Well, some more revolutions, both of and on our little blue-green spheroid, have come and gone and come and gone again, as revolutions are wont to do, and you find yourselves once more in possession of a butt-clenching, hard-hitting (in an outside edge to third man kind of way), eye-rolling edition of a semi-tome you know and love as, The Inconsequential.
During one of the many cyclical time periods since we last assailed your senses, we experienced the loss of a significant figure in British and the world’s political history. A figure responsible for more divisive outpourings and society-splitting legislation than our unassuming set of islands had seen for many a century. A person who single-handedly (for she alone created, promoted and installed her ideology) brought about the destruction of all that society claims to be: caring, mutually beneficial & protective and culturally interdependent. An individual who oozed class-reinforcing slime and allowed it to permeate into the Nation’s socio-economic cracks. A dictator who found herself elected repeatedly due to the quirks of a flawed democratic electoral system and the pathetic impotence of the weak-willed colleagues with whom she surrounded herself. A woman whose name alone could induce apoplexy in usually mild-mannered individuals. Someone hated almost universally by the proletariat and admired totally by the ruling elite. I don’t need to tell you her name. If you don’t know it, enter any of the above in a search engine and you’ll find it.
In short, then, a nasty piece of work.
So how should the Nation’s media report on the passing of such a leader? Should it reflect the strength of the displeasure felt by the people towards her? Or should it inconveniently forget anything remotely negative and, following convention, focus on the scraps of goodness it manages to unearth? Well, apparently, the latter.
We have no doubt that this person’s family and friends would relate any number of humorous stories and recall a multitude of redeeming qualities. Indeed, after any individual’s death, it should be expected that these characteristics are stated. However, they should not be presented as a complete encapsulation of the person’s existence to the total exclusion of everyone else’s glaring reality. Death doesn’t cleanse the soul, nor should it inflict amnesia on the living.
As ever, space and the nature of editorials, does not permit me to ramble on ad nauseum, and it certainly wasn’t my intention to give over this editorial in its entirety to the death of a politician, but you, our dear reader, will understand, I’m sure, that we have to comment on such a momentous issue.
For those wanting more, our Cover Story elaborates most comprehensively on the subject, while for those wanting less, the remaining 30-odd pages offer the very best in high falutin’ social commentary and witty asides, including a jock-tickling new story from Pat McDonough and the latest outstanding, observational offering from our very own NYC Correspondent, Stacy LeVine.
Until we roll around again, enjoy!