Unlike other members of my family and a considerable number of Quakers, I will own up to not being very well informed about international affairs. These days I do not get involved in discussions. Each morning I read a range of newspapers on line, and see the news no more than once a day on television.
Ironically some of this unwillingness to get involved comes from the time when I was most active in politics. Having just been elected to the local Council, I was working with some thoroughly good people, all wishing to contribute and with some very strong opinions. This was an incredible learning experience, exhilarating. and because of the responsibility, scary. Learning how to represent just one ward was hard, so it seemed best to focus firstly on those who were trusting me to act on their behalf. If one resident asked me to deal with graffiti on her walls, stop drug dealers in her road or simply remove the rubbish, that tended to take up most of my effort and concentration.
Shortly after my election I was told that political skill is almost entirely about presentation. In this process, our role was to flirt with the electorate so as to attract votes. Since bad news needed to be carefully sandwiched, I was told off when the first concern I raised just happened to be about drugs.
With each challenge there were so many points of view. Whenever a concern is raised, I still think of those police officers injured during a demonstration and obliged give up their career. I think of families worrying about a son serving in the armed forces who do not need my views to undermine his commitment. It would seem we all have our priorities and opinions. To me, practical support is so much more important than just having a Quaker presence or getting our voices heard.
In fairness to my colleagues, they never questioned or criticised my attitude to war although some of the implications of a Quaker peace testimony may have bemused them. Since trust in politics is usually based on a sense of common purpose, being an awkward Quaker could be uncomfortable at times. Political parties are to me a bit like systemic weed-killer, not always kind, likely to affect the innocent, but also an effective device to maintain a democratic state. When you do not have an efficient way of informing the electorate, the risk of creeping bindweed may be very much greater than the risk.
At one time, every adult Quaker in my town went to prison rather than swear an oath of allegiance. To me such loyalty to the truth is still a fundamental priority for Quakers. Although it was reassuring to think of Quakers who made a contribution to society through politics, I personally found it hard. There seemed little point in representing other people if I could not first be honest about me. It still troubles me when I see Quakers taking sides, as if one perspective is all it takes. As untrained enthusiasts for the most part, do we honestly believe we have sufficient knowledge to tackle complex international problems? In my community it is so easy for us to preach and pontificate. We are so fortunate in our freedom, in our comforts and our security. Those of us who have nothing to fear or forgive, do not I believe, have the right to make judgements about others.
Whether it be through the use of arms, a mass protest movement, in discussion, or even through winning an election, there is a certain attraction about winning. It can be very satisfying to look back on the things you were able to do and politics is no exception. If we are sincere about peace and the worth of other human beings, sometimes it is necessary to lose. Whenever I meet up with former colleagues I am impressed with their stamina and commitment. At the same time I have no regrets, knowing that standing down at the end of my term of office was the right decision for me.
Considering all the potential hazzards, perhaps it would seem a very good idea for Quakers to assume a somewhat monastic role in the world, engaged in harmless activities linked to a particular type of culture. We might choose not to hear about the dilemmas and suffering of others. In this way we could avoid being divisive, making mistakes, living out our testimonies or being particularly useful.
When I heard a few days ago about the brutal assassination of a young woman in Benghazi because she had been campaigning for human rights, was it really appropriate to think this had anything to do with me? I had once been a woman in politics and the worst anyone threw at me was an egg overnight at the front wall of our house. To be honest, I felt shamed by my own ignorance. It seemed the whole world was suffering and I had chosen to know nothing about it.
Strong opinions may result in young people being sent away to fight. Is this really what I want as a Quaker? Countries such as Libya which have suffered from the wrong type of foreign intervention over the years, might well feel entitled to tell misinformed do-gooders such as myself to just go away.
To me, resolving any dilemma needs to begin on solid ground. I know my own ignorance but am also guided by my beliefs about God and the human race. Just as I would ask someone trustworthy for directions if lost in the street, prayer should really be my first step. Do Quakers pray? If we are honest about ourselves there would seem no question that we need to.
This year as Muslims throughout the world celebrate the holy month of Ramadan, I am aware of the need to remember that we are all God's children. Whatever our religious backgrounds, or the form of words we use, it seems appropriate to remember communities that are not so fortunate as my own and pray with them for reconciliation and peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment