The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights • Hacker News Board

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#271

Post by starfallg » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 4:43 PM UTC

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #233

starfallg wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also varying degrees of lockdowns that can be effected depending on the situation. My point being that lockdown is a last-resort blunt tool used to prevent an explosion of cases overwhelming health care capacity, it's not something that people inherently support indefinitely. We don't cream our pants thinking about how great a world under lockdown is.

I don't agree. It seems to me that many people will support it indefinitely - not out of excitement , certainly, but out of a feeling that we've just gotta do it if the government says it's the only option. Some parts of Australia have been locked down basically since the pandemic started.

> government says it's the only option.

Over here in the UK, the government was dragged into this with their feet kicking. The fact that we were slow to act to stem the initial explosion of cases is the reason why a longer and more drastic lockdown was needed according to the modelling and borne out by data subsequently.

Three weeks ago the UK government was warned to start re-imposing measures to stem the second wave. The government ignored this, and now this week they are again forced screaming and kicking into a new lockdown regime as COVID hospital admissions start rising to levels last seen in March.

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#272

Post by freespeech4ever » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 4:46 PM UTC

doktrin wrote: post #239

mechnesium wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that’s the common interpretation. If we need an amendment to extend that to all entities and forums, public and private, then I’m all for it.

> that's the common interpretation Hardly an interpretation, it's stated in black and white : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Just because the amendment explicitly addresses the government, doesn’t mean that non-governmental entities shouldn’t respect the vision of the amendment. Not everything in this world needs to be driven by legal compulsion.

What we really need is an honor code, or something even simpler: mutual respect for other people’s thoughts and opinions.

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#273

Post by whimsicalism » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 4:51 PM UTC

burlesona wrote: post #258

whimsicalism wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's funny to see people dismiss those who want to "tear down the system and replace it" as something untenable and hard to achieve, then go on to propose proportional representation. How do you see any sort of path forward for proportional representation being adopted as an amendment to the constitution? I see no path towards 2/3 majority voting for that.

Actually it doesn’t strictly need a constitutional amendment for the president to be elected differently, as every state is allowed to decide how it appoints its electors. Maine and Nebraska come closer to proportional now simply by allocating their electors individually. Any state could choose to go one step farther and allocate its electors by proportional representation. However, there is only one president, so fo…

> it doesn’t strictly need a constitutional amendment for the president to be elected differently

Yeah, I assumed we were talking about the Senate - which would require huge, fundamental changes in order to be made proportional.

With the exception of suffrage, I would argue that that is a bigger change than any of the others you mentioned. It would require precisely the people most hurt by the change (small states) to vote for substantially decreasing their voter power.

I'm not claiming it's impossible, but I think it is silly to dismiss calls for more radical action in favor of a constitutional amendment with no path to get there.

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#274

Post by nickthemagicman » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 4:54 PM UTC

jointpdf wrote: post #268

nickthemagicman wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

75% of Americans believe there's an invisible man in the sky that grants you wishes if you pray hard enough. Not a good test for policy decisions....what about science instead? -"Not wearing a mask in crowded places causes harm to others. Not happening in Sweden. Maybe the people in Sweden have troll blood so they don't need masks. or maybe the jury is still out on that statement. - "Zero enforcement?" Half of the mu…

Sure, let’s talk about the science supporting mask wearing. Read these and come back with a good faith argument: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768532 https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v3 [Edit: removed “#ref-CR4” from end of first link]

Your argument is the worst possible faith argument but I'll bite and let you waste some of my time with your non scientific citations.

Now here's how misguided you are:

Literally from the first article you posted: (which was a fricking opinion piece!)

“"""If you look at any one paper — it’s not a slam dunk. But, taken all together, I’m convinced that they are working,” says Grabowski.""""

"It's not a slam dunk"

Anecdotal beliefs from a random person named Grabonski in an opinion piece article is not science. And this is your 'good faith' argument?

I didn't even read the rest of the links you posted because they're going to say the same thing: that mask effectiveness is inconclusive.

From the world health organization:

"""" At the present time, the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider."""

Not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence....

It's the world health organization saying that...

It's clear masks stop droplets but maybe at a community level continually putting a plague vector directly on your respiratory system for a virus that stays on surfaces for days is not a good idea...

Additionally Sweden has had no mask mandate and Norway has had no mask mandate and they both have the infection under control they both have less deaths per capita than the United States.

Yet you ignore all of this data that counters your narrative.

Because the Corona cult... was wrong about lockdowns and are wrong about masks...and are trying desperately to justify their mistakes so they don't feel bad for putting 40 million people out of work and crushing people's lives for a year.

Your thinking is as bad faith as it gets and I really hope the Corona cult gets the karma that's coming to it at some point.

Your arrogant ignorance is hurting a lot of people unnecessarily.

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#275

Post by starfallg » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 4:56 PM UTC

nickthemagicman wrote: post #252

starfallg wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the vast majority of people agree that we should do something reasonable for the common good and you disagree loudly while flailing your arms about, then it doesn't make you a defender of liberty, it makes you an obnoxious moron.

There's 3 billion people in this world that believe there's an invisible man in the sky that grants you wishes if you pray hard enough. I want science and data to backup policy decisions and not policy based on the "vast majority" of fear driven mental idiots believing something. That's how you get crusades and genocides. In this 'demon haunted' world science is indeed a candle in the dark.

It funny you mentioned this because the "science and data" overwhelmingly supports wearing a mask to cut transmission, which is also a major factor in why a overwhelming majority of people support wearing one.

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/36/eabd3083

https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-07-08-oxford-covid-19-study-f...

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7191274/

https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-confused-abou...

https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-0948_article

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8#ref-CR4

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768532

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202004.0203/v3

Who would have guessed that most people are reasonable and take heed of doctors and scientists?

Why have democracy at all if you don't believe our collective ability to make good choices most of the time?

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#276

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 4:56 PM UTC

freespeech4ever wrote: post #272

doktrin wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that's the common interpretation Hardly an interpretation, it's stated in black and white : "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Just because the amendment explicitly addresses the government, doesn’t mean that non-governmental entities shouldn’t respect the vision of the amendment. Not everything in this world needs to be driven by legal compulsion. What we really need is an honor code, or something even simpler: mutual respect for other people’s thoughts and opinions.

> Just because the amendment explicitly addresses the government, doesn’t mean that non-governmental entities shouldn’t respect the vision of the amendment

The vision of the amendment is the government getting out of the way so that progress can be made by the vigorous use of choice of what ideas to publish and distribute by private entities. Private entities promoting the ideas they like and not doing so with those they dislike with all their resource are the purest embodiment of that vision.

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#277

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 5:02 PM UTC

starfallg wrote: post #141

cwhiz wrote: post #130

In this forum, right here on HN, people routinely espouse desire for more authoritarian restrictions. People gleefully discuss Sweden and almost openly hope that their lockdown-free plan fails. The article makes it sound as if the erosion of democracy is coming from the top. In the USA, it’s coming from the bottom. It’s coming from everyday citizens.

People aren't asking for authoritarian restrictions. People have been asking for common-sense coordinated and effective measures that we can all rally around (like wearing masks). Instead we have ineffective politically driven responses marked by indecision and incompetence. People don't want lockdowns, but we recognise that because our containment measures have failed, we have no choice but to shut things. If you do…

[deleted]

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#278

Post by SpicyLemonZest » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

starfallg wrote: post #271

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree. It seems to me that many people will support it indefinitely - not out of excitement , certainly, but out of a feeling that we've just gotta do it if the government says it's the only option. Some parts of Australia have been locked down basically since the pandemic started.

> government says it's the only option. Over here in the UK, the government was dragged into this with their feet kicking. The fact that we were slow to act to stem the initial explosion of cases is the reason why a longer and more drastic lockdown was needed according to the modelling and borne out by data subsequently. Three weeks ago the UK government was warned to start re-imposing measures to stem the second wav…

Right, and it's this idea of "forced" that concerns me. Every country that imposes lockdowns on the premise that they were forced, that they didn't have a choice, they just had to stop the disease from spreading. But very few countries have indicated they have a plan for how to permanently stop the disease from spreading - in most countries, experts believe that there is no workable plan and the disease will spread for decades at least. So how can we be confident that lockdowns won't continue for a few years until they just become the status quo?

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#279

Post by sokoloff » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 5:04 PM UTC

starfallg wrote: post #267

treeman79 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Note the words "reasonable", here meaning "proportionate". We're not advocating mob rule here. We're asking you to wear a mask, not to kill your first-born.

COVID restrictions are way more than just masks though. In many jurisdictions, we’re requiring small businesses to remain shuttered while their competitors are allowed to remain open.

A small toy shop is closed. Meanwhile, Target and Walmart are allowed to sell toys in-person (and Amazon online). What’s going to happen to that toy-shop owner 6 months from now after everyone has been trained to shop at their competitors, after they’ve missed a Christmas season, and after they’ve got 6 months of back rent due? The shadow of COVID restrictions don’t end the first day the government graciously allows them to open their doors.

Many of the “solutions” (send a little money and let them delay rent payments) are answers maybe more fit for W-2 employees but not for business owners.

Re: The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

#280

Post by inops » Sun, Oct 18, 2020, 5:09 PM UTC

romanoderoma wrote: post #204

inops wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've not heard "denial", a la Trump, from Johnson. That's the trade off every country is making: dangers of the virus Vs long term effects of response to the virus. It's a balancing act. What would you prefer, wanton destruction of everyone's livelihoods in overreaction? Not everyone is lucky enough to have a job that can be done from home, such as us on this site (typically). Every country is trying to avoid shutter…

> I've not heard "denial", a la Trump, from Johnson. He literally said it himself when he recovered from COVID-19 > A few hours later, he received a positive test result, and the next day he made a video statement in which he said he was self-isolating, but would continue to work and lead Britain’s coronavirus response. > But during the next nine days, as he worked in isolation in an apartment above his official Down…

Nonsense. Nothing in your comment is "denial". The guy got progressively iller. He "felt rough" at one point, and then felt worse. He was commenting on his own state and his perception of it, not making some great statement of it being nothing. He self-isolated throughout during his illness, before going to hospital.

This was all against the background of the government shutting down the country's economy in response to the virus. A torturous definition of "denial" if I've heard one.