Paul Krugman on NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s hapless response to the city’s recent blizzard:
He just faced a major test of crisis management — and it’s been a Brownie-you’re-doing-a-heck-of-a-job moment.
Krugman, again, a few minutes later:
Update: Commenters are right: I shouldn’t have been so casual about the comparison to New Orleans, where so many people actually died. I was thinking too narrowly of the
political aspect, of the collapse of an undeserved reputation for competence; but the dead deserve more respect.
Can I vent? Krugman’s crack wasn’t in any way disrespectful to New Orleans, it was just a comparison that used a cultural touchstone that everyone would instantly recognize. Likewise, if you tweet that the world would be better off if someone were dead, it’s not “eliminationist” rhetoric, it’s just water cooler conversation from someone whose temper is frayed. No one thinks you really want to take out a contract on someone. And analogies to World War II aren’t meant to trivialize Nazis, they’re just handy comparisons that most people will understand because World War II is really famous.
This kind of “How dare you!” reaction is way too common in response to casual comments. Sure, we should all be careful with our smart remarks, but the outrage brigade needs to ease up. Either that or they need to start getting equally upset over “_____’s Waterloo” formulations. A lot of people died there too.
