Technocratic Death Drive

The Soul of the East

Hearts & Likes

People are able to discern good from evil. More or less everybody will recognize and condemn an atrocity exhibited on their TV screens, provided they have no stake in it. In this respect, social networks present us with a panoramic display of humanity’s certainty in its moral principles. Namely, that’s where thousands upon thousands like the photo of some little, dying “angel” and write condemnatory comments under the picture of some sadist caught poisoning dogs. Whether they are themselves good or evil is immaterial. They passed their judgments and ascertained what is and what is not good. Admittedly, the principles providing them with the capability for moral judgment are rarely explicitly defined. Yet who would doubt, for instance, the sanctity of human life and the obligation to respect its final act as unquestionable values? The virtual heart and like under the photo of the gravely ill child…

View original post 3,986 more words

1 Comment on Technocratic Death Drive

  1. Great article. The great task before all who wish to the defend Christian ethic of the human dignity (we are all created in the image and likeness of God and therefore every human life is precious) is to promote of what the Catholic Church calls the culture of life. But the West appears to be have been taken over by a death cult.

    The Catholic Church has often been a lone voice in the wilderness on this matter. Her opposition to abortion and euthanasia while often disparaged by the manufacturers of popular culture still has wide appeal among the public. (nationwide abortion-on-demand was not “legalized” via legislation but was a product of judicial activism). But it is the Church’s opposition to artificial contraception that has put Her at loggerheads with the death cultists. It is interesting that the author put the Time cover promoting childless coupling next to one advocating “death with dignity.” He recognizes the connection and that one inevitably leads to other.

    Sexual intercourse is selfish and ultimately meaningless unless it is open to procreation. And without the possibility of new life, sex becomes debased and perverted. The past four or five decades in the West proves this. Contraception, homosexuality and whatever new perverse lifestyle is conjured up leads to death. The demographic winter now descending on the industrialized world is the contraception’s bitter harvest.

    But one of areas of public policy where the Church has been mistaken is the so called healthcare debate. For decades Catholic Bishops have been issuing statements expressing vague support for socialized medicine as part of a broader social safety net. This has only emboldened the death cultists by creating broad economic conditions that make euthanasia inevitable.

    Socialized healthcare systems are not innovative and are notoriously inefficient, which inevitably results in lower quality of care and long waiting lines. This leads to de facto euthanasia as government bean counters impose rationing. The old and infirm are often denied care as a matter of cost saving. Now those enforcing such cost saving measures are are going admit their indifference to human life. They will employ language that makes there cold actions appear compassionate. Hence “death with dignity.”

    Socialist health care also results in gross inequalities, because the best medical resources are reserved for the very wealthy and well connected, who are able to get around the labyrinthine bureaucracies, while the general public is forced to make due with the scraps. And with any tax-supported health-care system it is inevitable that taxpayers will be forced to pay for practices that many consider morally objectionable, such as abortion, infanticide, and contraception.

    The healthcare system in America is not a product of the free market. Rather it is a grotesque creature born out of an unholy union between the government and rent-seeking corporations. It is unsustainable and desperately needs to be reformed. But the problem is that most of those calling for “health-care reform” disparage the free market and advocate more corporatism and further government intrusion into private medicine — hence the corporatist monstrosity called Obamacare.
    As libertarian Sheldon Richman writes of the health-care debate:

    “Almost no one is calling for a free market in health care. Doctors want regulations that free them to practice as they wish, while still having the government assure that everyone can get health insurance and thus pay doctors for practicing as they wish. Patients want as much care as they need and desire, paid for by others. Insurance companies want to maintain their cozy relationships with state regulators, built up over years, and not have to compete nationally, and are therefore opposed to calls to end the prohibition of interstate sales of health insurance. Everyone calls for help from the State, which, as Bastiat pointed out, is the fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.”

    In order to have a free, productive and humane society, the American people have to disabuse themselves of the notion that the government’s role is to provide basic needs like medical care. Government control of health care means government bureaucrats issuing tyrannical decrees and invading the doctor-patient sanctum to impose their will. And it also means the government micromanaging our lives, because virtually every decision we take as individuals can be construed to have an impact on our health. The nanny state quickly becomes the total state.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: