[Peace-discuss] (no subject)

[Susan Davis]

I'm not sure, given all the uncertainties about governmental and personal 
intention in the Schiavo case, that it is productively occupying space and 
time on our list, unless we want to talk about how a woman who was unable 
to speak for herself has been mobilized as a political spectacle. That 
discussion doesn't inform or solve any of the moral and ethical issues, but 
it might tell us a lot about the political uses of spectacle. If people 
want to continue a long discussion of the issues it might be better to 
choose a less spectacularized case, and/or possibly form different lists to 
discuss it.

In my opinion, the more forceful a statement about the importance and 
meaning of this case is, the less trustworthy it is. the Schiavo case has 
generated much more heat than light and that's probably not an accident.

here's why I think this:

Tom Delay is an opportunist and not to be trusted.  If he declared himself 
against the war tomorrow, for humanitarian and international justice 
reasons, I still wouldn't give him a quarter for his parking meter.

Ditto Jesse Jackson, George Bush and most members of Congress, especially 
Dr. Frist. Ditto the hack legal commentators on CNN and Fox News. I 
wouldn't allow any of them in my front door to talk to me about anything, 
and so it's bizarre if not surprising that they are in everybody's living 
room propounding their certainties.

The media coverage of the Schiavo case is opportunistic and driven by 
ratings as well as right-wing ideology and the need to distract from Iraq 
catastrophe, so it can't be trusted to be fully factual or evenhanded.  Or 
even informative.

Many people who know nothing about neurology, hospice care, or the law have 
felt free to opine nationally on the matter as if they were very 
knowledgeable.  Other public figures who know from experience have 
concealed or soft pedalled their experience with difficult decisions about 
their family members' deaths.

Many Americans distrust an intrusive and authoritarian for-profit medical 
establishment.  Some Americans think American medical technology can do no 
wrong (look at the wealthy people who sign up for major cosmetic surgery or 
expensive tests that tell very little).  Many Americans distrust an 
intrusive and authoritarian government.  Some Americans trust and place 
hope in their intrusive and authoritarian government.  Almost nobody feels 
ours is a government we control or trust.

The parents and husband do not like or trust each other,  and the parents 
at least have seemed willing to say horrible things in public, possibly out 
of their own pain, and possibly out of  their own manipulativeness.  Many 
similar cases are solved without acrimony between family members -- but 
this one has become useful to people with other agendas.

Congress intervened and the Bush administration tried to intervene clearly 
as a way to beat up on the judiciary.  This case will be very useful to 
them in the next round of court appointments.

Nat Henthoff, a supposedly well informed and thoughtful person, with a long 
history of writing about civil liberties issues, is willing to shout 
down  Jamie Raskin on democracy now -- for fully 10 minutes -- so that 
neither of their opinions can be heard or considered by an audience that 
cares and is very much interest in the issues -- and this from a man who 
claims he has been covering the case for 2 1/2 years.  II've disagreed with 
henthof for many years -- but now I also know he's willing to be a jerk in 
public, if he thinks he furthers his point score.  Some public intellectual.

I think a real death here, in addition to Schiavo's, is of public honesty 
and thoughtful unpacking of the issues.