Al-Megrahi, compassion and international justice. . .

I understand that many people are upset and offended by the recent release of Abdelbaset Ali al-Megrahi on compassionate grounds. As anyone who has followed the event knows, there is troubling evidence that the dying man is not in fact the perpetrator of the terrible crime of which he has been convicted. But this in itself would not be justification of his release until a court was willing to order a new trial. However, even if Mr. al-Megrahi was not dying, such a reexamination seems unlikely given the powerful political implications of the case. As I understand it however, the protocol for release on compassionate grounds is fairly straightforward and, given the circumstances, the court in Scotland felt that this was the correct legal call.  

Given the vitriolic attacks on al-Megrahi  and the almost universal condemnation of his release, it seems to me that a lot of people are wholly unaware of the actual meaning of the word ‘compassion.’ To act in a compassionate manner is, almost by definition, not easy. It is easy to have sympathy with your son or daughter when he or she falls and skins a knee. Compassion is easy when a loved one is stricken down by a debilitating disease or someone losses their home as a result of terrible flooding. But real compassion, like genuine forgiveness, is seldom an easy matter; if it were it would have little meaning. Surely the most vital lesson of Christianity is that those whom we perceive to have committed acts of evil are not themselves evil but have merely lost the true guidance of goodness that we all require to act in a ethical manner.  And if we are to truly bring goodness into the world then we must demonstrate to others the very conduct of goodness that we strive to promote. It is only through the cultivation of our compassion can we ever hope to do this. Gandhi said that you must ‘be the change that you want to see in the world.’ And given the terrible record of brutality that Western nations have practiced on many people in the world for many generations there is a remarkable irony and hypocrisy in our indignation at the release of one man. If true international justice prevailed many of our own leaders would be serving time in international prisons for various misdeeds. Western nations routinely laud the beauties of democracy while practicing the most atrocious militaristic follies. Christianity preaches compassion while perpetrating inquisitorial brutality. Here is a perfect opportunity for us to practice the real compassion that we have so long preached.

If Mr.  al-Megrahi did not commit the crime of which he was convicted then his release is not an act of compassion but an act of justice. If he did do such a terrible thing then we must hope that his release teaches him and, more importantly, ourselves that there is another path in life, a path of righteousness that expels the darkness from our souls. 

Barbarism or Compassion?

There is so much wrong with Harper’s government it seems almost comical to bother to recite the problems. And since I am not particularly partisan it amazes me that people would bother to defend a so blatantly incompetent government. At a basic level, Harper just is not fit to govern. His has demonstrated over and over that he has no respect of Canadian’s, no respect for the House of Commons, no respect for the country, its basic legal system or the media. He practices the politics of hate and division and seems not to care even about the core issues that he is supposed to represent. It is ironic that in his own master’s thesis he condemned deficit spending as a device to win votes and now finds himself running the largest deficit in history. Harper has demonstrated again and again that he doesn’t really care about issues unless they are perceived vote winners, then he his right on the band-wagon.

But what frightens me is not Stephen Harper per se, but the fact that we live in a time when someone like this can get elected more than once and when the politics of hatred and division are not just repulsive to people. It seems to me that in very troubled times there are two paths to take. One is the path of division and the other is the path of inclusion and compassion. This is the way it was in the thirties when some countries went to the extreme right while others looked to reform capitalism with more humane solutions. It is now clear that we are going to be facing the same kind of choice. How are Canadians going to react to this dilemma? Do we continue to elect a man who, in the midst of crisis, will do anything he can to divide and conquer, or do we look toward a kinder, gentler future? Do we accept a government which even outside of an election campaign runs any kind of negative advertising or do we demand that our leaders rise to the occasion? Do we let our governing party create handbooks instructing committee chairs on how to shut down debate or do demand real discourse and real respect?

History is a mess of violence and bloodshed, militarism and oppression. But behind the scenes individuals on the margins have constantly worked for compassion and justice. It is not that immoral actions have never had results. Pyramids and railways have been built with slave labour. But how long are we to tolerate inhumanity, violence, hatred, cut-throat competition, and division until we finally say ‘NO MORE!’ ? I regularly write to my MP, one of the most outspoken haters in parliament to demand more respect. But it is time for everyone to make a change in themselves, me included, to insure a better future.

I could go on and on about this governments mistakes and incompetent efforts. But it is not about this anymore. It is time to make a more fundamental change, one that requires a Prime Minister who actually talks to average people, works in a soup kitchen once a week, reads poetry and has a passion for people, refuses the politics of hatred and division, and won’t let the ideologies of money and profit get in the way of humanity.  Now that it has once again become clear that Capitalism is not flawless and the so-called market cannot solve all our problems, we are facing a choice between compassion and barbarism. I hope we can choose compassion for the sake of my children and their children.

John Adams once wrote “I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce, and agriculture, in order to give their children the right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry, and porcelain.” Unfortunately, our leaders are still studying, and practicing, politics and war and it is time for us all to move on to a better stage of historical development.