celticwarrior

Extremists

Extremist elements within protest groups are nothing new. In 1913 it was women, fighting for the right to vote, that resorted to extreme actions. At the time is was reported like this, "Among other actions, the suffragettes set arson to houses, seared golf courses with acid, burnt down sports pavilions, broke street lamps, stomped on flower beds, painted "Votes for Women" on the seats at Hampstead Heath, plugged up keyholes with lead pellets, slashed the cushions of train seats, staged false fire alarms, threw rocks at the windows of the Parliament building and houses of elected officials, severed telephone wires, blew up fuse boxes, placed bombs near the Bank of England, "hacked thirteen pictures in the Manchester Art Gallery", including the "Rokeby Venus", slashed by well-known suffragette Mary Richardson. These drastic measures culminated on June 4, 1913, when one of the more famous suffragettes, Emily Davison, threw herself under the King's racehorse at Tattenham Center, toppling both the horse and the horse's jockey. A riot ensued, and by the time Davison's body was recovered from the track and taken to a hospital, it was far too late; Davison became the movement's first, and only, true martyr."
Even though these women carried out far more and far worse damage than anything Fathers4Justice managed, I could find no calls in the press at the time to separate them from their children as unsuitable parents and there was little reluctance to jail them for their crimes. This government have also shown no reluctance to jail mothers who do not send their children to school, or to jail pensioners who do not pay their council taxes (with the exception of the deputy prime minister of course). Yet government ministers hesitate to jail mothers who breach clear and legal court orders by refusing to allow the children's father to see his kids. Such inconsistency seems certain to lead to the suspicion that the family court system treats people differently than the rest of our legal system and treats them differently according to their gender.

When we start making public and legal policy based upon gender considerations and a presumption that "mother knows best," we are going to alienate at least half of our population. We should not be surprised when they fight back and, if we fail to listen to their concerns, we should not be surprised if they become angry and resort to extreme behaviour. There have been many precedents that point clearly to these dangers in recent years alone.

Twenty years ago Toxteth exploded into rioting because of heavy handed police tactics that had been warned about for years. In 1981 Brixton also blew up. Again, there were clear warnings that the people had had enough of racial abuse and were getting angry. As far back as 1958 Notting Dale and Notting Hill erupted into race rioting and again, the tension had been growing for a long time before the riots began. The poll tax riots of the 1980's are another example.

In each of these cases and many more, the government and often the press also, only reacted after the event. All of the signs of tension were ignored until the damage was done. The people involved on the other hand, take the view that they elect government to listen and not ignore them. When the government fails to hear their concerns, often for reasons of political ideology and policy, the people have no other choice but to rebel. The government are there, not to suppress the will of the people, but to enact it. Therefore, when Fathers groups complain that they have talked for thirty years to a succession of different governments and their concerns have been ignored, why should we be surprised when extreme voices are raised , along with the temperature of the debate?

The lessons of history are very clear. The government and the media must start to hear more and talk less, to the people (and not just the press) of our land. We cannot sit upon high moral horses and complain about extreme behaviour, while at the same time denying justice and a fair hearing to much of our population. We are supposed to have moved on from the dark days of behaving like lords over the people. If we have not, then it will not be long before more extreme groups rise up and we will not be able to silence them with a dodgy looking story planted in the press. Neither shall we be able to suppress their voices by having a series of judges announce in the press that there is little wrong with a system that everyone else can see is falling apart at the seams.

George Rolph