POLITICS however, that it shines a light on lessons needed to be learned by us all. We politicos need less populist dogma driving a wedge between people, and more respectful debate designed to bind together and heal. The country needs to learn that we politicians are not saints. We can get it wrong, fail and annoy. When we do it must be called out and appropriate sanctions taken. However, the vile tsunami of social media that pours continually from keyboards must stop. The anonymity of social media has made it anti-social media. I know I’ve typed a few things in the past that should have been phrased differently. Have been less dogmatic. Let’s remind ourselves we can disagree without being disagreeable. Many of us use metaphor, irony, sarcasm and robust language knowing we do not mean the words literally. We presume that our readers, listeners, followers
will understand this. However, we make an error when we presume that everyone else will ‘get it’. The disturbed mind, the troubled soul, often needs little to break it and impel it to acts of ill and evil.
There is too much ‘type and press send’. An email address, Twitter handle or social media account does not create a cloak of anonymity. It does not absolve one of responsibility for one’s words. “...hoped I would die It harms. It in anguish with my hurts. It invokes My own story I remember children surrounding anxiety and receiving, shortly me helpless and then fear. It creates after my first an imbalance of burn in hell’s fire” entitlement – I election in 2015, an absolutely can say what I abhorrent email. The author want (says the writer) but woe hoped I would die in anguish betide if my MP/Councillor/ with my children surrounding official fights fire with fire. me helpless and then burn in So, as we come to terms with hell’s fire (you will get the drift). the murder of a decent public I contacted the sender to ask servant, husband and father these questions in relation to his killed solely because he was a message: would he have said it public servant, let us try to find face to face; would he have said a way as a country to cherish it a telephone call; would he and use our freedom of thought have put it in a letter? I asked and speech but in ways that him to reread what he had sent don’t lead to hate, violence and me. He was appalled. He cried. potential loss of life. I remain He apologised. We then had of the view that we can. I only a perfectly civil conversation. hope that we do.
23
