This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/23/woolwich-killing-a-life-lost-and-more
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Woolwich killing: a life lost – and more | Woolwich killing: a life lost – and more |
| (4 months later) | |
| Sometimes the old labels are simply not adequate to a new situation. Heated arguments about how they apply can seem almost perversely beside the point. The horrific Woolwich killing of the unsuspecting soldier Lee Rigby this week is a good example. Was it a terrorist crime? The honest answer is: yes in some ways, no in others. Was it an "ordinary" knife crime? The answer is the same. Was it, perhaps, more like a hate crime? Same answer again. Did it require the UK state to go into crisis mode? Once more there are arguments both ways. Are politicians part of the problem or the solution? There are serious points to be made for and against. And the media? Likewise. | Sometimes the old labels are simply not adequate to a new situation. Heated arguments about how they apply can seem almost perversely beside the point. The horrific Woolwich killing of the unsuspecting soldier Lee Rigby this week is a good example. Was it a terrorist crime? The honest answer is: yes in some ways, no in others. Was it an "ordinary" knife crime? The answer is the same. Was it, perhaps, more like a hate crime? Same answer again. Did it require the UK state to go into crisis mode? Once more there are arguments both ways. Are politicians part of the problem or the solution? There are serious points to be made for and against. And the media? Likewise. |
| In the end the labels are less important than an open-minded recognition of the facts and what they may imply. By any serious yardstick, the Woolwich attack was something pretty exceptional, an extraordinarily foul deed for which there are few, if any, precise precedents. The victim was unknown to his killers except as a soldier. That much is familiar from Northern Ireland. But what followed was something even the IRA would never do. The killers ran him down and carved him up in full view of onlookers. They were willing, even eager, to be filmed. When approached, they celebrated their attack and framed it with a political justification. | In the end the labels are less important than an open-minded recognition of the facts and what they may imply. By any serious yardstick, the Woolwich attack was something pretty exceptional, an extraordinarily foul deed for which there are few, if any, precise precedents. The victim was unknown to his killers except as a soldier. That much is familiar from Northern Ireland. But what followed was something even the IRA would never do. The killers ran him down and carved him up in full view of onlookers. They were willing, even eager, to be filmed. When approached, they celebrated their attack and framed it with a political justification. |
| But the disjunction did not end there. With incredible coolness, a bystanding stranger reasoned with them to surrender. Within 24 hours, her words – "You're going to lose. It's only you versus many" – were being repeated by David Cameron in Downing Street and may already be on a bestselling T-shirt. Even the prime minister's reluctance to threaten new anti-terrorist legislation was something new. In short, there was nothing run-of-the-mill about the Woolwich killing. It is ridiculous and even perverse to insist on squeezing this event into already existing categories. | But the disjunction did not end there. With incredible coolness, a bystanding stranger reasoned with them to surrender. Within 24 hours, her words – "You're going to lose. It's only you versus many" – were being repeated by David Cameron in Downing Street and may already be on a bestselling T-shirt. Even the prime minister's reluctance to threaten new anti-terrorist legislation was something new. In short, there was nothing run-of-the-mill about the Woolwich killing. It is ridiculous and even perverse to insist on squeezing this event into already existing categories. |
| This is not in any way to say that Woolwich teaches no wider lessons, because it certainly does. One of these lessons is that such a crime can easily be self-started at home, not plotted by some established network in a bomb-making school in Pakistan. That does not mean such crimes are about to become common. But it does mean that they are relatively easy to plan – and relatively hard to detect. | This is not in any way to say that Woolwich teaches no wider lessons, because it certainly does. One of these lessons is that such a crime can easily be self-started at home, not plotted by some established network in a bomb-making school in Pakistan. That does not mean such crimes are about to become common. But it does mean that they are relatively easy to plan – and relatively hard to detect. |
| Second, the Woolwich crime makes a fresh and dangerous new tear in the fabric of community. Most people, Muslim or not, have not the slightest intention of killing random victims of any kind anywhere. But the ease of obtaining a car or a knife, and the ordinariness of the killers' appearance, is bound to create some unease that something similar may happen somewhere else – as sadly it may. That is why the political response was important and, in principle, good. Mr Cameron's message of calm, solidarity and inclusiveness was the right one. And so, as long as he sticks to it, was his rejection of kneejerk legislative responses. | Second, the Woolwich crime makes a fresh and dangerous new tear in the fabric of community. Most people, Muslim or not, have not the slightest intention of killing random victims of any kind anywhere. But the ease of obtaining a car or a knife, and the ordinariness of the killers' appearance, is bound to create some unease that something similar may happen somewhere else – as sadly it may. That is why the political response was important and, in principle, good. Mr Cameron's message of calm, solidarity and inclusiveness was the right one. And so, as long as he sticks to it, was his rejection of kneejerk legislative responses. |
| This was also a crime of the social media age. Any public act in the modern era will inevitably be filmed and broadcast. We can celebrate that – or we can regret it. But the pictures of a man with bloodstained hands, ranting in our living rooms about the slaughter of his victim, will be the abiding image of the Woolwich killing. A disturbing threshold feels to have been crossed, raising significant ethical questions for media providers and users alike. But in the era of modern phone technology it is impossible to stop it without threatening vital freedoms, any more than it was impossible to prevent Anders Breivik from saying his piece after he slaughtered dozens of young Norwegians two years ago. | This was also a crime of the social media age. Any public act in the modern era will inevitably be filmed and broadcast. We can celebrate that – or we can regret it. But the pictures of a man with bloodstained hands, ranting in our living rooms about the slaughter of his victim, will be the abiding image of the Woolwich killing. A disturbing threshold feels to have been crossed, raising significant ethical questions for media providers and users alike. But in the era of modern phone technology it is impossible to stop it without threatening vital freedoms, any more than it was impossible to prevent Anders Breivik from saying his piece after he slaughtered dozens of young Norwegians two years ago. |
| It is no more true that the Woolwich killing requires a wholesale change of public policy than that it requires no response at all. This was a truly revolting event. There was no justification for it. The responsibility lies solely with those who committed it. But there are lessons from such a deed for politics, religions, communities and individuals too. For this is an event that in some way diminishes all of us. | It is no more true that the Woolwich killing requires a wholesale change of public policy than that it requires no response at all. This was a truly revolting event. There was no justification for it. The responsibility lies solely with those who committed it. But there are lessons from such a deed for politics, religions, communities and individuals too. For this is an event that in some way diminishes all of us. |
| • Comments have been removed for legal reasons | • Comments have been removed for legal reasons |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |