Massacre of the innocence

'Innocent civilians' is a phrase we hear being bandied about a lot these days by journalists and politicians in relation to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But it's lazy journalese and even lazier politics.

In a democracy, even a nominal one like Palestine or Israel - or the UK for that matter - no-one old enough to vote can really be considered innocent of the actions of their government, even where they didn't vote for them. Voting isn't (or shouldn't be) a once-in-four-or-five-years activity it should be a permanent state of engagement, holding one's elected representatives to account at every stage. 'Not in my name' is no excuse.

Okay, so back in the real world life for most is a daily struggle to put food on the table (another cliché beloved of overfed politicians and commentators), especially somewhere like the Gaza Strip. But is that enough to absolve the governed from seeking to influence and constrain the day-to-day actions of their governments? I posit the question whilst accepting that my answer, a resounding 'no', is an idealistic rather than realistic one. 

Nevertheless, many who have the right to vote don't exercise it. Turnout in UK general elections, which until the 1990s hovered around the low- to high-70s percent, has since remained in the 60s percentage decade, and in local elections is even lower. It's perhaps no surprise that the highest voter turnout in recent years was for the Brexit Referendum in 2016 (72.2%), and even then the result was hardly overwhelming.

The UK's first-past-the-post system ensures that more people routinely vote against the winning party than for it. But proportional representation (PR) has its own problems too - just ask the voters of Spain or Poland. We should all try harder as electors. It suits our politicians very well that we don't, of course, which is all the more reason for doing everything we can to thwart their efforts to subvert or evade democracy while introducing ever-more illiberal, unmandated, policies in our name. If we fail to make a concerted effort to stop this we're all culpable for the results.

For those who actually voted for such policies, history will be the judge but for those who didn't there is a strong moral obligation to resist or face an equally harsh, possibly harsher, judgment. The words of German theologian and Lutheran pastor, Martin Niemöller, should ring in our ears. In his poem, First They Came, he calls out those who did not speak out against tyranny because, initially at least, it didn't affect them personally. 

And Niemöller knew what he was writing about. He had been an early enthusiast for the Nazi Party's calls for national renewal after the decadence and financial incompetence of the Weimar Republic. But he began to change his stance at their developing antisemitic Aryan policies and eventually became a fierce critic of the regime, greatly to his own detriment.

The Nazi Party came to power in Germany in 1933 following federal elections, after which political parties and elections were banned and Hitler and his thugs consolidated their iron grip on the German people. But not without some resistance; for instance the White Rose movement of university students in Munich in 1942. Its leaders, Hans Scholl, his sister Sophie and professor Kurt Huber were arrested and executed in 1943 for the distribution of anti-Nazi leaflets. This is the lesson from history: eternal vigilance is the obligation of every elector, but is not without risk.

And the White Rose movement is a reminder of the essential role of youth in politics; they are, after all, the inheritors of the effects of any political dispensation - more so now than ever in an escalating climate emergency. The Arab Spring uprising of 2011 was largely a youth reaction against tyrannical regimes in the Middle East and the Palestinian youth demographic (18-29 years) in Gaza and the West Bank is currently around 22%. To my mind this makes the lowering of the voting age to sixteen in any aspiring democracy not only desirable but imperative. 

Unfortunately, the quid pro quo is the loss of any right to claim innocence.

Popular posts from this blog

Looking to Africa - long read

As I sit here on an island just off the coast of North-West Africa I can't help pondering the future of that vast and seemingly unknowable continent, so near and yet so far. I'm writing this in Tenerife, one of the eight Canary Islands forming an archipelago off the coast of Morocco and Western Sahara - tantilisingly close and yet a world away from the 'mainland' of continental Africa. As an Autonomous Community of Spain, the Canaries form an outpost of the European Union (EU). Yet, despite their proximity to Africa, their outlook, politically, culturally and economically, is resolutely European. Africa may as well be Mars, though only a narrow gulf of the Atlantic Ocean separates these offshore islands from their continent. I say resolutely European but that resolve may, little by little, be weakening. There is a growing sentiment, especially, though not exclusively, amongst young Canarians, that they have been sold a pup. True, the economy is superficially buoyant, du
Read more

On old age

"The fact is that when I come to think it over, I find that there are four reasons for old age being thought unhappy: First, that it withdraws us from active employments; second, that it enfeebles the body; third, that it deprives us of nearly all physical pleasures; fourth, that it is the next step to death."  Writing his essay,  De Senectute (On Old Age), in 44 BCE, Marcus Tullius Cicero went on to refute these four supposed reasons in characteristically robust and forthright manner. Cicero wasn't one to sit about moping in his own old age; he remained actively engaged in the political life of the Republic whose survival, in the face of tyranny, he championed so fiercely.  Cicero was nine years younger than I am now when he met his untimely end yet he considered himself already an old man; or, rather, his society judged him to be so. His second point about age enfeebling is more germane. Physical decline had not yet impacted him but, six years on from my retirement, I
Read more

Born to rule

When, ten days ago, I posted my piece about the manipulated image of Catherine, Princess of Wales, and her children (see Snap Judgment) I didn't know of her cancer treatment. Had I known, I would have adopted a gentler, though I hope no less critical, tone. But I didn't know, and nor did any of us outside the immediate royal circle, which rather goes to strengthen the case against the monarchy. For Kate and her family the diagnosis of cancer (as yet unspecified) will have been a devastating blow, as will the chemotherapy she is currently undergoing. On a human level, of course I sympathise and extend my best wishes for a full recovery as, indeed, I did at the time of her father-in-law's diagnosis. It is particularly cruel, then, that on top of all this she has been obliged to record a video statement to reassure the public. As if she didn't have enough to contend with already. But such is the unpalatable obligation placed upon any royal personage - noblesse oblige. Whic
Read more