...or however it's spelled. Once again the world is seeing scenes of jubilation at someone's death. There is something rather hideous about this - however tyrannical the dead person was. I often sense with older people a satisfaction when someone else has died - as if by surviving them they have somehow won. There is some sort of atavistic satisfaction about the death of a rival - so obviously the death of an enemy is even more satisfactory. I am taking the John Donne - "as not for whom the bell tolls" view...
Of course Ghadaffi was a horror - although he was quite a personable looking bloke when younger - which is neither here nor there of course. Strangely nutty - his regime was hideous for many ordinary Libyans - but was it, in terms of foreign affairs so dreadful? He sold arms to unpleasant groups - so do we, he made disagreeable diplomatic relationships, so do we; he "sponsored terrorism" - we support unelected dictators from time to time. Now everyone is calling for an enquiry into how he was killed - was it "fair"? in some way. I suppose he should have been brought to trial - but we've had this conversation over and over...about Osama - about all sorts of situations, and it's a bit boring - we know really that realpolitik will triumph and bleating about how Ghaddaffi should have been put on trial is just a waste of time.
A nice liberal man (John Kampfner) is saying we shouldn't assume that different cultures have different norms of justice.... well, that shows how much he knows about human societies. We see him down here a lot, he's the Chair of the Turner - a bit awkward, and a bit of twit. Editors of the New Statesman often seem to have rather bland, slightly gutless liberal politics: I suppose it goes with the territory - having a full-blooded socialist in that role wouldn't do at all. Mind you, it's probably years since he was its editor - I stopped reading it years ago - I occasionally buy it at Christmas! What a treat - or is it a penitential act?
Of course Ghadaffi was a horror - although he was quite a personable looking bloke when younger - which is neither here nor there of course. Strangely nutty - his regime was hideous for many ordinary Libyans - but was it, in terms of foreign affairs so dreadful? He sold arms to unpleasant groups - so do we, he made disagreeable diplomatic relationships, so do we; he "sponsored terrorism" - we support unelected dictators from time to time. Now everyone is calling for an enquiry into how he was killed - was it "fair"? in some way. I suppose he should have been brought to trial - but we've had this conversation over and over...about Osama - about all sorts of situations, and it's a bit boring - we know really that realpolitik will triumph and bleating about how Ghaddaffi should have been put on trial is just a waste of time.
A nice liberal man (John Kampfner) is saying we shouldn't assume that different cultures have different norms of justice.... well, that shows how much he knows about human societies. We see him down here a lot, he's the Chair of the Turner - a bit awkward, and a bit of twit. Editors of the New Statesman often seem to have rather bland, slightly gutless liberal politics: I suppose it goes with the territory - having a full-blooded socialist in that role wouldn't do at all. Mind you, it's probably years since he was its editor - I stopped reading it years ago - I occasionally buy it at Christmas! What a treat - or is it a penitential act?
No comments:
Post a Comment