Novelist Michael O'Brien makes telling observations on compromise as caving in a time of moral anarchy."You are presented with a choice. Threatened by a foreign leader with a Koran in one hand and in his other a nuclear weapon, you can choose to elect as your own national leader a figure with a Bible in one hand and in his other a nuclear weapon. Which of the two would you want to determine the future of the world? Oh, and as a supplementary detail, both of them are willing to drop the bomb on the other.
"Recoiling in horror, you might then turn to an alternative set of candidates, thinking you must now elect a leader who, like you, abhors nuclear weapons. He may or may not have a Bible in one hand, but it is more likely he will have The Humanist Manifesto (a sacred text of Materialism) in one hand and a suction tube in the other.
"Are these our only choices?" says O'Brien. "If so, this is no choice at all. It is a piece of deadly theater."
To read O'Brien's full essay click here. (pdf document)
1 comment:
Dear Ath,
With a miniscule recognition of mimesis, this article could have easily found its way in between the covers of Politics & Apocalypse, Studies in Violence, mimesis and culture.
Peace
Aramis
Post a Comment