Cattle are easily startled and prone to stampeding – on the basis of nothing. Human beings shouldn’t be.
Especially over a bug.
Yet they are stampeding – and mask-wearing, too.
Yes, I know . . . people have died! And so will we all, eventually. From one thing or another. But very few of us from Corona. Why limit the shutdown to just Corona? Does this make any kind of logical sense – assuming the logic (people have died!) that has been used to cripple the entire country?
Is there a specific number of deaths due to “X” – you name it – that is too few to justify another “lockdown”?
We are told about 23,000 people have died from Corona (though many of these probably died from old age, or from smoking, or a variety of things and just happened to have the bug in their systems when they died).
But let’s say it’s 30,000.
If this justifies the government assuming dictatorial powers, the suspension of basic civil liberties and the imposition of extreme, open-ended restrictions on millions of people then is there any logical basis for objecting to the same measures applied because of the ordinary flu?
Roughly the same number of people die each year, their deaths attributed to – or accelerated by – the flu, sans the Wu.
This was considered normal – not a happy thing, of course – but part of the cycle of life. People get sick and some of them die. A police state lockdown on the basis of the flu season was never proposed – even though the “ordinary” flu can be very bad (fatal) news for a small percentage of the population, if they catch it.
Each flu season, the vulnerable elderly and others in that category – those vulnerable to illnesses becoming their final illness – have been encouraged to take precautions. To avoid public places; to stay home. Maybe take a flu shot as a pre-emptive.
But the rest of the population wasn’t ordered to take them.
Why the change? And what’s the difference?
WuFlu is worse than flu!
Well, maybe. The actual death toll so far is not.
But it’s certain that medical malpractice is worse than both the flu and WuFlu combined, in terms of the number of people killed – about 250,000 every year – and those deaths are arguably much more tragic because they are the direct result of human negligence/recklessness applied to specific innocent victims.
You cannot avoid old age – and the declining ability of the body to withstand physical stress. This includes running marathons as well as bouncing back from a bad bug.
Should marathon running be “locked down” because it poses a higher degree of risk of dying for the elderly and asthmatic? Should we all be forced to live in hyperbaric chambers – or wear masks/get vaccinated as a condition of being allowed outside – because “someone” might get sick?
How many “someones” is too many?
Winter kills, too. Should cold weather – or hot weather – also trigger mass “lockdowns”? If not, why not?
It’s not a joke question. It’s a question about a principle. If it is acceptable to impose extreme restrictions on everyone because someone – or a few someones (no specific someone, just “someone”) may be at higher risk of death because of a possibility – whether catching WuFlu or just the flu or running marathons or walking up three flight of stairs, or because it’s -20 outside – then is there any logical end to this crusade?
And a crusade is exactly what this is.
We are in the midst of a religious movement – one premised upon faith in “experts.” And religious movements run amok often end up justifying the most extreme things – from burning people at the stake for heresy to locking down an entire country. With health and safety priests serving as the grand inquisitors.
If it saves even one life. Remember that one?
If 30,000 deaths justifies a police state lockdown then why not 20,000? How about 10,000?
Where is the line? What’s the number? This many is acceptable – but this many plus one more isn’t?
Maybe kill them all – or at least threaten to – and god will know his own?
It’s now the operating principle of the Corona’d States of America. The same principle that can force you to wear a seatbelt – at gunpoint – can force you to wear a mask, also at gunpoint. The same principle that forces you to accept being required to produce your “papers” on demand in order to be allowed to use the public right-of-way can also force you to produce “papers” that you have been vaccinated to be allowed in public.
In both instances, you are presumed to be a potential “threat” to the “safety” of . . . “someone.” Not anyone in particular. Just “someone.” It works just as well for sickness as it does for “safety.”
There is no number.
. . .
Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)