You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
We need be careful how we deal with those about us, when every death carries to some small circle of survivors, thoughts of so much omitted, and so little done-of so many things forgotten, and so many more which might have been repaired! There is no remorse so deep as that which is unavailing; if we would be spared its tortures, let us remember this, in time.
Austerity comes from the word austere—and dictionary definitions are as follows
Austere—stern, grim, severely simple, morally strict.
Austerity—hardship, sternness, severity. (Oxford Dictionary, 1969, p. 44)
However, contemporary understandings of austerity are multiple. From those who perceive austerity to be noble and dignified, a kind of “make do and mend” move to try to forge moderation, social cohesion, and survival. To those who perceptive that austerity measures to be deeply unfair, and far from being “all in this together” have simply attacked the poor and most vulnerable while encouraging the excesses of those who have more than enough. The language used in describing economic circumstances carries with it the air of resigned inevitability, that somehow the increased inequality we have witnessed is inevitable. But what is the true cost of austerity? Might we do well to call to mind the words of Samuel Johnson that “A decent provision for the poor is the true test of civilization” (Boswell, 1791). And what does psychoanalysis have to contribute to such ideas? There are a whole range of ideas which may be of benefit here, not least and for