Acts of Journalism (Part V)

Before I post my article, I would like to extend my deepest condolences to those who lost friends and family in the Virginia Tech massacre. Words fail.



Nobody is Born This Way

We may never know what led Cho Seung-Hui to wake up one Monday morning and murder 32 people. We may be able to hazard a guess at what brought about this tragedy at Virginia Tech University. There are clues in the form of his “multimedia manifesto”, as it has been christened, but it is highly likely that we will never know for sure.
However, while following the reports of this tragic event, I could not help but think of another incident which took place in Littleton, Colorado. On the 20th of April, 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold shot and killed twelve students and a teacher at the now infamous Columbine High School.
In the aftermath of such an event there was, of course, a desperate struggle for answers. Many reasons were proffered. While it is undoubtedly true that both boys (and, indeed, Cho) were mentally unbalanced, the question has to be “What made them that way?” There must have been something, there must have been a reason for this. One thing is clear: they weren’t born wanting to kill their classmates.
In the case of Columbine, various reasons were put forward. Those involving violent video games and aggressive music were the most commonly proposed. However, I believe that neither of these accounts adequately for turning shy kids into ruthless killers. Perhaps they were symptoms of their disturbed minds, but they were not causes. The most compelling reason, I believe, is that the society in which they lived did not merely react coldly to Harris and Klebold, but actively shunned them. According to various sources quoted in the Washington Post (in an article entitled “Dissecting Columbine's Cult of the Athlete” by Lorraine Adams and Dale Russakoff. I suggest you Google it) shortly after the massacre, there was a significant, blatant and fatally ignored culture of bullying, led by the “jocks” with whom we are so familiar. It was the sort of bullying, the sort of ostracising that leads to often crushing depression. And sometimes, this depression becomes something much, much worse. If you want evidence of the objects of Harris and Klebold’s rage, just look at what they shouted when they began their rampage: “All Jocks stand up. We’ll get the guys in white hats” (the “uniform” of jocks at Columbine was a white cap).
And now it has come out that Cho Seung-Hui was bullied at his school and taunted with various comments about his race and his shyness. If find the latter reason particularly bizarre. If someone is shy, why would taunting them about it make the situation any better? A split second after that thought came the answer: because they just don’t care. I don’t know what it is that makes people behave in this despicable, disgusting, disgraceful manner, but it is clear that they have no sense of decency or respect for the feelings of others.
If murder is the extreme result of such persistent bullying, what happens to the others? What happens to those who are not pushed over the edge to suicide (as one boy in this country was earlier this week) or even murder? It is clear from the experiences of those who have been bullied, and from the fact that some are willing to take their own lives to get away from it, that those that are bullied persistently, without mercy or remorse, kindness or compassion, suffer from intense and terrible depression. Depression that crushes souls, that leaves self-esteem, a most valuable attribute, annihilated, that causes people to cry themselves to sleep every night.
Most disturbing of all is that it is often regarded by its perpetrators as harmless, a “joke”. To suggest such a thing is both callous and insulting, and those who believe that because they could take it, everyone else can, are fools.
No, bullying does not always lead to murder, or even suicide, but it does lead to despair and depression. Anyone who fails to realise this and continues to bully, no matter how harmless they may think it, is ignoring their duty to their fellow man. That is what caused Columbine and Virginia Tech, and it is what has caused people to commit suicide. In the most recent case of an eleven-year old hanging himself, one of those who bullied him (an adult, no less), believed it was “just banter”. If the other person can take it, fine. If not, we should not taunt, or ostracise them, because nobody is born depressed and distraught, nobody is born wanting to take their lives or the lives of others – Nobody is born this way.

A Fatal Apathy

In 2005, to a collective shrug of the shoulders, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act was passed. This apathetic response was, and continues to be, a surprise. Under Section 132, it has become illegal to conduct a demonstration, either on your own or with others, in a "designated area" without prior police permission. This "designated area" is, in effect, anywhere up to one kilometre from Parliament Square, ie. anywhere you'd want to demonstrate against the government.

Admittedly, the permission has to be granted. However, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan police may place limits on:


(a) the place where the demonstration may, or may not, be carried on,

(b) the times at which it may be carried on,

(c) the period during which it may be carried on,

(d) the number of persons who may take part in it,

(e) the number and size of banners or placards used,

(f) maximum permissible noise levels.
If, in his "reasonable opinion", the protest would pose a danger to public safety, public order or security. Things like that.

The problem with this is that the Commissioner's "reasonable opinion" could, in fact, be anything. This, and phrases like it, are to be found in various pieces of legislation that have been passed under the Labour Government. There are no checks, no balances, it is the Commissioner's decision, and the Commissioner's alone.

What the Act represents is a serious infringement of civil liberties in this country. The right to protest is one of the most important rights that we possess (or perhaps, used to possess). We ought to be able to do it without having to ask for permission from the authorities, who are free to place whatever restrictions they like on it (for remember, there are no test of "reasonable opinion"). With this measure, this right, which is so vital to our continued existence as a free, democratic society, becomes a privilege, a treat, something the government lets us have as long as we're good and behave ourselves. It is typical of the disregard for Liberty shown by various Western leaders in recent times.

As if this was not enough, the legislation is applied in a strict and unbending manner. One man standing outside Parliament with a banner saying "Freedom of Speech" was arrested under this act. He posed no threat to security or public order, not was he a hindrance to access to Parliament or Parliamentary business. But, because he had not asked for permission, he was arrested. The same happened to someone eating a cake with the words "Freedom of Speech" inscribed on it in icing. Even a man dressed as Charlie Chaplin carrying a sign saying "Not Aloud" outside Downing Street was arrested under this act. I kid you not.

But, it is not the behaviour of the Government that is the worst thing of all. No, it is the behaviour of the British people. The sheer apathy that has permeated our politics has even seeped into our concern about our rights. We did not care that our rights were being taken away, and we continue not to care. This disgraceful state of affairs will not only persist, but it will deteriorate for as long as we keep up this fatal apathy, this apathy is the thing that strips us of our rights, of our Liberty. If we want our rights, we need to fight for them. As the Korean War Memorial in Washington DC says, Freedom is not Free.

One final point. As the man dressed as Charlie Chaplin was arrested and bundled into a Police van, one person in the crowd shouted out "It's a free country, isn't it?"



Apparently not.