2020 Post Election MEGAthread

[imperiouskitten]

Originally Posted by FatherSioux [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

LimpKitten, care to explain why we don't always lock ourselves inside and avoid human contact in order to save human lives? Surely we would save lives if we all just stopped seeing eachother face to face.

Because surrendering the world to avoid a small amount of influenza death is not worthwhile. Notice that I am calling for active measures that would reduce the necessity of lockdowns -- not lockdowns.

This pandemic, whose origin is inconclusive, is proof that we must adjust our way of life and sanitary practices to cope with our vulnerability to infectious disease. Larger, more interconnected world. Larger pool from which to conjure up new contagions. Which can and will be engineered and spread by state actors for geopolitical ends, too. Demanding that we install toilets and running water in every building is not surrendering the world and human contact; it is demanding a higher standard of hygiene from our civilization than that in Brazil. The fact is, I take a militarist position on this virus, which offers a rather low-impact drill for dealing with biological hazard, and I argue with each of you do-nothing defeatists from the right. Our laziness in the confrontation of this issue will cost us many lives in the next one, you know. We should have developed the protocols to kill the thing within our territory. We should be able to achieve the same feats the Chinese achieve, then be better than them by de-escalating to a freer posture after beating the threat. But for you, it is too much work. Because it will impact the quarterly profits of the institutions which pay the people from whom you get your political "philosophy".