The Future Now

The dangers of ideological equality

I have reservations over much of what Daniel Finklestien writes over at Times Comment Central - he and I are clearly cut from quite diifferent philosophical cloth - but today's piece about the absurdity of disabled campaigners arguing for the right for deaf  IVF parents-to-be to choose a deaf child over a child who can hear, is right on the mark.

I generally don't have much sympathy with those that blame 'political correctness' for so many of society's problems; such complainants are usually deeply conservative and, in their eagerness to condemn attempts to make people think about the harm that can be caused through unthinking use of language, reveal their own deeply entrenched prejudices.

This story, however, is a clear case of political correctness gone mad.  Addressing the deaf activist who has made this ludicrous assertion, Finklestien says,

It is courageous to refuse to lie down and be a victim. I can only admire that. But it is one thing to be strong, almost heroic, about his own misfortune, quite another to want it imposed upon a child.

13 March Update:  Daniel has just posted again on this topic; an excellent reply from a deaf person.

Changing health

As ever, an interesting piece from Michael Tomasky on the importance of the debate over health care in the battle for the Democratic nomination.  It sounds as if Clinton is gaining support by having a policy that can never be implemented, and Obama is losing support because it's just too difficult to explain to the electorate why the Clinton plan (mandatory insurance) is a non-starter. 

The comment below Tomasky's piece by Don Reynolds, who appears to know a thing or two about this, is at once the most enlightening and depressing thing I've read during during the campaign.  Reynolds says,

There are no politicians, including Hillary and Obama, that are able to stand up to the physicians, hospitals, nursing homes, and pharm corporations (and their lobbyists). The only one that honestly wanted to try was John Edwards and he is no longer in the race. (I doubt he would have met with any success either.)

The USA is clearly unable to deliver on the promise of universal health care, which puts it way down the league table in terms of social progress among the rich nations.  But this should send out warning signals to other countries about the problems to be faced over the coming decades, as science races ahead, the population gets older, and we find ourselves unable to fund the quality and quantity of health inputs we would like in an ideal world.