4 ms·

The scariest thing to me about this pandemic is not leaders and governments doing this. In some ways it's to be expected. What terrifies me, is how eager I was

The scariest thing to me about this pandemic is not leaders and governments doing this. In some ways it's to be expected. What terrifies me, is how eager I was at the start of this pandemic for the government to lock me and my fellow citizens in their homes. We have drones policing in Wales now, shouting "stay inside to save lives". And April fools jokes have been forbidden. Not even George Orwell ever imagined such a perfect scenario. Fear is really powerful, specially against such a strange enemy, one we can't see.

phreeza 7y ago
If Western society can get back out of this without permanently losing significant civil liberties, it will be a pretty strong signal for the viability of our democracies, because we can temporarily suspended rights to counter a credible threat without ratcheting up too much. It remains to be seen if that will happen. After 9/11 I would argue there was a significant ratcheting effect.
hyko 7y ago
There’s no law that I’m aware of prohibiting April fool’s jokes. If you can stomach other people’s disapproval, you can fill your boots without fear of government intervention. Your willingness to support the lockdown is no doubt based on the evidence that expert scientists have presented to the government; that’s about as far from arbitrary decree as you can get. Is it dangerous? Absolutely. The counterweight to the government seizing and consolidating their new powers and running amok with them is democracy. That’s what we’re doing here: remembering our right to free speech, and asserting it. It’s perfectly reasonable and compatible with democracy to recognise that some freedoms have been suspended for epidemiological reasons; you’d have to be a hopeless ideologue to want to assert the right to assemble right now.
- mcv 7y ago
  The vital part here though is that it remains science-driven. Not all governments have a good record of following science, and the moment they stop, the justification for the harsh measures disappears. If you're going to overrule or disband the parliament of people's representatives for this, maybe it should be replaced by a parliament of scientists.
  - jmiskovic 7y ago
    Science has completely different mindset and that wouldn't work well with governing job. Science is operating in almost anarchy to push boundaries and constantly revise previously accepted theories. Governing needs more cohesion and stronger guidance. Engineers, on the other hand...
    - mcv 7y ago
      The issue here is that we accept that these very intrusive measures are necessary because epidemiologists tell us that they are necessary. If politicians want to implement similarly intrusive measures that are not backed up by science, we won't accept them. So direct approval by scientists is vital for our acceptance of these measures.
      - jmiskovic 7y ago
        I agree. In case of covid-19 the scientific consensus was quickly reached and clear enough for world to respond accordingly.
jariel 7y ago
Fear not. This is not 1984. Your institutions have a very long history and have seen much, much worse. You barely need a law to protect your most essential right which is to able to confer ('assemble' but really meaning communicate) with others about whatever you want, especially to talk about your government in almost whatever terms you want ... because we have a fairly open Internet or this would be a lot scarier. You are not locked in at home because of some arbitrary authoritarian measure, there is are very good reasons for this, and though some things will change for good, most of your 'good life' will come back soon enough. Orban is playing a much more dangerous game, and I fear for the citizens of Hungary. I believe that once the EU gets over the hump, they will deal with Orban. The EU is effete and feckless sometimes, but I think Orban just crossed an actual line. The EU holds the purse, and ultimately Orban is small and poor, and therefore mostly powerless and he will eventually cave like a paper tiger. Or lose an election. Orban has no real cards to play. Have faith. It's 'mostly' going to be ok.
soneil 7y ago
The litmus test for me, is what does the state get out of this? As much as it seems like an authoritarian wet dream, the state doesn't actually benefit from this lockdown. The economic damage works against them, not for them. Hungary doesn't pass this sniff test for me. Orban finally saw his first electoral defeat late last year (his party lost the mayoral vote for the capital), and has now banned all elections until further notice. That's uncomfortably convenient. And for his track record .. the emergency powers they granted during the refugee crisis in 2015, are still in effect today. Emergency powers with no expiration date are terrifying.
op03 7y ago
Give it time. Lockdown will breakdown in novel ways. We don't live in the time of Orwell. A hyperconnected world where info good and bad is constantly flowing, changes how the system works. Its much more unpredictable and harder to control. If I don't like what my boss is doing I have ten different ways to subvert him because the network shows me different routes to people above his level. This was not true in the past.

phreeza 7y ago

If Western society can get back out of this without permanently losing significant civil liberties, it will be a pretty strong signal for the viability of our democracies, because we can temporarily suspended rights to counter a credible threat without ratcheting up too much. It remains to be seen if that will happen. After 9/11 I would argue there was a significant ratcheting effect.

hyko 7y ago

There’s no law that I’m aware of prohibiting April fool’s jokes. If you can stomach other people’s disapproval, you can fill your boots without fear of government intervention. Your willingness to support the lockdown is no doubt based on the evidence that expert scientists have presented to the government; that’s about as far from arbitrary decree as you can get. Is it dangerous? Absolutely. The counterweight to the government seizing and consolidating their new powers and running amok with them is democracy. That’s what we’re doing here: remembering our right to free speech, and asserting it. It’s perfectly reasonable and compatible with democracy to recognise that some freedoms have been suspended for epidemiological reasons; you’d have to be a hopeless ideologue to want to assert the right to assemble right now.

mcv 7y ago
The vital part here though is that it remains science-driven. Not all governments have a good record of following science, and the moment they stop, the justification for the harsh measures disappears. If you're going to overrule or disband the parliament of people's representatives for this, maybe it should be replaced by a parliament of scientists.
- jmiskovic 7y ago
  Science has completely different mindset and that wouldn't work well with governing job. Science is operating in almost anarchy to push boundaries and constantly revise previously accepted theories. Governing needs more cohesion and stronger guidance. Engineers, on the other hand...
  - mcv 7y ago
    The issue here is that we accept that these very intrusive measures are necessary because epidemiologists tell us that they are necessary. If politicians want to implement similarly intrusive measures that are not backed up by science, we won't accept them. So direct approval by scientists is vital for our acceptance of these measures.
    - jmiskovic 7y ago
      I agree. In case of covid-19 the scientific consensus was quickly reached and clear enough for world to respond accordingly.

jariel 7y ago

Fear not. This is not 1984. Your institutions have a very long history and have seen much, much worse. You barely need a law to protect your most essential right which is to able to confer ('assemble' but really meaning communicate) with others about whatever you want, especially to talk about your government in almost whatever terms you want ... because we have a fairly open Internet or this would be a lot scarier. You are not locked in at home because of some arbitrary authoritarian measure, there is are very good reasons for this, and though some things will change for good, most of your 'good life' will come back soon enough. Orban is playing a much more dangerous game, and I fear for the citizens of Hungary. I believe that once the EU gets over the hump, they will deal with Orban. The EU is effete and feckless sometimes, but I think Orban just crossed an actual line. The EU holds the purse, and ultimately Orban is small and poor, and therefore mostly powerless and he will eventually cave like a paper tiger. Or lose an election. Orban has no real cards to play. Have faith. It's 'mostly' going to be ok.

soneil 7y ago

The litmus test for me, is what does the state get out of this? As much as it seems like an authoritarian wet dream, the state doesn't actually benefit from this lockdown. The economic damage works against them, not for them. Hungary doesn't pass this sniff test for me. Orban finally saw his first electoral defeat late last year (his party lost the mayoral vote for the capital), and has now banned all elections until further notice. That's uncomfortably convenient. And for his track record .. the emergency powers they granted during the refugee crisis in 2015, are still in effect today. Emergency powers with no expiration date are terrifying.

op03 7y ago

Give it time. Lockdown will breakdown in novel ways. We don't live in the time of Orwell. A hyperconnected world where info good and bad is constantly flowing, changes how the system works. Its much more unpredictable and harder to control. If I don't like what my boss is doing I have ten different ways to subvert him because the network shows me different routes to people above his level. This was not true in the past.