Compassion when possible, Revenge when necessary
Posted on August 22, 2009
Filed Under A Progressive Viewpoint | Leave a Comment
I’m clearly the only “neocon” blogger on the planet to have supported the release of Megrahi (if this doesn’t get me expelled from the union altogether). In the circumstances a rethink is called for. So I’ve rethought and I still think the same as before.
Quick recap of my previously expressed view:
- Compassion is, all other things being equal, a good thing;
- All other things are rarely equal, therefore the opportunity to display compassion arises rarely;
- The release of Megrahi was an opportunity to display compassion because there was negligible risk or even political cost involved;
- There are propaganda points available for anyone who gets to display compassion.
No-brainer, in my view. Against this, the rest of the world is deploying arguments which are much like this:
- Megrahi committed a despicable crime;
- Megrahi showed precious little mercy or compassion for his victims;
- There is therefore no reason why he should be shown compassion;
- What are the victims’ families supposed to think?
- Isn’t this just more evidence of the West surrendering to terror?
- Etc.
To which my answer, briefly, is as follows:
Yes, Megrahi committed a despicable crime and he showed no mercy for his victims. He doesn’t deserve mercy – but it’s not about him, it’s about us. There was a letter in the Times today that summed it up quite neatly. Mr John Graham-Hart of Cranbrook, Kent, wrote:
Sir, Our showing compassion has nothing whatever to do with what he is. It is to do with what we are.
What his victims feel about it is not especially relevant either, in my view. The criminal justice system is not an adjunct to victim support, nor is it a substitute for appropriate counselling.
Right. Now that’s off my chest on to the next thing. I’m not a bleeding heart kind of liberal. It makes my blood boil that British courts repeatedly let young, healthy, dangerous terrorists wander the streets because we can’t charge them and we can’t deport them because less discerning jurisdictions might torture the poor dears. I never had a problem with Guantanamo – they can keep it open as long as they want until the whole lot are at death’s door with prostate cancer as far as I’m concerned. I have no problem with revenge as a tool of national security, defence or foreign policy. I just don’t think it has a place in the criminal justice system.
Megrahi is not a risk to the public and he’s not a risk to national security. These days he’s barely capable of blowing up a paper bag, much less an airliner. He’ll be dead soon, and it probably won’t be a nice death. Not much leniency involved there. Deterrence isn’t an issue.
Yes, it’s embarrassing that the Gadaffi regime won’t play ball. The hero’s welcome was a bit of a slap in the face. But there are other ways we can punish Libya.
So what’s the beef? It’s about revenge, isn’t it? And revenge without a reason is always destructive. We’re better than that. Aren’t we?
Comments
Leave a Reply