Why Shutdowns are Bad for Democracy

No, it is not the mask mandate, although it might be – we don’t know.  And that is one of the problems.

We have governors and now a presumptive president-elect who make proclamations about COVID-19 and masks and shutdowns for political reasons but which are based on half-truths and selected science.  The result is that we are being put into a mental slumber of unthinking in which we accept without question what we are told.

The mainstream news media, which seems to be where most people are getting their information, has an agenda.  That agenda for the last year has been to convince people that President Trump was getting it wrong about COVID-19.  

Government cannot fix everything.  The Trump administration has and with the vaccine continues to put a dent in the virus and our ability to treat those infected, but no government can cure it or make it go away.  Yet Democrats, rather than applaud successful efforts, choose to set up roadblocks and blame the President as if he had created the virus and intentionally set it upon us.  And governors continue to tell us that they would fix everything if only we would obey their dictates.

There are studies supportive of shutdowns and masks, but there are also serious scientific studies that question the usefulness of such measures.  See for example THIS 

Similarly, rather than pay attention to the scientific studies of the effectiveness of the vaccine, the MSM  jumped on the bandwagon when Kamala Harris proclaimed that the vaccine could not be trusted because it was developed during Trump’s presidency.  Now, when we have two vaccines showing 94 and 95 percent effectiveness, the narrative continues that it may not be trustworthy because it was developed during the Trump administration.

And there are the shutdowns and the mask mandates which come and go like the wind and are always riddled with irrational exceptions. 

Let’s remember that last spring we had a 3-week shutdown to SLOW THE SPREAD.  Not to completely eradicate the virus.  We always expected it would continue to be with us.  But now when the numbers go up in the slightest, we have to shut down all over again because apparently somehow we believe that some government official can just make it completely go away if we only do what he or she says.

About those numbers:  generally, the numbers given to justify government mandates are not complete.  Do you know if deaths due to COVID-19 but with underlying conditions were really caused by COVID-19 or by the underlying condition?  How is that determination made?  Are there incentives to count it as COVID-19?

What about infection rates?  Do more tests result in a higher or lower overall infection rate?  What about false positives and false negatives?  How many are there?  Why?  How do they affect the rates?

And the masks.  Did you know there are significant studies by credible scientific groups that deny the effectiveness of masks?  Why do these studies not get equal time?   Did you know that a study performed by the military resulted with a lockdown showing slightly greater infection rate than non-lockdown? (LINK )

Arbitrary and ever-changing shut down and similar rules can and do take a heavy negative toll on the populace.  Not only do small businesses and their employees take the brunt of economic devastation, but also the people in general suffer in ways that many would find worse than the virus. 

The repressive actions by many state governors seem to ignore such things as increased depression and suicide, increased spousal and family abuse, decline of academic and athletic training and skills at K-12 schools and colleges, the loss of a will to live in the elderly isolated in elder care homes, etc.

But far more catastrophic than the individual and specific events that we can point to is the effect that the shutdowns have on the soul of every individual and ultimately of our country as well.

Isolation is not natural for humans.  Sitting at home, even working at home, lacks the stimulation that occurs when we go out into the world.  That stimulation might be talking with a colleague at the coffee machine, or shopping, or having lunch with friends, or discussing any number of topics in a seminar or playing games inside or outside with friends or strangers or any number of the things humans typically do (or did before they were instilled with COVID-19 fear and threatened with lockdowns).

When one is left without real stimulation, with hours of essentially nothing to do except scroll through social media or stream videos on TV, one becomes sluggish in both body and mind.  An inertia sets in.  I can’t help but think of the description of “mental slumber” found in The Golovlyov Family by Saltykov-Shchedrin: “As she gazed she would think of nothing . . . .  She merely gazed and gazed, until a senile drowsiness began to hum in her ears again, veiling the fields, churches, villages and that distant trudging peasant in the mist.”

The Russian word for such inertia is oblomovshchina [Обломовщина] from the character in Goncharov’s Oblomov who spends the whole day just dreaming and lying on the couch.  In his book Dead Souls, Gogol also referred to such “lie-a-beds.”

We have this soul-deadening inertia being cultivated by our various governors and their lockdowns.  It is not healthy for us or for our democracy.

As any good communist, socialist, or Democrat will tell you, “never let a crisis go to waste.”  COVID-19 arriving on our shores was a crisis.  And the Democrats had no intention of letting it go to waste and continue to use it to suit their agenda.

They begin by generating a fear so great that it cripples logical thought.  Now yes, as with any dangerous thing, including a virus, a little fear or caution is a good thing.  But the fear mongering of the media and the left goes far beyond that as they created and continue to promulgate fear that reaches the level of hysteria about the virus. 

With hysteria and its emotional and illogical mates, comes a huge uncertainty.   Humans do not like uncertainty.  They look for something or someone that can provide certainty to their lives.

The state governors and other politicians make it clear that you must listen to them asserting that they are the only ones who have and understand all the information, and, being in a state of fear many people are willing to listen and accept without question.  They think the mandates will provide them the certainty they seek.

They do not question what that information is.  They do not question why it leads to the mandate being imposed.  They do not question what other information is available.  The people just blindly follow, the well instilled fear being that if they do not then they will certainly die. 

The people are learning to follow blind and often inconsistent and irrational mandates.  They are learning to accept what they are told without question.  They are learning to give up their freedom without question.

This does not mean that everything we are told is inaccurate or not useful, but to accept it without question is the very antithesis of democracy. 

Democracy requires a mind that is awake, that is able to question and to seek out all the evidence, that is energized by debate about information and policy.  It requires a soul that believes in itself and is self-reliant and innovative.  

The mental slumber in which the unquestioned mandates place us is the enemy of democracy, of free and fulfilling lives, of the true happiness and health that comes from being in charge of your own soul.

So, yes, COVID-19 is dangerous and even deadly for some.   For others it is less so.   We are human.  We can think.  We can understand the facts and evidence if it is fully provided to us.  We can take the precautions necessary for who we each are and can do what is necessary to help protect our neighbors. 

We do not need mandates that that are filled with holes like a slice of Swiss cheese.  We have minds and it is time that we started to use them, because if not, the “cure” for COVID-19 will be the death of us all.

 

 

CoVid Mission Shift

Doctors and scientists are not and should not act as if they are politicians.  Politicians are not and should not act as if they are doctors.  But that is exactly what is going on with CoVid, and it is a disaster.

Let me begin by saying that I believe CoVid is very real and very dangerous.  It is not the flu.  It may or may not have a death rate similar to the flu.  But its transmission is far different from the flu and it can and does kill, it can and does spread more easily than the flu, and its long term effects are unknown.  Even with a vaccine it will likely be with us forever.

That being said, the shut down hysteria is ridiculous and is based in politics far more than it is in science.

Let’s briefly review.  When the virus first arrived from China we knew nothing about it except that it seemed to spread easily and that it killed people.  People who were severely infected with the virus needed ICU care and ventilators.  We were concerned that there might not be enough beds or ventilators, so, the scientists suggested that we do something to “slow the spread.”

“Slow the spread” never meant eradicate the virus.  It meant try to keep the rate of spread slower than it was so that the hospitals would not be overloaded and we would not run out of ventilators.  A variety of measures were taken to slow the spread in the early spring.  There were major shutdowns. We even provided unemployment bonuses to encourage people not to come to work.  We watched the daily numbers on our TV screens.  We slowed the spread and the threat of overtaxing our resources was eliminated, in part because of the slower spread and in part because of the President’s efforts to join with industry and manufacture ventilators and other needed supplies.

Up to this point, things seemed to make sense given what we knew about the virus.  There were the expected attacks on the President – he acted too fast/too slow in shutting things down, closing entry from infected countries, etc, but for the most part we accomplished the goal.  We slowed the spread and the medical effects of the virus became manageable.

But then something happened.  We had a mission shift.  As people began to venture out, some still got the virus.  The Democrats said Trump was killing people.  The media became hysterical.  The virus was still here.  Somehow, we seemed to think that the “slow the spread” guidelines should have completely rid us of the virus. 

Democrats loved this – they could blame Trump that the virus is still here while at the same time attacking everything he has done.  Their candidate, Hidin’ Biden, could sit in his basement and read prepared critiques while pointing to numbers saying people are still dying.  This of course easily combines with the media’s love for, and talent in, creating hysteria.  As the disease continues to spread the idea of uncertainty is pushed; and, with uncertainty comes not only hysteria, but also a need to blame someone – the media and the Democrats point us to the perfect target – Trump. 

And, what a wonderful campaign tool to be used by a Party that needs to hide its candidate from public scrutiny.  Make Trump and other Republicans out to be unconcerned about the citizenry if they go outside to campaign.  Trump should not have rallies; he should not travel or make presidential appearances.  People should not be allowed to gather at places like conservative churches.  Presidential debates are being rescheduled (and I for one expect that Biden will find a CoVid reason to ultimately cancel).  We must have full mail in voting (which, unlike absentee mailed votes is fraught with the potential for abuse and fraud) because going outside to vote is too risky.  This at the same time as the Democrats have no problems with protestors and rioters gathering in large numbers to assert Progressive demands and attack traditional values as well as public property and private businesses. (New Mexico’s Governor said that door-to-door campaigning “is just a terrible idea in a CoVid world,” while asserting there is “no data linking political protests to outbreaks of the disease.”)  How convenient – Trump and conservative activities bad, Progressive activities good. 

And so we see a variety of ridiculous prohibitions put into place against the backdrop of fear and hysteria over the simple and always expected fact that CoVid is still with us.

How can a governor (NM) order breweries open but bars closed?  Either getting together in a room for a drink heightens the risk of CoVId or it does not.  But, it is a younger, more left leaning crowd that generally frequents breweries.  Why does Ohio require bars to close at 11 – does CoVid suddenly become more aggressive later in the evening?  Why can a professional soccer team in New Mexico continue to play while high school and college soccer are banned?  Why are crowded planes OK but theaters must stay closed?  Why is it OK for Dr. Fauci to remove his mask when sitting next to two other individuals in the baseball stands, but not OK for someone to not wear a mask when they are walking alone on an outside trail?  Why is it OK to gather with or without masks to assault federal property, but not ok to sing a song in church? 

These and many other similar questions suggest that the current shut downs along with the current distancing and mask wearing requirements are more about furthering one or another agenda than serving some medical or scientific purpose.  If masks are necessary to protect us, then orders to wear masks should be without exception.  If bars are a breeding ground for CoVid, then all bars should be fully closed.  The fact that rules that are allegedly to protect the public health are fraught with exceptions belies their stated purpose and strongly suggests a different and likely political purpose instead.

There is no way to fully prevent CoVid, to guarantee that no one will become infected.  That is the fact, and that is the problem.  The media has ginned people up to become hysterical over that fact.  The scientists, some of whom seem to enjoy the limelight, like to make predictions or tell us what they think we should do.  The politicians use data and recommendations selectively to make demands that have nothing to do with CoVid.  And, if the Democrats can, they will keep this going until the election. 

Dr. Fauci yesterday suggested goggles and face shields in addition to masks.  Really?  Are we all going to let them put us in hazmat suits before this is over?  A doctor suggests all sorts of things to prevent risks.  Our doctors tell us what to eat for our heart, our weight, etc.  Sometimes we follow their advice, sometimes we don’t.  Sometimes Leftist politicians try to make those decisions for us (for example, banning large soft drinks).  But we have never let our doctors, in conjunction with our politicians, put us in a bubble. 

A bubble is where we likely need to stay for the rest of our lives if we are to be protected with certainty from CoVid.  But that is also where we need to be if we are to be protected from life’s many dangers – auto accidents, flu, broken bones, being attacked, infecting a loved one with any number of diseases we might contract, etc. 

Until CoVid, we seemed capable of entering life’s ebb and flow based on our own assessments of our own individual circumstances and risks.  Yet, suddenly, our politicians seem to think they must pick and choose when and where we can go, with whom, and what we should wear.  And we let them.  And we fail to see that what they are really doing is putting into place rules and behaviors and laws that in the end have nothing to do with CoVid but with their own policies.  Things like guaranteed minimum wage, guaranteed income, general health care criteria, gun laws, tax bases, school programs, and many other items on political wish lists should not be attached in any way to CoVid.  Nor should efforts to modify or direct individual human behavior and individual choices and decisions about what activities are better or worse.  Efforts to usurp power to control individual behavior should not be allowed without appropriate Constitutional or legislative authority.

Here is what I think.  We need to understand that doctors give ADVICE which they think is in our best interests.  When the doctor is not our personal doctor we must add to that advice and weigh with it our knowledge of our own personal circumstances.  And, added to that and weighed with it is that no doctor or scientist is yet fully knowledgeable about CoVid or its possible effects. 

Doctors along with us need to remember that while they are likely more informed than us about medical issues and about CoVid, that does not make them actually better than us or give them a right to order or control our behavior.

We must also understand that the politicians are not our doctors.  They have their own agendas and the CoVid is simply something that they are using to further those agendas and their own quest for power. 

CoVid is a part of our world and we must learn to live with it, not hide from it.  We must take the precautions that fit our personal circumstances and which we all, as members of a society, can reasonably take as part of our concern for our fellows.  This generally includes a choice to social distance and wear a mask, wash our hands, and avoid others when we are not feeling well.  We can decide for ourselves what venues and gatherings are appropriate to attend or not attend.  We do not need a Big Brother to order our choices for us and we should not suggest that we cede our personal liberties to the State.

Uncertainty is a part of life, and CoVid is now a part of that uncertainty.  We must not let the doctors, the scientists, the politicians, or the media use that uncertainty to divert us from our own ability to act reasonably and make our own decisions.  There is no reason to be hysterical.  CoVid, its risks, and its unknowns are just another part of life’s many uncertainties, uncertainties that our freedoms allow and demand us to navigate on our own.  Seeking relief from those uncertainties by turning our freedom of choice over to others provides only the certainty that we will lose our freedom to be who we are.

 

 

Why Cautious Reopening is the Right Choice

No one can be certain about anything when it comes to corona virus – the term Novel Virus is certainly appropriate since, the adjective “novel” based on the on Latin novellus refers to something that is not only new, but also original, fresh, and unique.  We are still learning about this virus, probably will be for several more months if not years, and thus, cannot be certain that decisions we make based on what is known at a given moment will, in retrospect when we know more, have been the best actions to take.

Nonetheless, when the virus first arrived on our shores, we saw that it spread easily and quickly, infecting large numbers, and that the consequences of infection could, at least in some people, be highly severe if not deadly.  So, to avoid completely overloading our healthcare facilities we shut down our economy.  People were encouraged if not ordered to stay home and, by shutting down they had no place to go anyway.

It worked.  We flattened the curve.  We did not overload the healthcare system.  The shutdown was never thought of as a means to destroy the virus – it could not do that – but simply a way to make more manageable the care of those infected.  We now can take care of the virus at its current rate of spread.  The reason for the shutdown no longer exists.

That does not mean that we can just run out and completely overnight return to normal.  The opening needs to be cautious.  The shutdown, never intended to completely eliminate the virus, did accomplish its goal of slowing the spread.  And we can continue to keep it from returning to its initial overwhelming spread if we open with precautions.

To be clear, people will continue to get the virus regardless of what we do.  And yes, the more that people are together the more chance of becoming infected.  But we can take reasonable precautions that can minimize the virus’s potential devastation.

We need to open for many reasons.  Small businesses need to restart if they are to avoid facing certain bankruptcy and closing.  People need to get out of often suffocating and sometimes dangerous home situations.  Individuals need to return to work for income as well as for their own self-respect. 

A measured reopening means things like social distancing, limited and slowly increasing occupancies, and masks.  Yes, masks.  These little pieces of cloth seem to have become of mammoth significance in the reopening debate.

As an aside, masks alone will not prevent the virus.  An individual virus can easily penetrate a mask.  But the virus attaches itself to droplets (spread by cough, spit, talking, etc.) which are larger, and the individual virus molecules themselves group together as a larger unit.  A mask won’t stop everything, but it can help and perhaps stop that one that would otherwise get you or that one that you are expelling that would infect someone else.  And, of course, you and others will be in a position to be assaulted by more of those molecules the longer time that you and they spend in the presence of a person or people who are infected and the longer you spend in one place or in a place with inadequate ventilation and air circulation.

Cautious reopening should be a simple and reasonable concept to put into practice.  But, of course, in our currently politically divided nation it cannot.  Instead, the commonsense reopening has become a politically charged weapon, seized upon by both sides of the political aisle.

The Left would keep everything closed indefinitely.  They claim they are advocating this to save lives.  It may do so.  But what it will also do is tank our economy and, since economy is often an issue high on voters’ minds, the Left sees a poor economy as helpful to their political chances in November.  Closure also will require more huge CARES Act type bills that will in many ways further a leftist or socialist agenda in the long term:  make people comfortable with the idea of depending upon government rather than themselves; creating a larger tax burden that then leaves people with less money and therefore more need of government support – the cycle can go on forever; and, providing incentives for unemployment creates an unemployed class dependent upon a government that will continue to provide for them.  Creating underclasses dependent on another's political power is selfish and in the end careless of those others one claims to be helping.

The Right demands immediate and complete reopening with no limitations on the individual’s right to decide for him or herself whether to social distance, whether to wear masks, whether to open their shop for limited or full occupancy.  Conservatism and patriotism never before included the concept of needlessly endangering your neighbor and fellow citizen just to prove a political point that you have individual rights that you believe someone else is threatening.  Yet this has become a rallying cry for the Right, perhaps because they see the Left’s use of this virus as a way to promote a Socialist agenda and therefore the Right chooses to promote the precise opposite position as a defense, allowing that to become more important than any thought of one's neighbor.

There is a middle ground between these two positions, but, like everything else in our charged political environment, it is hard to get people to go there.  It seems easier to simply throw criticism, hatred, and of course more investigations, at the other side.  Yet all that proves is that no one anymore seems to have that basic American value of caring about their neighbor and their country as a whole.

We need to put politics aside.  We need to accept that we do not know everything about this virus and that whatever we do may be proven to have been the wrong thing when we have more knowledge.  In the meantime, we need to do the reasonable and responsible thing.  Slowly move forward in reopening.  Take reasonable precautions – social distancing, limited occupancies, avoiding large gatherings for any sort of extended time, and, yes, mask wearing.  Let’s see how it goes.  As we see that socially conscious Americans can do this, we can move forward – increase occupancies, increase gatherings, and yes, maybe less mask wearing. 

We need to join in support for, and individual participation in, a cautious reopening of our country.  We are one country and one people and, without politics to urge us otherwise, we can do this.