The Oxford English Dictionary defines “cowardice” as “the quality of a coward; cowardliness; want of courage to face danger; faint-heartedness, pusillanimity.” It goes on to specify the meaning of moral cowardice as “ignoble fear of the disapprobation or hostile sentiments of others”. This is as apt a summation of the qualities inherent within cowardice as one could ever find. But it does not reveal the insidious and pervasive nature of cowardice.
Cowardice comes from a variety of sources. Sometimes cowardice is caused by the simple fear of bodily harm, a dread of pain and injury and death. This is the most forgivable form of cowardice, since that fear is ingrained deep within our souls and it is beyond anyone to pass judgment on what another man can bear. Cowardice of this sort should not be praised, but neither should we condemn it too harshly. We do well to remember the old adage, “There but for the grace of God, go I.” The grace of courage is not common.
The other, worse sort of cowardice is perhaps best described as gutlessness. It comes when one values serenity and peace over other, better things. For while we may prize peace, there are many things we should prize more: liberty, life, knowledge, love, and even humor. These are noble and good things, and they should rank above serenity. When they do not, this is a moral failing. It is the failing we call cowardice.
I do not mean to say that peace is not a good thing. But it is not the best thing. The words of General John Stark of the Revolutionary War, immortalized in the state motto of New Hampshire, say it best: “Live free or die: death is not the worst of all evils.” Sometimes we must worry, or sweat, or even bleed for the things which matter to us. If something is virtuous, that virtue is something for which we must be willing to take a stand. No matter the time, no matter the place, no matter the forum.
Last week, a student at the University of Florida was at an open question session being given by Senator and former Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. You probably saw videos on YouTube or television. This student, Andrew Meyer, was rude and disruptive as he tried to launch into a vitriolic speech and ignored the moderators in order to keep shouting at Kerry. He deserved to be shut down and taken away, and maybe even deserved to be arrested when he shoved the UF police who took hold of his arms. But the officers who dragged him from the podium not only pinned him down and began putting him in handcuffs, they also began shocking him with a taser to stop his struggles.
The behavior of the officers was entirely unwarranted, of course. Four or more police officers were already grappling with Meyer, one per limb, and one hand was already cuffed. So why did these police officers feel as though they had to tase their target?
They did it because a senator was there talking, and this student was causing a scene intentionally, and they wanted everything to be over with. They wanted him cuffed and gone, quietly. So they tased him so he would stop struggling, and they could cuff him and drag him out quickly.
They did it, in other words, because they were cowards. They didn’t need to tase him, but it would restore peace the quickest way and so they took the easy way out. They ignored his right to liberty and health (Amnesty International has documented 245 deaths that occurred after taser use) because they valued peace of mind more.
Was Meyers a ridiculous jerk? Of course. He brought his camera and gave it to another student to use, cut in front of the next person in line to ask a question, disrupted the entire proceeding and was incredibly rude. The officers arresting him also report that he only struggled when a camera was visible, so perhaps his motives are also questionable. But had they acted appropriately, he would have been laughed at and forgotten within a week. Instead, the police gave into cowardice, and made him into a victim.
It’s easy to underestimate the dangers of cowardice, especially on relatively minor incidents. We might shrug off such a thing. After all, we can easily see the point of view of the aggressors, and empathize with their position. But we can’t give in so easily, because that’s just the start of the slide towards a long gray world of bitter silence.
When one stops doing what is right and what is good, because doing otherwise is quieter and more peaceful, then that person has to look at why they are here at all. They have to ask themselves what they value. And act accordingly, no matter the noise.
It’s actually even worse than you outline here. ACCENT – the group that sponsored this event is known for very managed events – i.e. more about PR for the university than really asking tough questions.
Ultimately Meyer was recognized, he was given the floor. He was engaging Kerry which makes all the difference. Kerry – a combat veteran & U.S. Senator was certainly capable of dealing with a zealous college student. Kerry himself had made some noise as a young protester.
Meyer never presented any kind of threat, he was boisterous but he was certainly lucid. He was asking specific questions. It should be noted he was asking these questions with an officer prompting him to “hurry up”. It’s not a small point when armed police act as arbiters of public discourse. The decision to suddenly reverse course and cut Meyer off lies with Max Tyroler, the corporate-Borg-in-training ACCENT student representative. Police then assaulted Meyer without regard to Kerry’s repeatedly stated wishes that he be allowed to respond to Meyer. Kerry subsequently expressed his concern over the incident saying he had never witnessed anything like it and that he was quite capable of handling Meyers’ questions.
They could have simply allowed him to ask his question and Kerry to answer but intrusion of the police and the use of potentially lethal force trumped all other considerations. The FDLE of course rubber-stamped these actions, as if any other outcome were possible. Further, besides having his life jeopardized Meyer was put under the thumb of the state with various charges leveled at him that could have potentially had long-term consequences on his life. All because he dared upset ACCENT’s little tea party. It wasn’t just about peace of mind but asserting the thuggish authority of the university and of the state.