On Sun 29 Mar at 4:51pm Nanook of the North wrote:
The story recurs in nearly every mythological system: Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia to guarantee good winds to sail to the battle of Troy; human sacrifice was an integral part of Aztec religious rituals; Christians hold that Jesus of Nazareth died for the sins of all mankind. In each case, we see the hallmarks of religious sacrifice: Give up the lives of a few to rebalance society.The old and the vulnerable will be offered up to our new Gods.
Check it out here »
On Sun 29 Mar at 5:07pm Tom Pain wrote:
The idea of self sacrifice is a little different from sacrificing someone else. Shouldn't this post be categorized under religion rather than politics, perhaps a new colour, webbo?
On Sun 29 Mar at 6:41pm David Stanley wrote:
The article is behind a paywall unfortunately but I agree that Mammon is the deity who rules over us, along with Moloch of course....but that's another story.
On Mon 30 Mar at 10:36am Nevillman wrote:
I can't see the article either Nanook. Can you explain what you mean. At the moment I can't work out if you are a religious nut suggesting that the virus is divine punishment, a worthwhile sacrifice or saying something else entirely.
On Mon 30 Mar at 12:36pm Nanook of the North wrote:
Clue @Nevillman,I am not a religious nut.See "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift.Although a cleric he was not a religious nut either,or reference Juvenalian satire.
On Mon 30 Mar at 2:09pm Nevillman wrote:
Okay Nanook, so what specific "bitter and ironic criticism of contemporary persons and institutions" are you making?
On Mon 30 Mar at 4:11pm Nanook of the North wrote:
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R), told Fox News’s Tucker Carlson on Monday that, if called on “to take a chance on your survival in exchange for keeping the America that all America loves for your children and grandchildren,” he — and other seniors, the demographic most vulnerable to the coronavirus — would be “all in.”
Patrick isn’t alone in making the case that the economy demands, if not quite ritual sacrifice, at least the nation’s willingness to put its most vulnerable at risk. Last weekend, President Trump hinted that, despite experts’ pleas for Americans to maintain social distancing, he would advocate for everyone to return to work within a few weeks: “WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF,” he tweet-wailed late Sunday. And in a televised appearance Tuesday, Trump proclaimed, “I would love to have” business as usual resume “by Easter,” to which Fox News’s Bill Hemmer replied — blending the ecclesiastical with the civil — “That would be a great American resurrection.”
Within such a paradigm, the implication — however repugnant — that in the midst of a pandemic, our capitalist system might require sacrificing the elderly to ensure future bounty for the young is sort of the next logical step. When the language of buying and selling, product and profit, so dominates our discourse about our identities, our society and our metaphysics, capitalism becomes indistinguishable from religious faith. Once we made human sacrifices to appease the gods; now, we’re told, we must do the same to appease the markets.
Meanwhile on this side of the pond,Dominic Cummings.The unelected government advisor pushed a strategy of “herd immunity” to protect the economy and “if that means some pensioners die, too bad”.Sir Patrick Vallance, the government’s chief scientific adviser, announced in mid-March that the UK would be taking a different route to other countries in imposing gradual restrictions to allow “enough of us who are going to get mild illness to become immune”.
The strategy was reversed after a study from Imperial College London showed that the policy would have led to a quarter of a million deaths,but the fact that this policy gained any traction at all speaks volumes for the priorities of our rulers ,their advisers and their scientific establishment chums.
On Mon 30 Mar at 11:21pm Nevillman wrote:
I hate to in any way appear to be supporting trump but if the lockdown continues for long term we are all in serious economic trouble. Why should the need of the old and vulnerable dictate that everyone should allow the economy to stagnate? We are either all in lockdown until a vaccine is found or we accept that those for whom the virus is unlikely to kill or need the health service, get it over with and those who choose to stay in isolation continue to do so. It shouldn't be too hard for those of us in the position of not being prepared to risk the virus to do so and let younger people get on with their lives. If I have to stay in isolation while others get on with it I don't regard it as a sacrifice. Businesses will soon appear to meet our needs.
Please explain Nanook if I have misunderstood your argument or why you disagree with my post.
On Tue 31 Mar at 12:07am Tom Pain wrote:
The strategy from imperial college was computer modeled and, as I recall envisaged half a million deaths. Another later one done in Oxford is way lower. It's all made up bullsh*t given a "scientific" veneer for the easily impressed. Corona viruses are colds and flus which are always mutating. I look at loads of reports,all contradictory and I can't see any confirmation that this particular version can be differentiated from any other. The last flu scare~ as many vaccinated people got it as unvaccinated. If you want bits of aborted babies and who knows what else shoved into your arm as well as an rfid chip,youre welcome but count me out.