and make government take a different approach, I can understand why the Labour and Conservative parties are committed to the replacement programme and I suspect that were I in government and listened to what the service chiefs were advising and privy to genuine state information about the threats, I would play "safe." (Am I really using these words to describe spending money on weapons of mass destruction aimed at non combatants, and which could otherwise make a dent in saving the planet, and or bring required medicines, foods and other resources to Africa and other struggling societies?).
The "did Iraq hold weapons of mass destruction experience". Has made everyone, especially politicians in the USA and UK less trusting of their secret services, and with good cause. although those who employ people who will do anything for a government, also know that they will do anything, for anyone, if it interests them, and provides the lifestyle freedom which they need, and even if the politicians have never been part of some secret net work or club of self and shared interest, they will have quickly learnt how such networks operate and how to monitor and counterbalance.
My experience was with the predominantly non violent peace movement of the early 1960's. My difficulty at the time was that many of the early activists were like me, full of anger, opposition and suspicion, and ignorant of the realities of human behaviour, especially when it becomes collectivised. I once upset a kind and genuine activist who arranged for a small group to undertake voluntary work one evening a week, sending out a publication to subscribers, by declaring that it was difficult for me to convinced when those advocating non violence were so angry and troubled themselves. I have one my space friend who regularly has a rant in print, and those who do not know the individual better, have sometimes through their comments believed this reflects the whole person, rather than just a creative outlet, of a complex multidimensional individual, that we all are. Unfortunately, others channel their frustration, and sense of personal powerlessness, into less constructive, and sometimes harmful ways, to themselves, and to others.
There was also one meeting intended for those prepared to commit civil disobedience at the end of a campaign, where among a room of some fifty people there were only half a dozen who I knew were genuine and trustworthy. The difficulty was working out who was what among the others. There would have been undercover operatives or associates from the various national secret services of the main countries involved i.e. the UK, the USA and Russia which makes a potential of 12 with one for each national government and for each branch of the armed services, and it is possible that there were two for the national government, with one for internal security and the other for overseas, and this excludes any arms length covert groups directly or indirectly employed, especially those directly funded by the main arms making manufacturers and their agents.
Then of course there was the media, still in its electronic infancy. Some were open about their activities and one leading national paper sent a journalist to cover the three month campaign, at the end of which I was not sure if he had become one of us. Others were also open in their objective. I once accepted an invitation to meet a journalist for another national paper who admitted that he was under instruction to be nice and get me to talk and then write up the interview in as damaging way as he could. Because he liked me and was sympathetic to the cause he told me this in advance, but nevertheless did what he warned he said he would do, and it makes excruciatingly embarrassing reading to this day, although I also have to admit that it was closer to the truth about me than I still like to admit. Some at the meeting were blatant agent provocateurs calling on the campaign to use undercover tactics and to be prepared to use violence in self defence. Some were deranged with no mitigating qualities as anyone undertaken the venture had to be a little deranged don't, you think? I cannot remember if the young woman with four children in care was at this meeting or arrived later without a sleeping bag, inviting herself to share with those of the young men and who on two successive nights announced to the rest of the mixed sleeping on floor group that she would "let you have it tomorrow night because." Just before she transferred her affections to a third male, the police arrived to reunite with her offspring.
Of course we were aware that the more effective we became in gaining public support the more our lives were going to be monitored and some members who were confident in each other organised a dummy demonstration by telephone restricted to themselves and then arranged for someone to monitor the particular situation who was able to confirm that the authorities were much in evidence. These days there are few interested in matters of national security that would not expect anything less of governments and approve of such methods, supported by the technology which can enable monitoring of everything electronic, electronically without prior consent or official approval, and of everything and everyone else when cause can be shown. And because of my experience I also know the limitations of the most sophisticated methods. This in turn leads to calls for even stronger and tighter monitoring, even by those who would be horrified if such monitoring was then turned on them.
The reality is no different from the casualties of friendly fire. In any situation of armed conflict there will be potentially significant human errors of judgement and of simple error leading to the deaths of non combatants and those on the same side, including closest colleagues. These have to be regarded as unplanned sacrifices. There are always planned sacrifices such as in the First World War when tens of thousands were sent to their deaths because the public aroused by the media called for some token advance or theoretically morale boosting venture. And there is always opportunity for the settling of some private scores.
It is boring for anyone who has read what I have already written on the subject but it is worth repeating, the use of violence begets more violence whether it is an individual or collective act and whether sanctioned or organised by the state what ever the nature of the government, whether a form of rule of law overrides and whether there is a superimposed faith or ideology which one believes in or does not. However it is the function of any government, by definition, to protect the interests of the nation and its people, although sometimes it is not possible to achieve both by the same act. It is also essential that a significant number question and challenge everything that the state does, and usually the most effective way of doing this is by and through the media, and therefore the media has to be forgiven when it gets things wrong or goes off along blind alleys, or damages the lives of individuals and their families unintentionally or unfairly.
However as with preventing disease, stopping malnutrition, saving species and the planet, some economically unviable service which works such a local hospital or post office, stopping further slavery, the exploitation of women and the abuse of children, and so on, governments have a major part to play, but can do nothing, especially in democracies, without the support and actions of a significant number of separate and diverse individuals, their families, friends, and local communities banding together in common cause.
This is why all the energy being expended by millions all over the world in the hope that one pre school child is found, hopefully alive is not meaningless gesturing, it proves what I have believed all my life that most human beings, despite their understandable self interest, and cautiousness about getting involved in anything which takes them out of their security space, will respond if they believe in something or someone who is open and honest with them, and treats them with the respect they show to others. I have always believed that there are also a lot of others who if given the right help, including help to move to a different or better environment, will also become creative, giving and sharing human beings like the majority.
It is best to let governments, and their organs of state, to deal with the minority of others who because of biological inheritance or childhood circumstance, or childhood events become capable of acts of evil without remorse, or the capacity to change. It is also important that everyone else learn from an early age how to identify, avoid and where necessary, refer to the authorities such individuals as appropriate to the circumstance. The trouble is we have actually elected some of these individuals into our governments, or stood by in understandable fear while others have set about, and in some instances in history successfully, destroyed the safeguards and imposed their nightmares on everyone else. I remain reluctant to give governments a free hand to deal with such individuals because mistakes have and will continue to be made, but the priority should be to give support and recognition to those who go into the front lines on our behalf, and for everyone else to participate and be vigilant. But who is to guard the guardians?
No comments:
Post a Comment