I figure if I bump this it will just go away, but I just read this and loved it. I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, what the truth is these days is debatable. What accurate scientific conclusions are is debatable. Nothing is settled, yet we must march on with imperfect knowledge, struggling. And truth, sadly, may be not ascertainable to the laymen who cannot understand the complexity of that which is to be known (Maurile often touches upon this in his posts on the board) and hopefully put forward as a truthful and benevolent philosophy, political policy, or social theory.
It might be that our nation is too large, our reforms too needlessly big to be understandable, our pluralities too great not to be divisive.
For us to be informed, for us to speak truth, or even for us to be silent while truth is enacted for us seems Herculean.
But that does not mean we should not seek truth, nor run away from its implications. To wit: the bank bailouts were fascism; let us call them that. Movements towards environmental concerns and sustainability, in Clare Booth Luce's words, will be authoritarian; they will need to take the totality of the nation -- of the world -- into consideration; they will be totalitarian in spirit.
We face hard questions and deserve plain yet nuanced answers and plain definitions and the courage to call that which is, is. We need better than identity politics, corruption, and a charlatan that calls something truth when the truth is simply bull#### and an image created in a PR room somewhere on Madison Avenue.
I call bull####.
But enough politicking; nobody will see this. I'm still interested in whether the man in the OP, knowing the implications of his escape, commits suicide or enacts free will for one last time. And therein the possibility of a paradox; that both are true.