This is a good argument and it somewhat changed my mind. But I would add that if you take a risky decision in a scenario where the potential downside is mounta

This is a good argument and it somewhat changed my mind. But I would add that if you take a risky decision in a scenario where the potential downside is mountains of corpses on the streets (or a Lombardy scenario), and then it turns out not to happen, you might have not made the objectively right decision. In hindsight, you got lucky, so it was OK; but maybe confronted with the same situation again you should choose differently. (I guess Tegnell would argue that he had reasons to be confident that Sweden wouldn't become Italy, and that it wasn't just a matter of blind guessing.)