Whose death is acceptable for the sake of the economy?

by Richard on September 30, 2011

No time to blog this morning. Instead, read Whose death is acceptable for the sake of the economy?

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

1

Kim 09.30.11 at 5:55 pm

Whose death is acceptable for the sake of the economy?

Thousands and thousands of lives are sacrificed on the altar of the deified market day after day, after day, after day …. It’s just that most of them are far, far away, foreign, poor, and voiceless. So what are a few Bristish motorists added to the holocaust? After all, we do have a BIG Society. As for increased petroleum consumption, carbon emissions, ecological friendliness — well, blah, blah, blah…

2

Pam 09.30.11 at 11:44 pm

No death is acceptable for the sake of the economy.
Yes, many people die needlessly and I can offer no explanation for that as can any of us. We can help where we can. Unless of course we’ve got enough guts to give up everything for someone else.

3

Pam 10.01.11 at 2:46 am

Just read an interesting article on this subject entitled “Drilling into hearts of darkness” by Slavoj Zizek who is visiting Sydney as part of the Festival of Dangerous Ideas. At the beginning of the article he quotes Mark Twain “A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court” (that made me smile!):

There were two ‘Reigns of Terror’ if we would remember it and consider it: the one wrought in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood….our shudders are all for the ‘horrors’ of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak, whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heartbreak? A city cemetary could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over, but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror, that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror, which none of us have been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.”

Wish I was as clever as Slavoj. And Mark Twain.

4

Richard 10.01.11 at 6:44 am

>> “Wish I was as clever as Slavoj. And Mark Twain”

We could all wish that!

5

Kim 10.01.11 at 7:32 am

Žižek cites Twain’s parable (on p. 387) in his recent Living in the End Times (2011, updated from 2010). Three pages later he refers to “Today’s post-political ’silent majority’, which “is not stupid, but it is cynical and resigned.” Then, referring to the 2005 elections in the UK, the re-election of the immensely unpopular Tony Blair, and the inability of “discontent to find a politically effective expression”, he observes: “Something is obviously very wrong here — it is not that people ‘do not know what they want,’ but rather that cynical resignation prevents them from acting upon it, with the result that a weird gap opens up between what people think and how they act (or vote). Such frustration can foment dangerous extra-parliamentary explosions, which the Left should not bemoan, but take the risk of relating to in order to ‘awaken’ the people.”

Now fast forward to the August riots in England …

Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>