Coronavirus Thread IV: Legends, Laments and Lockdowns

[Estanglia]

Only for a temporary period. Death is permanent. Freedom cannot always be the top priority. Sometimes during an extreme crisis we have to look past them to take action to save lives.

Freedom must always be the top priority because life without freedom isn't worth living.

Life without freedom isn't worth living, therefore you're gonna end the lives of people living with freedom, which is presumably worth living.

[Nakena]

What about “May the 4th be with you” for a title

But Comrade,

what if we would take some "contributions" of the community into account and...

[Luminesa]

Freedom must always be the top priority because life without freedom isn't worth living.

Life without freedom isn't worth living, therefore you're gonna end the lives of people living with freedom, which is presumably worth living.

Freedom is nothing without responsibility.

[Pilipinas and Malaya]

Only for a temporary period. Death is permanent. Freedom cannot always be the top priority. Sometimes during an extreme crisis we have to look past them to take action to save lives.

Freedom must always be the top priority because life without freedom isn't worth living.

Yeah, but life without actually living is literally nothing. What’s the point of freedom when life is absent? Life without the freedoms for a while is better than not experiencing life at all.

[Post War America]

Freedom sometimes has to be sacrificed to deal with a crisis. Avoiding taking action to avoid a pandemic for "freedom" is just bad governance.

Those that would give a little liberty for temporary safety deserve neither and lose both. Ben Franklin said. Was he wrong?

Absolutely, about a great many things.

Sacrificing liberty for safety is literally the definition of society.

[Andsed]

Only for a temporary period. Death is permanent. Freedom cannot always be the top priority. Sometimes during an extreme crisis we have to look past them to take action to save lives.

Freedom must always be the top priority because life without freedom isn't worth living.

Stop being dramatic. This is not some 1984 thought police shit. This is temporary restrictions to prevent a full blown pandemic.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Freedom must always be the top priority because life without freedom isn't worth living.

Yeah, but life without actually living is literally nothing. What’s the point of freedom when life is absent? Life without the freedoms for a while is better than not experiencing life at all.

Will it kill the majority?

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Yeah, but life without actually living is literally nothing. What’s the point of freedom when life is absent? Life without the freedoms for a while is better than not experiencing life at all.

Will it kill the majority?

How many did the last major worldwide unbridled flu pandemic kill?

[Andsed]

Yeah, but life without actually living is literally nothing. What’s the point of freedom when life is absent? Life without the freedoms for a while is better than not experiencing life at all.

Will it kill the majority?

No. But that does not mean we should let hundreds of thousands die just to uphold "freedom."

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Will it kill the majority?

No. But that does not mean we should let hundreds of thousands die just to uphold "freedom."

If we let it get to Spanish Flu levels, i.e. let it claim 1-6% of the world population (probably more in our case if we let it run rampant)... 90 to 540 million people die. The world calamity that ended with atom bombs in 1945 "only" killed 85 million people.

[Rojava Free State]

And restrictions on restaurants for example of kept to long will put them out of business because they can’t make any money

Is this what this is about? Being unable to go to Mcdonalds for your daily sustenance people?

Risking death from COVID to die from junk food.

[The New California Republic]

Is this what this is about? Being unable to go to Mcdonalds for your daily sustenance people?

Risking death from COVID to die from junk food.

McDonald's in the UK are going to try to start opening for deliveries only.

[Rojava Free State]

Those that would give a little liberty for temporary safety deserve neither and lose both. Ben Franklin said. Was he wrong?

Absolutely, about a great many things.

Sacrificing liberty for safety is literally the definition of society.

Sacrifice too much liberty for safety and there will be no safety from the government. Most governments in the past, present and likely in the future don't usually do something without the ulterior motive of expanding their power or protecting themselves, and already tyrants worldwide are using COVID to expand their power (Orban, dutuerte, etc).

[Theodosiya]

Life without freedom isn't worth living, therefore you're gonna end the lives of people living with freedom, which is presumably worth living.

Freedom is nothing without responsibility.

I don't think GVH understand it, or would ever accept. What could be expected, given the way he had, how to explain it, his position throughout the threads?

[Nakena]

Next poll is going to be this, but the wording and phrasing might need some big improvement:

Question: Do you know some people who have been infected

Answers:

I have been infected myself in the past or present
Members of my family have been infected in the past or present
There have been cases amongst friends and acquaintances of mine
No known cases in my social circles so far
My area is relatively little affected by Covid-19
I don't know/Not sure
Other (please share below)

[Kowani]

Absolutely, about a great many things.

Sacrificing liberty for safety is literally the definition of society.

Sacrifice too much liberty for safety and there will be no safety from the government. Most governments in the past, present and likely in the future don't usually do something without the ulterior motive of expanding their power or protecting themselves, and already tyrants worldwide are using COVID to expand their power (Orban, dutuerte, etc).

Yeah, but it’s GVH. Mate probably thinks speed limits are tyranny.

[Rojava Free State]

Freedom is nothing without responsibility.

I don't think GVH understand it, or would ever accept. What could be expected, given the way he had, how to explain it, his position throughout the threads?

I think GVH is an Ancap, although I'm not sure. I think he or someone else said he is and if that is true, HOLY FUCK that's the definition of unchecked freedom without social responsibility.

[Estanglia]

Absolutely, about a great many things.

Sacrificing liberty for safety is literally the definition of society.

Sacrifice too much liberty for safety and there will be no safety from the government. Most governments in the past, present and likely in the future don't usually do something without the ulterior motive of expanding their power or protecting themselves, and already tyrants worldwide are using COVID to expand their power (Orban, dutuerte, etc).

Basically any organisation with power will attempt to extend it.

Sadly, there isn't really much we can do in the middle of this pandemic to deal with that. Protests could give the government an excuse to extend the measures using the argument that these protests endanger the public/spread the virus more, warranting further measures. Also, this is one of the few cases where the government(s) have legitimate reasons for these measures, rather than something baseless and trumped-up that is of no actual danger (or the danger is overstated).

[Rojava Free State]

Sacrifice too much liberty for safety and there will be no safety from the government. Most governments in the past, present and likely in the future don't usually do something without the ulterior motive of expanding their power or protecting themselves, and already tyrants worldwide are using COVID to expand their power (Orban, dutuerte, etc).

Yeah, but it’s GVH. Mate probably thinks speed limits are tyranny.

GVH thinks Michael Bloomberg worked too hard to spare money for us lowly peasants. I find that funny since bloomberg could live without 90% of his money while we are struggling to get by.

[Fartsniffage]

Sacrifice too much liberty for safety and there will be no safety from the government. Most governments in the past, present and likely in the future don't usually do something without the ulterior motive of expanding their power or protecting themselves, and already tyrants worldwide are using COVID to expand their power (Orban, dutuerte, etc).

Yeah, but it’s GVH. Mate probably thinks speed limits are tyranny.

He has previously argued that blind people should be allowed to drive and preventing them was an unreasonable restriction on their freedom.

[Rojava Free State]

Sacrifice too much liberty for safety and there will be no safety from the government. Most governments in the past, present and likely in the future don't usually do something without the ulterior motive of expanding their power or protecting themselves, and already tyrants worldwide are using COVID to expand their power (Orban, dutuerte, etc).

Basically any organisation with power will attempt to extend it.

Sadly, there isn't really much we can do in the middle of this pandemic to deal with that. Protests could give the government an excuse to extend the measures using the argument that these protests endanger the public/spread the virus more, warranting further measures. Also, this is one of the few cases where the government(s) have legitimate reasons for these measures, rather than something baseless and trumped-up that is of no actual danger (or the danger is overstated).

There will be alot of social consequences because of COVID. It's hard to tell if we are doing everything right now, and that'll only be truly known years from now when COVID no longer exists.

[Rojava Free State]

Yeah, but it’s GVH. Mate probably thinks speed limits are tyranny.

He has previously argued that blind people should be allowed to drive and preventing them was an unreasonable restriction on their freedom.

Once, I saw a commercial for the Sam Bernstein lawfirm in which Richard Bernstein was driving a bus. I didn't sleep at all that night because all I could think was oh dear God, Richard's blind and there were children on that bus.

[Ifreann]

Freedom sometimes has to be sacrificed to deal with a crisis. Avoiding taking action to avoid a pandemic for "freedom" is just bad governance.

Those that would give a little liberty for temporary safety deserve neither and lose both. Ben Franklin said. Was he wrong?

Yes.

[San Lumen]

Those that would give a little liberty for temporary safety deserve neither and lose both. Ben Franklin said. Was he wrong?

Yes.

Why?

[Estanglia]

Basically any organisation with power will attempt to extend it.

Sadly, there isn't really much we can do in the middle of this pandemic to deal with that. Protests could give the government an excuse to extend the measures using the argument that these protests endanger the public/spread the virus more, warranting further measures. Also, this is one of the few cases where the government(s) have legitimate reasons for these measures, rather than something baseless and trumped-up that is of no actual danger (or the danger is overstated).

There will be alot of social consequences because of COVID. It's hard to tell if we are doing everything right now, and that'll only be truly known years from now when COVID no longer exists.

Indeed.

My best-case scenario is that this situation exposes the complete incompetence and in some cases evil of modern governments, people get sick of it and want change, and leads to some long-term positive changes (even if in the short term it worsens).

My worst-case scenario is that in a few years, Coronavirus (or at least the significant threat it poses) is gone, nobody gives a shit about changing anything, and we go right back to pre-pandemic conditions, just with more authoritarian laws slipped through during the pandemic that nobody cares to remove (or, if a state goes full authoritarian, can remove).