The diary of Anne Frank became famous because of its wide release after publishing and the movie about it that followed. The diary detailed the experiences of a Jewish teenager in The Netherlands hiding in an attic for 25 months. This was during the purge of the Jews in Holland while Germany occupied that country in World War II.

The story of the capture of Anne and her family and the eventual death of all — save for her father — in the Nazi death camps has always presented her as a heroine, and her diary chronicles this dark period of history through the eyes of a child.

I do agree that hiding in an attic to save your life, rather than just giving up, has an element of resistance and survival. I find it appealing as a person who supports resistance to any oppression, whether it be against Nazism, fascism, or gang domination.

I am sure most readers will know the name Anne Frank, but I wonder how many know the name of the Norwegian woman who hid her and her family at risk of death. Well, her name is Hermine Geis.

This lady, just a regular citizen, faced down the significant danger of Nazi brutality — which at that time knew no limits. Yet, her name is known only to those who have an interest to seek it.

This example is relevant because we also forget to even recognise the courageous among us who stand up and risk their lives without fanfare or acclaim. I speak of our judges and prosecutors.

This is one of the most violent countries in the world and it is home to the most brutal gangs in the Pan Am region. For many years these gangs had political backing; some say they still do. I am not sure I agree.

The history of Jamaica’s judiciary is by no means free of violence. At least two judges have been murdered in the last 25 years.

Yet, our judges and prosecutors stare down these gangs daily in our parish and high courts. And they do it without demonstrating an ounce of fear. They never even seem remotely intimidated.

They are not giant figures like Renato Adams or Cornwall Ford. Yet, daily they stand up against this network of killers.

The irony is that there is no fortune to be earned here. A pencil-pushing conveyance attorney can earn their year’s salary in one deal. This example is relevant to both prosecutors and judges. And it is not like the professionals who take on these roles are lacking in talent.

I recall, about 30 years ago, listening to Director of Public Prosecutions Paula Llewellyn, then a Crown counsel, in a matter and wondering why such a talented advocate would choose such a hard life. This is the picture of dedication and courage that we do not even notice. We often focus on cops, and as a group and as individuals the JCF certainly is a deserving body. However, our armed forces are just one link in the chain.

We need to consider the fortitude it takes to prosecute and then sentence the ruler of a thousand guns. And that is what the head of any of our three largest gangs control. Then, add to that a few hundred dunces as members of these gangs, who are also willing and able to attack on a word.

The courage demonstrated by these two groups makes it clear that the excuses of many not to get involved in the war our nation is conducting against this subset of society is unreasonable. We are losing, not because the few who are fighting back are lacking in quality, but rather lacking in quantity.

It comes across as a battle being fought not by the nation on a whole, but only by the few who give their lives in pursuit of service, rather than fortune.

This battle, no battle can be won when fought only by a fraction of the capable. History has proven this. The Nazi occupation of France was not only fought by professional soldiers, but by the French Resistance made up of regular citizens. The civil rights movement in the 60s in the United States was championed by the most vulnerable group in the country — young black males. The suffragette movement that fought to grant women ‘the right to vote’ in England was championed by working class women.

The core of this issue is that we do not look at gang domination as a national threat. It is viewed by many as the “police dem problem”, or whatever group that is paid inadequate sums to fight them. This approach will never work. No battle against any national crisis that does not engage the nation as a whole body will result in a successful outcome.

A horrible, but relevant example is the gas riot of 1999. It was a distasteful show of violence and disorder, but it was the entire country opposing the tax. And it worked! Good cause, great unity, bad method.

The daily demonstration of courage by these professionals shows that not all battles are fought over the barrel of a gun, and not all heroes are obvious.

The question you must ask yourself is what other person risking his or her life have you not really thought about, and when do you plan to play your part to defeat your nation’s enemy?

Feedback: jasonamckay@gmail.com