In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
“A market economy is to economics what democracy is to government: a decent, if flawed, choice among many bad alternatives.” -- Charles Wheelan, "Naked Economics"
Comments
I'm reading now...
Hopefully because you know that I will only steer you to good things.
Initial thoughts - god, I have so many. Can society flourish without the poor, the handicapped, the suffering (the forgotten child)?
Is Omelas truly a happy place? Can you recognize happiness without experiencing sorrow?
Is beauty/happiness real if it's only skin deep - Is it real if its very existence is based on ugliness?
Do Omelas' adults accept the situation because it benefits their children - and their children are their first, and only, priority?
What is the forgotten child worth? Everything - because the child's existence guarantees Omelas' existence? Nothing - in the terms of humanity?
Yeah, I would be one of the ones who walked away - mainly because everything built upon that child is a lie.