Political Assassinations

I’m well aware that in our current political climate, any endorsement of violence is viewed with utmost suspicion and Biden (and other leaders) had to say what they said. Nevertheless, there are moments in history when one must peer beyond the polished rhetoric of our leaders and question the moral underpinnings of their pronouncements. President Biden, like many before him, maintains that political assassinations are never justified. Yet, history (and American involvement in political assassinations on foreign soil) provides ample evidence to the contrary. Perhaps it's self-interest that produces such statements.

Take, for instance, the Valkyrie plot of 1944. the aftermath of which is shown in the photo below. This was not some reckless scheme hatched by hot-headed militants; it was a calculated endeavour by high-ranking German officers, motivated by a profound sense of moral duty to end Adolf Hitler's reign of terror. Claus von Stauffenberg and his co-conspirators knew that conventional means had failed and that the world's future hinged on their drastic actions. Had they succeeded, the war might have ended earlier, sparing countless lives and averting further atrocities. Is it not a greater moral failing to stand by and do nothing when confronted with such evil?

Our leaders often tout the sanctity of democratic processes, yet they conveniently ignore the complexities that arise when those very processes are hijacked by tyrants and despots. Would we have been better served if someone had successfully assassinated Stalin before his purges, or Pol Pot before his killing fields? Surely, the cold calculus of political morality sometimes necessitates extreme measures.

President Biden's blanket condemnation of political assassinations ignores the harsh realities faced by those living under brutal regimes. It's easy to pontificate from the safety of the Oval Office, far removed from the daily horrors that necessitate such desperate actions. To condemn the Valkyrie plot, or any similar attempt, is to disregard the moral courage and ethical imperatives that drive individuals to risk everything for the greater good.

We must be wary of simplistic moral declarations that fail to account for the dire circumstances that breed the necessity for such drastic actions. While political assassinations are not to be taken lightly, neither should they be categorically dismissed. History demands a more nuanced understanding, one that recognises the tragic necessity of such measures in the face of unfathomable evil.

As for Trump, did his anti-democratic and insurrectionist rhetoric play a part in this? "Anti-democratic?" you may query, but part of the democratic process is accepting defeat graciously. It also necessitates truth, not 'alternative facts'.

Meanwhile, Fuhrage skips off to America to check on his 'friend', a liar, a convicted felon and an adjudicated sex offender - anything to avoid Clacton. Trump is not Furage's friend - he's nothing more than a tool to be used, a spanner or hammer. A man is measured by the friends he keeps.