Re: Corona Virus: is it the beginning of the end?
Okay...so no, no, and no.
First of all, lockdowns aren't really what's being put on the table right now. It's the wearing of masks. Stop deflecting.
Full lockdowns are crippling, but part of the reason they needed to happen was because of the disastrous early handling of this virus. Part of that was the CDC saying early on that the general public probably didn't need to wear masks. This was a huge mistake. Part of it, especially in America, was Trump's handling of the situation, which can best be described as an absolute fucking train wreck. Obviously we aren't in a position right now to maintain full lockdowns for years; that is not something anyone here has suggested, and to my knowledge isn't something any sane person is attempting to push, either. So lockdowns...take them off the table. This is not a permanent solution to this problem, nobody said it was, so stop using fear. If numbers spike too high, then it may become necessary again, in short and controlled fashion, to close things down. Yes, that's going to suck. But do you know how you, and everyone else, can help that to not happen, or to happen further up the road and with smaller impact? Three guesses, and the first two don't count.
Now, very conveniently, back to masks.
If you stop and think about this, you'll realize that people (you included) wearing masks is actually in everyone's self-interest. Here's why.
1. People wearing masks allow most businesses to work at moderate or near-full capacity.
2. Open businesses with clients and staff wearing masks means a quicker fix to the economy
3. A quicker fix to the economy pretty much voids all your worries about "ohmygod where does the money come from?", because it re-establishes as much as the status quo as is reasonable. No, it's not a perfect solution for anyone, but I hope you agree that it beats the snot out of full lockdown, and also beats the snot out of everyone going back to full normal.
Herd immunity. Sure, it's a thing; let's pretend for a moment that there is complete consensus on its existence and viability. In that light, how would you feel if I said that everyone in the world should be infected with the virus deliberately in order to speed up the acquisition of herd immunity? Yes, that includes you. Yes, that includes your daughter. Yes, that includes your fictional mother who has COPD and diabetes. Everybody. No exceptions. Everyone gets infected. This would kill a whole pile of people, but a whole lot of people would survive, and they would end up hopefully generating antibodies which made future infection far less likely. Are you willing to stand up and say that you think this would be a good way to proceed?
I'm not.
And if you're not, perhaps you'll understand why I'm continually trashing all your arguments. Your "we should all just go back to normal" rhetoric will result in far, far more infections than we can handle. Far, far more people will sicken and die. the toll on the economy will be enormous. The toll on human life will be disastrous. The toll on the medical system will be straight-up ruinous. We're going to eventually get a form of herd immunity anyway. It is going to take years because this virus is quite new in humans, and I promise that trying to deliberately infect everyone isn't worth the cost. And just letting everyone get sick isn't worth the cost either. You think it is, and I guess you're entitled to think this, just as peasants six hundred years ago were entitled to think that the earth was the center of the universe and was a flat disc with an unknowable gulf around it. So you can have your opinion, but the moment you start pretending you have a seat at this table, I'll step in and remind one and all that you don't. Virologists and immunologists - people who have gone to school for the better part of a decade, people who in some cases have spent longer than you've even been on the earth studying this subject, are saying that the appropriate measure at this point is to slow ihe infection rate as much as we can. We've realized that lockdowns forever just aren't feasible, so we switched to the next best thing: masks. They aren't perfect, but remember, kids: 1 is greater than 0. Math doesn't lie. As long as masks have a greater than 0% chance of blocking particles which can transmit the virus - and by definition, they are porous surfaces, which means a great deal of those droplets won't get in or out through those pores - they are a better-than-nothing alternative. Anyone who deliberately goes into public without a mask at this point, and does so because they just want to "get it over with already" is showing arrogance of the highest order. Privilege is what is permitting you the freedom to believe that your right to smell freely is greater than someone else's safety.
-- Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com https://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
