If you’ve paid any attention to the news, you know that every massacre, beating, gang attack, and so forth, is referred to as an act of “cowardice.”
Now I wonder why?
Why, instead of condemning the act as evil, or the actors as evil, instead they reach for cowardice?
Frankly, I’m embarrassed when I hear it. They sound like a bunch of nincompoops who are sanctimoniously lecturing a wrongdoer. Cowardice? Do they really think the perpetrator, or the victims, cares if it was an act of cowardice? Will that kind of condemnation stop future crimes?
Consider the case of the 14 year old Australian who was attacked by Africans. That case was referred to as an act of cowardice as well. Do these people think:
(A), that it will give any comfort to the boy to have his attackers called cowards?
(B), that it will stop future attacks from African migrants on native Australians?
Now, what if this had been said instead:
“For African migrants, who we’ve kindly accepted into our nation, to attack one of our native citizens is both shocking and aggravating. This will not be allowed to continue. We will prosecute any such crimes, including this one, with the utmost vigor and energy. We will remove such criminality from our streets.
Additionally, we are going to reconsider our refugee and immigration policies in light of this event. And we shall reconsider it with full consciousness of what is good for the citizens of Australia.”
Now, what effect do you think that would have? It would make the migrants think twice about cutting their connection to the nice, first world country they are presently living in. A few would doubt the seriousness of the declaration at first. But when their compatriots start getting rounded up and sent back to Africa because of their crimes, they would behave themselves fast.
The leaders of the West are failing their peoples. Sanctimonious condemnations like “cowardice” for crimes both brutal and intolerable shows this.