Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

The Case for Social Distancing

Don McManus
It seems logical and obvious that social distancing will reduce the number of infections and deaths due to Covid 19.  Nothing could be more obvious, right?  Therefore we have embarked upon a near nation wide program of Government mandated social distancing, complete with the shuttering of business that are deemed 'non-essential' with little concern as to the nature of the individual business, the dynamics of the workplace, and the ability of the individual business to protect their people.
We have been told that absent this government mandated social distancing, upwards of 2 million Americans could be killed by this virus.  We were told that even with mandated social distancing, 100 to 200 thousand Americans will die.  
These numbers are based upon computer modeling, and are being stated as fact by those who are imposing this government mandated social distancing, but we all know that computer models are only as good as the data and assumptions that go into that modeling.
It is no doubt premature to make any definitive statements, but it is not too early to really think about the underlying question.  We have states that have delayed the implementation of mandated business closures with apparently no negative effect statistically.  We have states that have implemented severe business closure mandates whose numbers continue to raise significantly 3+ weeks after the implementation.  

While I still believe that limited contact has to reduce infection and ultimately deaths attributed to the virus, at what point in time can we have an honest conversation as to whether the effective shutdown of our economy was and is worth the cost?  We are now being told that opening the economy may begin when we have a reliable quick test for Covid-19 antibodies in place such that every person returning to work can be tested and issued papers to the effect that they can rejoin society.  We do not yet even know if antibodies prevent re-infection, much less if the person, (even if protected personally) can be a carrier.

Businesses, including restaurants and bars will eventually re-open.  At the time of re-opening, there will be risks.  Individual Americans will have to make the decision whether these risks are worth it.  Currently, government is preventing the individual American from making that personal decision for our own good.

C.S.Lewis summed up this attitude to a great degree:

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

We must question benevolent tyranny.

We must push for individual choice and responsibility.

Perhaps today is too soon.

Perhaps we should have started weeks ago.

 



6

Comments

11 comments

Date Votes
  • Marc1301
    Unfortunately many people do not exercise the responsibility part of your statement,......"We must push for individual choice and responsibility." It often becomes a do what I want regardless of the consequences to others mentality.

    That is an unfortunate manifestation of behavior that didn't widely exist in our Founders time, I don't believe. Generally I agree with what you are saying though.
    I have been working every day through all of this so far.
    0
  • BobJudy
    Life is a crap shoot. It would have been almost impossible for any country to be prepared for a pandemic. How would you know in advance what disease to devise a test for? What the treatment for an unknown pathogen is? A temporary halt to allow testing to gain knowledge of the problem and also not overwhelm the health care system seems to be in our own best interest. How long should this temporary halt last is the question. A large portion of our population is to stupid to survive if not for mandatory distancing and shutdowns. Once again the rest of us have to pay the price for the lowest common denominators in our society. Just like gun control where I pay the price for the small minority that can't be trusted with a firearm. Unfortunately just like gun laws I will bet some of these restrictions never go away whether they are effective or not. Bob
    0
  • hillbille
    to me this social distancing is just common sense, if most folks would have done it last few years the flu wouldn't have been as bad as it was. but it is up to the individual not the gov't to do it, now that they have, you gotta wonder are we gonna go through this every fall/winter when a new flu hits?????  staying back from folks when you are sick, not coughing or sneezing on them is one thing, closing the state/country is another
    0
  • 4205raymond
    Sounds like maybe C.S. Lewis had the Tyrant King Cuomo in mind.
    0
  • chiefr
    I guess you can use the same analogy with respect to any threat, be it something as small as a virus or as large as a pissed off lion or bull elephant.  Even mechanics such as a broken 4000 Volt power line whip-lashing all over.  These are things I dont need government to tell me how far I need to distance myself.  

    As a student of science to include microbiology and virology, I cant help to remember the trail of death and lessons learned in blood regarding prevention of infection and the spread of disease:  Distance, cleanliness, sterilization, protective equipment, immunization and the list goes on. 

    I have spent time in equatorial Africa where contracting malaria and hepatitis is a given.   I had no problem taking prescribed medications as a  prophylaxis to prevent disease, then again there were those who chose not to and had great regret. 
    0
  • Sam06
    This whole deal is a media event when its over this country will be in worse shape than it has ever been since the 30's.  What will be the next boogyman that is going to kill us all? 

    Look how the media has responded to this, 1st DJT was a raycist for closing borders now he didn't react fast enough............this whole thing has been a media promoted event to destroy this country and the POTUS.

    CS Lewis is spot on.

    Look how the great depression changed this country, wait to see how this BS is going to effect this country.  I just watched a video of 7 cops pulling a guy off a subway train because he didn't have a mask on!  What will be next?
    0
  • serf
      They are closing down meat packing plants and cannier plants now. If the virus can be latent and reemerge later  after an infection in people than we have a much bigger problem to fight.  Something like A fever blister infections,it hides to attack you again when your immune system is low later again..
    I hope this is not the case and it's unconfirmed but I would be very cautious on not getting an infection of Cov 19 Wuhan virus  at this point,It looks like a bioweapon to me, just my opinion.
                                                    serf
    0
  • Brookwood
    I have felt since the beginning of all this, that our gov't knows a lot more about this virus than they are sharing with our people.    The gov't is treating us like we were very young children.  
    0
  • bpost
    Inner city dwellers in big cities are not going to follow any rules except that of the code of silence and gang banging.  The are still shooting each other as fast as they humanly can.  My concern is the "suspension" of the freedom of religion.  There is nothing more dangerous on earth than a God fearing man with a gun and some azzhat Government weenie telling him he can't go to his place of worship.
    I can see the lock down for all of April, after that Gubmint better get the heck out of the way.
    0
  • SCOUT5
    Good post Don.
    0
  • Don McManus
    Barzillia said:
    "It is no doubt premature to make any definitive statements, but it is not too early to really think about the underlying question.  We have states that have delayed the implementation of mandated business closures with apparently no negative effect statistically.  We have states that have implemented severe business closure mandates whose numbers continue to raise significantly 3+ weeks after the implementation.  "


    The logical error of a false equivalency.
    How so?  
    These are two true statements supported by the data that is available.  There is not a stated (nor is there any intention to suggest an) equivalency or even a relationship other than raising the question and suggesting that it is worth considering as we look at the virus from a wholistic mindset as compared to simply parroting that which fits how we wish to believe.
    The two statements stand on their own, and an open mind will take these facts into consideration.
    There is much we do not know yet, as this thing is still fairly new.  We can all agree that this mandated social distancing feels like the right approach to mitigate the spread of infection, but it is legitimate to consider embarking upon a science and fact based cost/benefit analysis of this approach.     
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity