The title of this article is that he "didn't have to die." That is correct, he didn't have to kill himself. Yes, he faced significant adversity, which he brought upon himself. It's said that character is how you deal with adversity. This person chose to end his own life instead of confront the challenge he sought. No, the federal prosecutor was not in the right, but neither are they in the wrong for the decision by Mr. Swartz to kill himself.
Oh, pish. We're more than happy to condemn young cyber-bullies who hound kids to suicide without blaming the person committing suicide. If the act of making someone's life unbearable is enough to blame bullies for a suicide, then surely it's the same for the prosecutor.
Note that this doesn't rely on the victim's age: regardless of whether a 26 year old can be blamed more for suicide than a 16 year old, that doesn't change the fact that we should give similar blame to the external factors in both cases. Indeed: most tormentors of teens are themselves teens, so they, if anything, deserve less blame than a sociopathic adult prosecutor hellbent on career advancement, damn the consequences.
Also: the implicit attack on Aaron's character is uncalled for. You know nothing at all about the quality of his character. You should keep in mind that many of us here did know him. If you feel the need to engage in "man up" rhetoric in some pointless display of how hard-nosed and pragmatic you are, you should keep in mind it's a reflection more on you, not the person-object you're leveraging to establish your own status.
I'd also say we are wrong to condemn young cyber-bullies. There are things in life that create adversity, then there are ways of dealing with adversity. I think conflating the two, makes it difficult to discuss.
That said, clearly the two are related, but it is correlative, not causative.
I agree: plenty of people here have been bullied and came out relatively unscathed. Often the bullying survived was worse than what drives others to suicide. It's messy, because you can't tell in advance the likelihood of your "being a dick" turning into "instigated a suicide," because something minor for some people--nasty rumors on Facebook or a felony charge--might be life-rending for others.
But just because something is uncertain doesn't mean you have to treat the worst case as equivalent to the typical or median case. We treat drunk driving much more leniently than vehicular manslaughter while drunk. That's the lens I view the government's role through.
I couldn't agree more. I've sorta kept my mouth shut on the issue as HN has fallen all over itself eulogizing this guy as some type of martyr but good God, he pulled the trigger on himself.
And HN reverts to the "man up"/"suck it up buttercup"/"you made your bed, now sleep in it" passive-aggressive back-stabbing everyone-for himself sentiments. None of us asks to be born into our lives and circumstances. It doesn't make someone less deserving of empathy to choose what they consider a moral battle. You are basically saying he wasn't jaded enough for your liking, and as a result, deserved to feel as hopeless as he did. I consider myself anti-religous... Still: "If we are not our brother's keeper, at least let us not be his executioner." (Brando)
It's odd that personal accountability is now looked down upon so vehemently by so many. Nobody is saying that Swartz deserved to die. Nobody is saying that the his potential punishment wasn't unfair.
There could have been an outcome to this situation where Swartz lives, accounts for his actions, and progress is made towards reforming the laws.
Now instead of having a legitimate debate about the appropriateness of existing laws we are dealing with an endless amount of bleeding heart sentiment that does nothing to correct the perceived injustice.
I'm not against accountability, and I'm not criticizing you wanting to focus on change. If you have no patience for other people, some of whom are still simply upset (I've moved on, I'm just commenting), that also doesn't mean you have to wait for them any more than you have to resent them for being in a different stage of grief, or dismiss their progress because it's not your progress. "Bleeding hearts" aren't really stopping any of the discussions you want... You are still free to start them; they might not even happen without you. Calling people names ("bleeding hearts") might, however, discourage others from participating with you in the discussions you want to happen.
Those things to the left of the timestamps are usernames. They belong to individuals. Individuals post their opinions on HN. Do not conflate the opinions of individuals with some sort of concept of the stance of HN.
The set of individuals posting on one thread may have little or no overlap with the individuals posting on another thread.
I upvoted you because you're quite right. (That said, 2 points make a line and at the time there were 2 comments with the same sentiment just cordially agreeing with each other, and it didn't look like anyone was going to disagree.)
The people for whom I have empathy are his parents, family, and friends who, by committing the ultimate act of self-centeredness, he has now forced to live the rest of their lives bearing a burden of sorrow and survivor's guilt.
This is the sort of attitude that contributes to the difficulty people who are considering suicide experience in getting help.
Despite what the RCC and the like have drilled into western discussion for centuries, the depressed who consider or commit suicide are victims. Depression is a disease, not a sin, and this sort of stigmatization makes it all the more difficult to treat before it kills.
With no other disease would we term it "inconsiderate" for the afflicted to die.
(That is not to say that depression was the cause in this situation (though I strongly believe it was a contributing factor), but your "ultimate act of self-centeredness" bullshit is not discerning.)
I'm doing an extraordinarily poor job of communicating today.
I've had the Black Dog, as Churchill called depression, at my heels since I was a kid. Hereditary type thing, history of suicide in the family. 11 years ago I saw myself headed towards the edge of a cliff and made a phone call that saved and ultimately changed my life.
Having dealt with the type of depression that leads one to that edge, I also know that one of the side effects is extreme self-absorption. You feel so shitty and hopeless that all you can think about is how shitty and hopeless things are, which creates a downward spiral that can ultimately lead to someone deciding to take their own life. Everything becomes about you and your pain, and there is not a way to just "suck it up" and get out of the pit, because depression doesn't work like that. It takes help from without. I.e., counseling, medication, etc, but because the person is so down just reaching out for those things can be like trying to reverse gravity.
But I've also been on the other side of things, where a friend decided to kill himself, and I've seen how his decision emotionally eviscerated the people that loved him. Suicide truly is an incredibly self-centered act; the self-centeredness isn't a character flaw, it's an outgrowth of the disease. But that doesn't make it different from what it is, and it doesn't make the effects of that decision any less devastating to a person's loved ones.
I fully realize that the above two paragraphs are somewhat ambivalent and that's because I'm pretty ambivalent towards those who commit suicide. Part of me feels sorrow that they got to that point, the other part feels like they're selfish a-holes. And somehow each part makes up more than half.
I'd just mention, just because you've experienced depression, doesn't give you ultimate insight into how others experience it. There are different kinds, and their interactions with different personalities causes different things.
With that in mind, making broad reaching statements "that suicide is always a selfish act" is just out-right incorrect. You are projecting your own feelings, based on your own experience. No one knows any suicide victim's state of mind, so how can we make statements about that state of mind?
In other words: "Stop crying, dammit, you're making everyone else feel bad."
Suicide is a private whimper that is not made to be heard. Yes, his family's suffering should be the focus now - they are the ones in pain. That doesn't negate Aaron's circumstances. It's still well-worth reflecting on those circumstance. Yes he chose it, some of it (not necessarily the depressive tendencies), but he also felt compelled for moral reasons to take a path. That's less like choice and more like moral imperative. I agreed with his imperative and it's sad to me to think people with those values face disproportionate burdens. It's OK if you disagree with that imperative, but we don't have to throw people we disagree with to the wolves either. That's bitterness, not problem-solving.
Are we responsible for the emotions of others? If so, are others responsible for Swartz's depression? Then how is it selfish for him to act out the emotions put onto him by others?
I don't buy the idea that a suicide victim "forces" people to feel guilt. That implies we are not responsible for our own emotions and that we expect others to live for our own personal welfare. Believing someone else is obligated to make us happy, despite his own incredible pain, is truly selfish.
