We don’t need to “just” reopen things as a kneejerk reaction. We will need to reopen things sometime. But from the earliest lockdowns, all the forecasts have b

We don’t need to “just” reopen things as a kneejerk reaction. We will need to reopen things sometime. But from the earliest lockdowns, all the forecasts have been that about 60% of the world population ultimately gets infected anyway. The lockdowns are about making that happen in a more orderly way, one that doesn’t absolutely crush our hospitals, ICUs, ventilator capacity, and our stocks of PPE. That’s what we’re buying with the lockdowns. That’s where the lives are being saved. That makes sense, for a while. That doesn’t make sense for five years. The question is where the line goes in between, and I really don’t know exactly where. We may have passed it or it may be months ahead. Just remember that even if we are right to call for a much longer lockdown, we shouldn’t go all William Bligh about it, condescending to abuse people who are stubborn and wrong for their stupidity on the matter. Such an approach is anti-leadership; it gets you senseless mutinies instead of buy-in. (See also: Bill de Blasio enjoying the amenities of the Park Slope YMCA mere moments before shutting down all the gyms. Not a great way to build solidarity.)