July 15, 2012
Revenge Insurance: A Few Short Steps to the Gallows
Terrance Tomkow in his own excellent blog:
You are travelling to a lawless third world country to do good works. You make preparation for your journey: You get the appropriate shots. You increase your health insurance in case the shots don't work. To protect the family you are leaving behind, you increase your life insurance and add a double indemnity clause.
Friends advise you to arm yourself, but you are not comfortable with guns. Instead, you visit the office of a private security agency ("The Agency") to investigate the possibility of hiring bodyguards. The Agency's sales rep explains to you that because of the prevalence of violence and the total absence of law in this country the demand for private security there is high and so the service is very expensive. Looking at their rate sheet you realize it is far more costly than you can afford. As you rise to leave, the sympathetic rep offers you a brochure for one of The Agency's other services. They call it "Revenge Insurance".
The brochure explains that Revenge Insurance does not provide any protection to its policy holders. However, in the event that a subscriber is the victim of wrongful injury while in-country, the agency will undertake to use its considerable resources to track down the wrongdoer. When they find him, The Agency's operatives will not try to have the wrongdoer pay the policy holder compensation or recover stolen goods. That is a separate service and, given the general poverty in the country, rarely worth the cost. But, if you have Revenge Insurance, what the agency will do to the bad guy who injured you is hurt him.
Question: Is it morally permissible for you to buy Revenge Insurance?
More here.
Posted by S. Abbas Raza at 05:05 PM | Permalink






















Comments
"Question: Is it morally permissible for you to buy Revenge Insurance?"
Anwser: It is morally reprehensible of you to go do your "good works" which are nothing but you earning a huge packet in Afghanistan, Iraq or wherever th US military operates with its "revenge insurers".
Posted by: shn | Jul 15, 2012 9:23:13 PM
Loved this post -- I think Tomkow is spot on in his analysis.
@shn: way to comprehensively miss the point of Tomkow's article. Did you even read it?
Posted by: Matt_M | Jul 15, 2012 9:46:56 PM
Great article. I didn't care for the "if you don't agree, stop reading" silliness, though.
Posted by: Tyen | Jul 16, 2012 6:58:02 PM
This is a fun romp around the gallows and is an interesting business to parse as we suffer under the new rules of homeland security, and more importantly, as we transition into a global society. Though suffering is universal the cultural meanings of crimes and punishments are as yet varied. If one has to self-design a global society one would likelier chose the relative stability of an organized system of justice rather than random personal vendettas (suffer the loss of personal satisfaction for the sake of a peaceful market square). The trouble as always is in keeping the state’s organized powers of retribution out of the hands of social, political, religious, nationalistic, corporate, racist, or sexist self-interests. So it still falls to citizens to enforce a separation between a system of justice and the typical political power maneuverings of office holders and private interests. That task is not nearly as sexy nor as simple as revenge but is far more vital.
Posted by: Christopher Holvenstot | Jul 17, 2012 7:16:32 AM
Post a comment