[lbo-talk] Shiavo "Forbidden video"

[Michael Dawson]

Bunk and more bunk.  The politics of the Schiavo case are entirely tracked
as usual.  The whole stink is the product of the political right's ongoing
(and wildly successful) efforts to divert and confuse politics.  Meanwhile,
Woj, your blanket talk about "Us-ers" is rather sickening.  As usual, it
levels all distinctions and hangs them equally around everybody's necks.
And why are you here if it's such an unredeemed stink-hole?  Why don't you
return to Poland, that bastion of Enlightenment and the Beer Party?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
> On Behalf Of Wojtek Sokolowski
> Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 8:00 AM
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Subject: RE: [lbo-talk] Shiavo "Forbidden video"
> 
> Tully:
> > This issue about Schiavo and the rights of disabled people does not
> > track nicely down the left / right political alignments.  I'm seeing
> > the split occur on both right and left biased lists, where a brand
> > new fence has been created.  I'm also seeing this issue break ranks
> > in personal discussions.  For the first time in decades, my parents
> > and I, who are on opposite sides politically, agree with each other
> > on an issue.  This "coming together" is very encouraging to see and
> > I'm seeing it increase over time as people consider the situation
> > more deeply.
> 
> The problem of the Schiavo's case is that it is a classic case of
> "ignoramus
> et ignorabimus"  (we do not know and we will never know) - and that US-
> sers
> as the people are simply unprepared to deal with such open-ended mysteries
> without a closure.
> 
> The US-ers have been conditioned, by their infantile religion,  mooovie
> industry, and exhibitionist reality-show tee-vee, that everything is
> either
> right or wrong, every problem can be babbled about and solved  as long as
> there is a will to attack it head on.  They have been conditioned that
> earnest devotion and sincere faith suffice to solve all life and death
> mysteries.
> 
> The problem with that naïve faith is that life is full of problems that
> cannot be solved by sincere devotion cum knowledge and technology.  Ms
> Schiavo's is a classic example.  We do not know and will never know what
> her
> wishes were or if she had any after she became incapacitated.  Ignoramus
> et
> ignorabimus.  We can only speculate, and any speculation is as good as any
> other.  We can believe her parents, because parents are supposed to love
> their children, or we can believe her husband because what would his
> motive
> to refuse let this thing go other than fulfilling his wife's wishes (he
> already got his insurance money and any court would grant him a divorce).
> But the bottom line is that we do not know and we will never know, and
> that
> makes a lot of people uneasy.
> 
> That anxiety creates a perfect opportunity for moral entrepreneurs,
> "mountebanks" (as HL Mencken would say it), and kindred moralizing scum
> telling people what to think, to cash in.  A single individual tragedy
> with
> no solution has been transformed into "the case of ____" - the case of
> right
> to die, the case of parental rights, the case of right to life, the case
> of
> care for the disabled, the case of government intervention, and so on.
> 
> The only civilized thing one can say in this case is that there is nothing
> that can be said with any semblance of veracity or done about it, so let's
> just honor the victim and remain silent.
> 
> Wojtek
> 
> 
> 
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk