Soldiers on our streets

We awake today to a new sadness. Yesterday was the unspeakable, wailing grief for innocent lives so brutally and foully destroyed in the bombing in Manchester. Today's sadness, of soldiers on our streets, won't provoke the same gut reaction. Many will read this news with a shrug. Some will celebrate. I however find the valve for tears, which yesterday were denied me by the shock.
I wrote yesterday of the fear. How we must not let fear govern our lives. It's a daily struggle at many levels. And please do not misunderstand me. Yesterday's act was horrific and anyone with young children will be frightened. We can no more prevent ourselves from feeling fear than we can always protect our children from every danger.
To be afraid for our children and ourselves is natural. But to allow that fear to dictate how our lives are lived is ultimately self-defeating.
Mrs May is quoted as saying: “Let us remember those who died and let us celebrate those who helped, safe in the knowledge that the terrorists will never win – and our values, our country and our way of life will always prevail.”
Sadly, these words have the ring of 'what a politician always says at times like this.' Because in the next paragraph we are told: "A host of major events have been cancelled this week and political campaigning for the General Election has been halted". Seems to me like our way of life just got entirely affected by the actions of the terrorist.
And what are our values that she says will prevail? Isn't this fundamentally about freedom? Freedom to conduct our private lives as we wish, away from governmental scrutiny, so long as we act within the law. Tony Blair began a process of eroding our liberties in his excessive response to terrorism. Mrs May and her frightening Snooper's Charter has continued it. We have more CCTV in this country than almost anywhere on earth (mostly to no public benefit). And now Mrs May follows her empty words with a new action - action that is wholly at odds with her words. She has put the army on our streets. This was an existing contingency plan, for sure, but she is the first PM to use it. Even Cameron refused to do it - he recognised that it was redolent of a state of emergency. A presence of armed soldiers will affect all of us in our mundane, civilian lives. But will it really stop a suicide bomber?
The only argument that might make sense is that the soldiers can relieve the police to enable more policing work to go on. And if that is the argument then we are right back in the middle of election campaigning, asking why our police numbers are inadequate? Why have our police been cut so drastically that they are not able to cope with an incident which the politicians have been warning about (in a generalised way) for years?
Something doesn't add up. Has our Home Secretary-turned-Prime Minister brought about irresponsible cuts to our police force? Is she using the cover of public outrage at this attack on our children to change the face of our country? Widespread surveillance, Snooper's Charter and now armed soldiers on the street.
So I am sad. I don't want to live in a military state. (That's an exaggeration of where we are today; I am saying I don't like the direction of travel.)
And I'm very sad that this reaction will tell terrorists that they did indeed score a goal on Monday night.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Brexit Apathy

“The death of democracy...will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.” These words of Robert M Hutchins seem rather pertinent to our current situation. Every day I ask myself again whether it's time to “let it go” and accept Brexit. And every time I ask that question, two big issues rise up to block the way. The first is the unbelievably cavalier way in which the individuals most affected by this are being treated – the EU nationals who live in the UK and the UK nationals who live in other EU countries. We have, as the saying goes, thrown them under a bus. And when you consider the stir caused this week by CCTV footage of a London jogger doing exactly that to a woman on the pavement, it brings home what a shocking analogy it is. As long as the politicians insist on playing games of chess with real peoples' lives, there will be millions of us who dig in our heels and say “unacceptable”. The second big stumbling block to accepting the out
Read more

Brexit - Secret Option Number Three

There's talk of riots if Brexit doesn't go ahead. It's hard to know whether this is a serious possibility – a proposed protest at the Supreme Court in December was hastily cancelled at the last minute when barely a few dozen showed any interest. But let's just for a moment assume it is a real and credible possibility. The prevailing narrative over-simplifies the choice – implement the result of the referendum or don't. Implement it and cause certain impoverishment to our nation. Ignore it, and risk riots and undermining the cause of democracy. But why is our vision so narrow? What if there is a secret option number three? There are five Ws that help us get to the bottom of a story – What? When? Who? Where? And Why? The first four are essentially fact-based and are in themselves often rather dull. They are answered easily enough with regard to the referendum result. The interesting question is the last one – “why”. And over a year later, we are still no clearer
Read more

Windrush - twig or branch?

I can't stop thinking about the so-called Windrush scandal. I say so-called, because I think there's a danger that we have got hold of the wrong end of the stick if this is 'only' about the Windrush generation. Or rather, we have grabbed firmly on to the twig, but if we run with that, it will snap away, leaving the main branch, the bigger point, unmoved. Don't get me wrong - the Windrush scandal is certainly shocking. The way individuals have been treated correlates with my definition of criminal. But these individual cases are but twigs from a thicker branch of systemic hostility to "the other". If we allow ourselves to be focused on individual cases, we allow Theresa May and the Government and, in fact, ourselves, off the hook. If the concern is that person A is deported in error, an apology can be made, decisions reversed and even, potentially, compensation made. And there the story dies, with no hint of "lessons having been lear
Read more