KEY POINTS:
In this harsh world, someone occasionally performs an act of enormous kindness, and my opinion of the giver is forever altered. Such as when John Banks, a man with whom I often lost patience, announced years ago he and his wife were going to Russia to adopt a child.
When they visited the orphanage to choose their new daughter, they couldn't bear to leave her two brothers behind, so they brought three children home to Auckland.
For anyone launching bravely into instant fatherhood this would be frightening. But for someone as obsessively fastidious as John Banks, this was an extraordinary gesture, unselfish in the extreme.
Those three children's blighted lives were lifted not just because they'd be raised by wealthy parents in a warm South Pacific nation, but because what remained of their original family - two brothers and a sister - would grow up together.
So if I was an Auckland voter I would elect Banksie just for this kindness. Someone who lives their Christian beliefs, as opposed to bum-polishing pews each Sunday, can't be too bad for a city.
Cynics would say Banksie the politician had merely found a cute way to get votes from soft, middle-class women. They've obviously never raised children. There could be no tougher route to the mayoral chambers than committing to a lifetime of parenting.
But who cares about cynics, anyway? They are the lowest of life form, sneering at everything except their own nihilism; impressed by nothing save their own snigger.
Journalism seems to attract such people - perhaps they mistake a healthy scepticism for their own odious malady. The world would be a better place without their poison, but why be quick to judge? Perhaps they've never been on the receiving end of unexpected kindness.
Ten days ago I read a column by Chris Trotter, hardly regarded as someone who would reach out a helping hand to a former Act MP and long-term admirer of Sir Roger Douglas. Writing "from the left", Trotter began: "If she was of a mind to, Deborah Coddington could justifiably stand up and demand an apology". He went on to explain how I was "roundly condemned for 'Asian-bashing' " after writing an article in North & South magazine in which "she sketched out the growing menace of the Chinese triads - the organised criminal fraternities which have preyed on the Chinese diaspora for more than a century".
Trotter suggested I refer my critics to Peter Low's comments when he organised the mostly Asian march against crime, his declaring he had money and could "buy anything", talking of hiring criminal gangs for protection "in much the same, matter-of-fact way other New Zealanders might talk of hiring a security firm."
I read on in disbelief, waiting for the sting from Trotter, assuming he would conclude by calling me racist, as had every other commentator who took a whack at me for the article. But Trotter didn't, and I'm not ashamed to admit that, blubbing with gratitude, I phoned and thanked him for having the guts to publicly back me.
I will still vehemently disagree with his politics from time to time - we'd both be worried if that were not the case - but I shall never tolerate a bad word said about him in my presence.
I don't know if I'm capable of grand gestures like those of Banksie and Trotter. My everyday kindness extends to the (real) animals which are my companions, and the plants in my garden and vineyard which only respond to tender nurturing. But in my past I've delivered too many unnecessary and undeserved blows, figuratively speaking, which I now regret. From the cesspit of personal cruelty there is no retreat.
Recently Danny Kruger, who runs a London resettlement programme for youth ex-prisoners, penned a Spectator article on why he's still proud of writing Tory leader David Cameron's "hug a hoodie" speech.
He argues love is a neglected crime-fighting device, but the need for it is powerful because people who've never known kindness legitimise their evil with hatred. It's an interesting position, and should be considered seriously with Kruger's other arguments in favour of reducing crime, such as reforming unconditional welfare which "smothers ordinary responsibility", and promoting fatherhood not fathering.
But Kruger's most-powerful criticism is against "today's aristocracy - the elite who make the culture and the policy", including middle-class professionals who buy illegal drugs for recreational use, who should "put their vaunted social conscience into practice and stop paying people to be criminals".
Kindness and love, it seems, can be expressed through a cruel truth. Is anyone listening?
* deb.coddington@xtra.co.nz
