3 ms·
This is an absurd article written by a person with a barely-hidden agenda. A review of their Twitter makes it clear this is not a matter of "renewed concern"; t
by ivraatiems 5y ago
This is an absurd article written by a person with a barely-hidden agenda. A review of their Twitter makes it clear this is not a matter of "renewed concern"; this is a person who has resisted every measure used to fight COVID from the beginning because that "disrupts normalcy" or gives public health officials even a smidge of temporary control over one's life.[1]
I have no patience for works like this, written by people for whom any modification to their existence, even the most minor and most voluntary, is one change too many (and a sign of malign conspiracy to destroy them). Masks? Nah, who knows whether they're effective. Distance? No, it's not a big deal if I just don't. Vaccine to avoid the above? No, it's "too experimental" and I "just don't trust it" no matter whether it's based on decade-old or century-old technology.
The author makes no concrete suggestions about what we should do differently, and I think it's because for them, any change to their behavior whatsoever is one change too many. It's all well and good to try to help people as long as it doesn't require any personal effort or sacrifice after all, and as long as absolutely no mistakes are made and no missteps ever occur. In the mind of the author, anybody who would dare ask them to do anything at all to help their fellow human is a ghoul who must have an ulterior motive. This says much more about the author than it does the people asking.
It's tempting to ask sanctimonious questions, like, how many people would have had to die before this person considered that that loss of life might justify temporarily changing their behavior, or (the horror) listening to the government or working with their fellow man just a little? How bad would something have to be before they'd agree to try, just try, to do something that might help?
What a shame that there are so many selfish and conspiratorial people in American society.
[1] https://mobile.twitter.com/galexybrane?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor https://mobile.twitter.com/galexybrane?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogl...
- throwawaynumber 5y agoConversely I think most people who were the most vocal cheerleaders of the anti virus measures were so vocal precisely because it didn't require them to change their life - stay at home introverted shut ins basically.
- AndrewBissell 5y agoWhenever I see someone minimizing everything done over the past year as "not a big deal" or "really just the bare minimum you could ask" or (lol) "voluntary," I know that they either have no conception of the vast amounts of harm that was inflicted on people over the past year by NPIs or they just don't care. What if a disease that is maybe 4x or 5x a bad flu really wasn't worth upending all of civil society (particularly for its youngest) to combat? Wow, it's almost like the Hippocratic Oath says "first, do no harm" for a reason!