Kathleen Stock

Today is publication day for my book DO NOT GO GENTLE: The Case Against Assisted Death. Kim Leadbeater's bill was the catalyst for writing it, and at the time, it felt like the task was urgent. Back then, the positive stories about assisted death sounded to me like fairytales. I wanted to explore the reality of assisted death more deeply. Justifications offered by supporters were so often mindless mantras about rights and "choice", but I wanted to see how it all fitted together, and what choices it gave to vulnerable people in reality. The writing period was a strange time. Every day I faced the fact of mortality, the nature of pain and suffering, and the darker sides of human nature. Yet I was also completely uplifted by the selfless compassion that humans can show to one another, when life is ebbing away. This week, Leadbeater's bill runs out of time. There is already talk by pro-MPs and lobbyists of flooding the private members' bill ballot, so that a similar bill arrives in the next parliamentary session. In the meantime, the public has some time to think properly about what kind of society we actually want. Is it one where state-sponsored death is treated as a solution to social ills? Or can we stand together to get something better, and far less bleak? Though times are hard, I still hope for the latter. I also hope that my book will be widely read, and especially by those tempted by fairytales.

@ceili221 Thank you - I agree, absolutely.

@Docstockk One argument I hadn’t thought of that you touch on in your book “Do Not Go Gentle” is the switcheroo of progressive sympathy when it comes to assisted death. When confronted with the fact that many old or terminally ill people might choose death out of a fear of being a burden and the humiliation of it, progressive supporters of assisted death support that rationale and the right of people to think that way. But there are many ways people can feel as though they are a burden and/or feel humiliation of being needy in some way. Can you imagine a progressive saying that someone taking charity or relying on food bank assistance has the right to feel humiliated or burdensome? Let alone that they might decide to opt instead to end their lives rather than be burdens or experience humiliation? Thank you for pointing out the incongruity of their arguments as well as their underlying message that they just don’t believe some lives are worth living in their estimation.

@HeatherMallick Not at all - no obligation! Sorry it isn't out sooner.

If you have read my book Do Not Go Gentle and think it's any good, please could you consider leaving an Amazon review? It helps with the algorithm, apparently.

DOES KANYE DESERVE OUR FORGIVENESS?, by Kathleen Stock (@docstockk) Professions of personal responsibility are disappearing from common language. Mistakes get made but have no makers. Rules remain hauntingly unfollowed by persons unknown. Even the US President, bloviating on social media about the imminent obliteration of Iranian civilisation, seems the very next minute to become a forlornly passive observer of his own intentions: ‘I don’t want that to happen, but it probably will.’ Also this week, the British government appeared to hold a man responsible for things he did when in the grip of mental illness. Kanye West has been banned from entering the UK in order to perform at a festival. In the recent past, he has written songs called ‘Heil Hitler’ and ‘Gas Chambers’; been on several offensive social media benders; made various conspiratorial statements during interviews; sold swastika T-shirts. Earlier this year he offered a fulsome apology in the Wall Street Journal, saying that his behaviour was the result of uncontrolled bipolar disorder, but it has made no difference. According to the Prime Minister, ‘Kanye West should never have been invited to headline Wireless... We will always take the action necessary to protect the public and uphold our values.’ There is no doubt that West has a serious illness. In the final episode of the 2022 Netflix documentary about him, he is seen raving incoherently, to the alarm of his friends. At other times his speech is slurred and his face and body heavy with medication. He cuts a mournful figure, even before deterioration is visible onscreen; sensitive and child-like, coping with the consequences of a serious car crash, devastated by the death of his mother, his ego buffeted by simultaneous currents of adulation and demonisation from the world. It would be a lot for a sane person to deal with, and West is not always sane. Read more below ⬇️ buff.ly/XJSRcdR

@ParchAled That's great to hear, thank you

@Docstockk I bought it in Waterstones, and am 3 chapters through. So clear, so far, and I shall leave positive reviews everywhere once I've finished it. Your case against assisted death outweighs any other arguments.

Reviews in for @Docstockk's DO NOT GENTLE Order now: shorturl.at/PSGgp

@ClarkeMicah Ha, thanks very much!

.@docstockk Though it is always annoying when reviewers haven't read your book (I'd guess 90% do this, but proof is hard), bear in mind that most people won't read the review to the end either, whether hostile or friendly, and rejoioce at how *big* it is and how many reviews you are getting.

@hopeful11111112 Thank you very much, on both counts

@Docstockk Have left review

@ceili221 Thank you!

@Docstockk Absolutely will do today. What a smart book. Listened to it. You did a great job narrating it as well.

@NABurkinshaw Much appreciated!

@Docstockk Done.

@glosswitch *philosophical, obvs

@glosswitch Maybe so. Either way, I can't see how it's a philosopihcal response to any of the arguments I offer about systems and ideologies taking over. It's just "have a little faith in people" and a rueful headshake.

The New Statesman review of my new book is out. Tbf it is better than it might have been, given the author previously did a hit piece on me for The Baffler back in 2019 . Relieved to see that he has not abandoned the trope of "mild-mannered Sussex university lecturer goes into phone box and comes out a gender-obsessed nutter" in his account of my back story. And if you wonder where the evidence for my alleged "belligerence" is, I append below the not-entirely convincing example he gave in the Baffler article the last time. What can I say - in academic philosophy, politeness norms are very confusing. The bar was always set very high for me for some reason, and incredibly low for nearly everyone else.

@JustMisogyny No idea. I could be wrong, but I get the impression an actual philosopical defence of his own claims is not the point here.

@Docstockk Has he ever given a coherent account of why he's a "trans-inclusive Leftist"?

@DrJenIzaakson "belligerent" and "aggressively forthright" = "dear God, if you exist, allow me just once in my life to write something not pre-approved by disciplinary gatekeepers at Wadham/All Souls/CUNY/ the alarmingly vigilant nonbinary in my dept" 😄

‘Rarely offline’ aka has an online audience size I’d give my right arm for. It is always a tactic of the left to attack others for their perceived strengths (that’s what they think happened to Corbyn, as if everyone applies their rules) never weaknesses. Once more the left is feminine

@moveincircles Jealous!

@Docstockk My favourite such description to date is probably “unusual combination of erudition and mania”

@jmc_fire Am wondering if he is a Jane Austen reenactor on the side.

@Docstockk “an aggressive forthrightness.” Heaven forfend.