Three political advisors obtained government posts.
The first had a record of making racist statements, making comments against disabled people and people from sexual and gender minorities, being misogynistic, promoting pro-eugenic policies and supporting fascist regimes.
When the public heard about him and his record there was an outcry. After a few days he resigned.
Some people said, ‘See public opinion is still strong. He has gone and our society is safe’.
The second advisor tried to suggest a slightly less extreme set of views. He was still promoting social division and encouraging others to voice racist, homophobic, disablist and other discriminatory comments and promoting hate crimes. Some people noted this connection and campaigned for his removal but others said, ‘Freedom of speech is important. He’s not done anything wrong’ and he kept his job.
The third advisor learnt from what had happened to the first two advisors. He said nothing. He supported racist and homophobic attacks and euthanasia for disabled people in secret. He told lies about policies and people, including those who were poor, homeless or living in the margins, but he was clever enough not to attract too much attention. Few people noticed him and he kept his job.
Which of the three advisors posed the most potential danger to your community and the most vulnerable members of it? Listen then if you have ears.
Janet Lees
18.02.2020