A different aproach to the pandemic?

I’m sure I can’t be the only beer-writer at the moment, sat in front of a computer, with a mind that’s totally devoid of ideas of what to write about; and this is after only 12 days of Doris’s second lockdown. But with pubs, bars and restaurants closed until at least 3^rd December, there’s nowhere to go, even for a quiet drink, and certainly no chance of meeting up with friends or even other family members.

There’s also no guarantee that the current round of restrictions will have the effect the statisticians, or epidemiologists or number-crunching mathematical modellers predict, or the end game that "expert" advisors like Valance, Witty or Johnson’s latest pet scientist "Jay-Vee-Tee" are seeking. It could all have been so very different. 

The normal thing to stop a contagious disease from spreading, is to remove sick people from the population, by confining them, either in a hospital, or at home. Quarantine the unhealthy in order to protect the healthy would be the normal and sensible thing to do and is what has happened during past pandemics.

Unfortunately, with this particular plague, governments the world over have turned normal practice on its head by restricting the freedoms and movement of healthy people by incarcerating them, in their own homes. This seems a perverse and totally illogical way of preventing a disease from spreading, particularly when it’s an illness which, in the vast majority of cases, produces only mild symptoms or even none at all.

No-one appears to be questioning this irrational approach, and people in general seem only too happy to comply with government edicts which extend to telling them who they can and who they can’t have in their own homes. So how have governments manage to exercise such control over their populations?

Fear, backed up by disproportionate punishment, are the main weapons in their arsenal. Frighten the population out of their wits with tales of a creeping and insidious “deadly” pandemic that takes no prisoners, and if that doesn’t work levy savage and draconian fines, that are out of all proportion to the “crime” allegedly committed.

As an example, the police have been granted powers to issue “on the spot fines” of up to £10,000; an absurd financial penalty, that is way in excess of what a magistrate could impose, and equivalent to fines that could only be handed down in a crown court, in front of a judge and jury. These are measures that the world’s most despotic rulers and dictators must have only dreamed about, until Covid-19 appeared on the street of their towns and cities. Talk about using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut!

It would have made far more sense to shield the vulnerable, whilst at the same time temporarily removing the sick by quarantining them, allowing the healthy to go about their daily lives unfettered and unhindered by petty rules and regulations. It would also have prevented the damaging and destructive shutdown of large sectors of the global economy. 

I appreciate that I might be over-simplifying matters, given that people can be totally asymptomatic, but still capable of infecting others with Coronavirus, but that is why it makes sense to shield the vulnerable, rather than locking up the entire population. We should also be aware that this IS a pandemic and unfortunately pandemics kill people; sometimes in large numbers. Of course we should do all we can to mitigate the effects of this particular one, but given the relatively low mortality rate of Covid-19, shutting down the entire global economy is not the way to do this.

An approach based on common sense, doesn’t suit the government control freaks and their allies, who hide behind the guise of public health, whilst asking us to sacrifice our rights and our liberties for the "Common good.” Where have we heard those type of slogans before?  Stalin’s “Five Year Plan,” Mao’s “Great Leap Forward, or Pol Pot's genocidal "Year Zero" policy?

None of this bodes well for a post-Covid world, and having taken our freedoms, rights and liberties from us, in such a rushed and shameful fashion, governments are unlikely to want to return them in a hurry.  Regulations preventing people from meeting up with members of their own family are unheard of, even in wartime, as is the closing of pubs and restaurants.

The shifty-eyed bunch of tricksters, spivs and charlatans running the country are in their element, and in no rush to relax the unprecedented grip they hold over our daily lives. Meanwhile the economy continues to suffer along with people’s mental health and the general well-being of society as a whole.

There must surely come a time when people turn around and say, “enough is enough.” I’m not advocating breaking the law over these restrictions; although I am saying we all need to continue questioning government policy and ask are these measures really in our interest? 

Furthermore,  are they just a question of governments the world over, flexing their muscles under the guise of public health, when all they are really doing is cracking down on the rights, freedoms and liberties that we in the western world have enjoyed for generations. 

Since writing the article I've noticed a news clip stating that police forces are to suspend the £10k fines. This sounds like a small, welcome and long overdue outbreak of common sense!