The death of Lindsey Graham. A timely American reminder.

 

There will be, no doubt, a lot of mention today of the death of Lindsey Graham.  It'll feature, in some fashion, on all the news programs.  

I've commented a little on Graham in the election thread.  He was standing for reelection. That's all beyond him now.

What I'm commenting on instead is the "surprise" by his death.  Here's the most American, and stupidest, one:

I’m sorry, but Lindsey Graham dying out of the blue like this doesn’t make any sense at all. 

We have him on camera yesterday looking perfectly healthy. 

None of this is making any sense…

Sorry junior, somebody dying suddenly at age 71 makes all the sense in the world.

And frankly, Graham was more than looking his age in recent months.

It only doesn't make sense to modern Americans. Graham's own father was 69 when he died of a heart attack, which is likely what Graham died of as well.  

All human beings die, and after about 30, all males are on borrowed time, females after about 45.  After that, if death comes, maybe people are surprised, but they ought not to be.

My own father died at age 62, and his father at age 47.    My father's mother was 65 when she died.  I was a child at the time, but I can recall it.

The point here isn't to just point out the obvious, but to add something else.  American culture has moved in the Baby Boom Era from knowing that death can arrive at any point, and will arrive ultimately, to sort of believing it just can't happen.  Graham was 71 years old and running for a position which would have ended for him at age 78.  At 71, that position should go to a younger person.  People have to yield at some point.  Moreover, by putting positions of responsibility in the hands of people who are that old, society is just gambling with death.

Indeed, some morning in the news few days to years, we're going to wake up to the news that Donald Trump is dead.  Maybe he'll live through his term, but there's utterly no guaranty of that.  Right now he's taking a physical every six months, which is probably due to his declining mental status, but that shows it right there.

In earlier times countries would occasionally come under the reign of the the very young, but it was rare.  Almost always a regent was put in place to govern until they were old enough to do so.  There are rare exceptions.  Ismail I became Shah of Perisal at just 13 years old in 1501 and actually governed..  King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem  dismissed his regency and took personal control of his kingdom at age 15. I'd frankly rather have a 15 year old in charge than an 80 year old.  Society would say that's nuts, and indeed having a 15 year old in charge is nuts.  Having an 80 year old in charge is nuts too.

I'll deal with it in another post, but as for myself, at 63, I've recently started sending out the signals that I'm headed towards a career landing.  I'm 17 months out, no more.  It's funny how that's received.  Some are nervous, and some just don't believe it, including two older partners of mine, one in his 70s . It's not possible to retire at that age (I'll be five months shy of age 65).  But for that matter, there's no guaranty at all I'll be living by that time.  I may spend the next 17 months of my life paying for the fear of my long suffering wife that I can't retire, right now.

That's a bit different, however, from the hubris of "I'll be living" and "I'll be fit".

And so the general lesson.  We don't allow for old airline pilots as they may get suddenly ill, and kill everyone on the plane

The same is true for the elderly in charge of anything.

There's a time people should stop.  And people imaging that any male death over 50 is shocking or unusual are merely trying to comfort themselves.