This is probably the first time I have started a blog with no real idea of where it will finish. And maybe that is because there is no clear answer.
When I first heard John Bercow’s statement to parliament about Trump not addressing MPs, my first response was ‘Yes!’
I think it is fairly clear that I have a very low opinion of Donald Trump, and nothing he has done or said of late has changed my mind in the slightest. And when a petition was set up to withdraw the offer of a state visit, I was happy to sign.
As individuals, either singly or in a collective voice, we are entitled to state our repugnance at any and every opportunity. Freedom of speech. It’s in the Constitution!
And speaking out, and marching, and demonstrating is a duty, if we hold our freedoms and our rights as valued social contracts. The louder the better, for as long as it takes.
And if or when he does come, I think a more effective response would be to line the streets with our backs to him, in silence.
However, when it comes to a public servant, and one in a unique position within parliament, then the picture is not quite so clear. Whilst it is always instantly gratifying to see misogynist sociopaths slapped down in public, there is a point when the critique of him begins to sound as full of a similar vitriol to his initial statements.
Once again, private individuals, by ones or in groups, are entitled to delve as deeply into the pit of venom as they deem appropriate, and I do love some deep, dark venom.
But there has to be a higher level of response, and responsibility, when it involves a public servant in a public place.
Because, what initially appears as the morally correct response can quickly become a mirror image of the original offence.
There has to be a higher standard set, and held, and presented as a means of shining a light on the dystopia of Trump’s world.
And he should visit the UK, even though I signed a petition against it – as a means of tallying a count against him – so that he can be presented with the opposition to his words and deeds.
If he is stopped from coming, or stopped from speaking, then he can, again, create his own narrative. He must be confronted at every opportunity, and that requires his presence.
So, as private citizens we can say whatever we want. Public servants need to respect the process. Because the process is our defence against tyranny.
cherokoffdotcom 