The Tribune

A month ago, I wrote about the thorny and controversial subjects of ‘wokeness’ and the ‘cancel culture’ - and I return to these today because there is growing evidence that people in the UK are fighting back against these strange phenomena, which are loosely defined as demanding adherence to a new orthodoxy about social and political justice together with attacking and ruining the lives of any who do not submit to such demands.

Some are now saying the notion of political correctness has gone too far and the so-called liberal elite has become illiberal in its disdain for freedom of expression and its refusal to listen to dissenting opinion which does not fit with its extreme views. Such attitudes fly in the face of democracy in which free speech, free and fair elections and respect for the rule of law - together with the right to rational argument without fear of sanction or reprisal – are fundamental.

Former Australian rock star of the 1980s, Nick Cave, who was once described as a “leftie icon”, has now made headlines by writing that political correctness was an honourable attempt to reorder society in a more equitable way but has become an unacceptable expression of moral certainty and self-righteousness that shuts down debate or alternative views. As he puts it so vividly, a refusal to engage with uncomfortable ideas has “an asphyxiating effect on the creative soul of a society”. Any belief system which says “I’m right about everything and no other opinions are allowed” will surely fail ultimately - though not if George Orwell’s 1984 becomes the norm.

Reportedly, in Britain this pattern of intolerance is creating a climate of fear that is destroying essential liberties. The whole issue shows how fragile democracy can be - with its freedoms constantly under threat - and it is good that more and more people are speaking out against the excesses of political correctness.

The Black Lives Matter movement, whose struggle for racial justice and equality is generally considered to be legitimate, is an example of such intolerance for it has been infiltrated by far-Left political activists and anarchists intent on overthrowing capitalism and the existing order; and for further evidence look no further than the events right now in Belarus whose people are resisting dictatorship following claims of a flawed election.

So those who enjoy democratic freedoms in their own country should surely be on permanent guard - in order to preserve them in a troubled world.

Mauritius oil spill will ring alarm bells with us here

It would not be surprising if television footage of the massive oil spill off the coast of the island of Mauritius in the Indian Ocean rang alarm bells among Bahamians fearful of a similar catastrophe happening here to threaten our marine ecosystem and unique natural environment. Some may also seek to link this tragedy to the danger of offshore oil production in the pristine waters of The Bahamas.

The sad images of a stricken Japanese oil tanker spewing out an estimated more than 1,500 tonnes of its cargo of 4,000 tonnes after running aground last month on a reef will be heart breaking to environmentalists in particular. There has already been substantial damage to the sea, beaches, coral reefs and marine life and a massive clean-up operation is underway. The most recent news is that the vessel has split in two, but it is claimed that much of the remaining oil has already been pumped out of it.

The well-known environmental group Greenpeace has asked why the vessel was sailing so close to a reef in charted waters and is raising questions about the protection of the environment and the efforts of the vessel’s owners to deal with the crisis.

An internet search reveals that oil spills are all too common around the world as a result of collisions, pipeline leaks, production platform leaks, onshore derailments, fire and other accidents – and the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska in 1989 and the Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 are considered to be the two worst in US waters.

So, even without offshore oil production, there is the risk of accidental collisions of tankers or of their running aground, though it seems there have been no serious incidents involving tankers passing through Bahamian waters.

That said, despite all the claimed safeguards it is reasonable to claim that entering into offshore oil production would be likely to increase the risk of an oil spillage and consequent damage to the local environment. But the question is how great is that risk and is it worth taking when balanced against the likely huge economic benefit.

There is no space today to make the case for and against proceeding with offshore oil production. But it is no secret that the government has given the initial go-ahead by granting licences for exploratory drilling. 

If it turns out that oil can be produced in commercial quantities, any government would be under considerable pressure to allow it to proceed, given that the domestic economy is in such a sorry state as a result of coronavirus. But there is likely to be strong opposition from environmentalists so perhaps some sort of consultation exercise might be desirable on such an important issue. If managed properly, oil production could transform the Bahamian economy even if world prices have dropped recently.

Assuming that discovery of a vaccine will eventually pave the way for a return of tourism, many will contend that the priority must be to protect and preserve the nation’s unique environment that makes it such an attractive place for visitors. But, equally, that should not necessarily rule out offshore oil production. So far, the risk of potential pollution is said to be low. But the key should surely be to assess the risks associated with such production carefully and thoroughly – bearing in mind that, as I understand it, drilling is in a relatively small area many miles southwest of Andros – and to insist on adequate safeguards.

A final curtain falls on the heroes who gave their all

In covering last week the atomic bombing of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August, 1945, I mentioned the commemorations and celebrations that would follow on the fifteenth of the same month to mark three quarters of a century since the formal end of the Second World War. The events that took place in Britain turned out to be so moving and meaningful that I hasten to offer comment. Moreover, it is improbable that their like will be seen again since the next important milestone will be the far-off centenary. The intervening anniversaries are commemorated in a more modest way and the veterans are in their nineties so their attendance at future events will be lost.

In last week’s column I recalled the US entered the war following Japan’s surprise attack on its Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. Four years of fierce fighting in the Pacific followed, with heavy casualties on both sides, as American forces gradually captured islands occupied by the Japanese. By the summer of 1945, the US was in a position to invade the mainland but Japan finally surrendered soon after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. VJ-Day is celebrated on August 15 at the time the surrender was announced but the documents were not formally signed on board the USS Missouri until September 2.

Historians acknowledge that, in bringing about an end to the war by surrendering, Emperor Hirohito had to break the grip of the military on the nation and on the throne itself. They also recognise the US’s magnanimous treatment of post-war Japan. Immediately after the surrender, a military occupation by the Allied Powers followed until 1952, accompanied by far-reaching reform including a new Constitution under which Japan was not allowed to maintain offensive military forces though it was clear that it could rely on US support in time of danger. The Constitution declared, inter alia, that the Japanese people would remove war as a sovereign right of the nation as well as the use of force as a means of settling international disputes. The result has been the emergence of today’s democratic, peaceful and prosperous nation.

None of this, however, should disguise or lessen condemnation of the brutality and barbarity displayed by Japan’s armed forces, not only in the Second World War but earlier as well during the invasion of China in 1937 - the Nanking Massacre is just one example. It can never be forgotten that in the war against Japan there were 71,000 British and Commonwealth casualties including more than 12,000 prisoners of war who died in captivity.

Nevertheless, last week’s events in Britain were in a spirit of remembrance and of gratitude to those who lost their lives, rather than retribution or revenge, and were based on the words of the Kohima Epitaph carved on the memorial in the cemetery of the same name in northeast India - “For your tomorrow, we gave our today”.

As veterans looked on, the Prince of Wales led the nation’s service of remembrance and laid wreaths at the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire in northwest England and there was a two-minute silence to honour the dead.

Prince Charles paid a heartfelt tribute to what he described as the forgotten army in a forgotten war that continued for several months after the end of the conflict in Europe. There was a special message from The Queen and Prince Philip of “grateful thanks to all those who fought so valiantly”; and it is interesting that Prince Philip himself, who served in the Royal Navy during the war, was on a British warship in Tokyo Bay when the surrender documents were signed.

In a separate address to the nation 75 years after his great grandfather, King George VI, gave a speech on VJ-Day praising British and other Commonwealth forces, Prince William spoke of “the most catastrophic conflict in mankind’s history” and described the emotions at its ending as “the mix of happiness, jubilation and sheer relief together with deep sadness, and overwhelming sense of loss for those who would never return home”. All this was topped off by a special BBC televised star-studded programme of famous actors portraying key figures from the war, including, of course, the forces’ sweetheart, Dame Vera Lynn, who had sung to the troops in the jungles of Burma.

With their mix of commemoration and celebration, these events were unforgettable and could even be the last of their kind in relation to the Second World War. I, for one, felt a sense of vicarious pride, since honouring the casualties of war is the least new generations can do. Historians should not be the only people who are interested in former times and who study annals, relics, records, archives, memoirs and ancient documents. The rest of us surely ignore the past at our peril.