Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The pandemic has eroded democracy and respect for human rights

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 363 posts

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

#341

Post by ryandrake »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #278
starfallg wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 f…

Let's for a minute live in this world where mandating masks, social distancing, and business closures is not allowed because it's authoritarian and violates people's freedom. So what happens when the hypothetical COVID-2 comes around in a few years, which is 20x deadlier than this pandemic and kills people uniformly across age groups. What do we do?

Do we just have to die, because heaven forbid we infringe on people's rights to go out to restaurants and buy their khakis? We can't make people wear masks, and we can't make them stay home? So everyone just gets the disease and a big proportion of the world just dies. This is what people want??

Honestly, I think we are lucky this one didn't turn out to be as deadly as it could have been. COVID should be a wake-up call, and it should cause us to come up with an actual pandemic plan--so that when a more deadly one comes, we can shut up and save lives rather than argue about whether someone has a constitutional right to get their nails done without wearing a mask.

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

#342

Post by bsder »

jpxw wrote: post #71
bsder wrote: post #11

The US was putting people in cages before the pandemic. The level of the pandemic in the US is an effect of decreased democracy and respect for human rights--not a cause.

Just to note, America has been doing this since Obama ( https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-build-cages-immigran... )

I didn't mention a president, you will note. There is plenty of blame to go around.

However, I'm not going to let you get away with lying by omission.

Quoting your article:

> "In response to the backlash, U.S. President Donald Trump (falsely) pinned the blame for the child-separation policy on his predecessor, Barack Obama."

> But then Trump also attempted to deflect outrage over photographs of immigrant children being kept in “cages” by asserting, “Obama built the cages. I didn’t build them. Obama built them” That portion of Trump’s commentary was true.

Obama may have built them, but Trump is the one who imprisoned children in them.

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

#343

Post by smichel17 »

burlesona wrote: post #265
smichel17 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reduced? Probably. Meaningfully? I don't think so. It's baked in to the system: if your equivalent (nth party voter) on the other side of the political spectrum switches their vote to the mainstream party and you don't, then the mainstream party you're more aligned with is disadvantaged. There's nothing subjective here; it's just how the system works. We desperately need a voting system that allows you to express you…

Thanks for sharing STAR, I hadn’t seen it before. How does that interact with proportional representation?

https://www.starvoting.us/pr

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

#344

Post by makomk »

ryandrake wrote: post #341
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 f…

Let's for a minute live in this world where mandating masks, social distancing, and business closures is not allowed because it's authoritarian and violates people's freedom. So what happens when the hypothetical COVID-2 comes around in a few years, which is 20x deadlier than this pandemic and kills people uniformly across age groups. What do we do? Do we just have to die, because heaven forbid we infringe on people'…

A hypothetical Covid-2 which is 20x deadlier than this pandemic and kills across all age groups would be a really good candidate to contain via contact tracing well before it reached the point where we needed mass lockdowns - assuming that Covid-19 hasn't totally destroyed trust in the scientific and medical establishments by that point. Remember, 20x deadlier means a lot more people showing up in hospitals, which means a much higher proportion of cases can be detected early on in the pandemic without needing mass testing. Covid-19's fatality rate is probably close to optimal for causing the most damage overall.

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

#345

Post by neilwilson »

legulere wrote: post #294
neilwilson wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Venezuela has a peg to another currency doesn't it. And government bonds issued in denominations other than bolivar. What is the UK pegged to? What alternative denominations are UK bonds in? There is literally no mechanism by which UK sovereign bonds cannot be changed back into Sterling. None. So it can only matter in the minds of those people who haven't a clue how currencies actually work.

Maybe slow down a bit before claiming that someone does not have a clue. The Venezuelan bolivar is not really pegged to any currency otherwise its hyperinflation would not have been possible. That is also the reason why nobody would buy bonds in the Venezuelan bolivar. Of course the UK is in a different situation than Venezuela, being a country with an advanced economy. Still the rating will have an effect as a lot o…

I don't need to slow down. You've nicely proved it.

"The Venezuelan bolivar is not really pegged to any currency"

It is. There is an official VEF to USD exchange rate. Which means if you get some VEF on the black market you can upgrade it to USD and make a profit. That's the problem.

"So the interest rates will rise."

There is no mechanism by which interest rates can rise unless the government sector permits it. Look at the Weekly tenders for Treasury Bills in the UK. By simply mentioning that the UK would use the Ways and Means Account rises in Treasury Bill rates stopped and reversed and are now negative

Sterling can't go anywhere else - because it doesn't have the feedback loop that kills Venezuela, Argentina and even Zimbabwe, yet again.

30 years of Japan, 10 years of QE elsewhere, and the simple announcement of an account that didn't even get used are the evidence. Sovereign currency markets are supplicants not masters. They get what they are given.

Perhaps time to update your understanding of how monetary operations actually work in reality.

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

#346

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#347

Post by [deleted] »

celdon25 wrote: post #171
starfallg wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> People have been asking for common-sense coordinated and effective measures that we can all rally around (like wearing masks). Instead -- We're already doing this. > because our containment measures have failed, we have no choice but to shut things. Until when? The shutdowns were supposed to be about making sure that hospitals have time to prepare, research has time to be done, society has time to adapt. This has a…

[deleted]

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

#348

Post by thebeefytaco »

jointpdf wrote: post #229
thebeefytaco wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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). Whether you agree with it or not, how would a mask mandate not be an authoritarian restriction?

I can think of a few reasons: - 75% of Americans (incl. a majority of republicans) support mask mandates. (The US isn’t a direct democracy, but mask mandates have the green light from the general public). [ https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-understanding-the-out... ] - One of the main functions of any government is to mitigate the harm that people do to one another. This is the main thing that distinguishes it f…

- Authoritarianism can be supported by majority, and that first point is essentially argumentum ad populum. The US isn't a direct democracy for good reason, as that is essentially mob/majority rule, and erodes the rights of individuals.

- If we're referring to the US, it really doesn't matter what the functions of other governments may be. The founding fathers clearly defined the responsibilities of the federal goverment, and it isn't their job to protect you from any sort of harm. I don't see how that would line up with anything in the enumerated powers. Ignoring the US, the act is still authoritarian whether you agree with it or not, as it's an order from the top down which limits individual freedom. Again, whether people agree with it or not is a moot point.

- Your point here is anecdotal, and I don't think selective enforcement of the law is nessecarily a good thing. If it's not enforced at all, why make it a mandate and not a recommendation? Also the enforcement or lack thereof of a law/order has nothing to do with the authoritatian nature of it.

While these points you're making may be reasons you think it's a good idea, I don't think you've made a case that it wouldn't be authoritarian. I'm not even saying that inherently makes the idea bad, but you should call it what it is.

To be clear, I'm not against wearing masks. I've had N95s since before this pandemic and wear them whenever I go out in public, moreso to help proyrct others than myself. I am however very weary of granting the goverment authority like that and setting precedent during a national crisis that would erode our liberties long after the fact, like the patriot act.

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

#349

Post by thebeefytaco »

starfallg wrote: post #198
thebeefytaco wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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). Whether you agree with it or not, how would a mask mandate not be an authoritarian restriction?

Is a prohibition of setting your neighbours house on fire an authoritarian restriction? How about a mandate to clear the pavement/sidewalk in front of your house of snow so that pedestrians don't fall and break their hip? Having laws doesn't mean you're being oppressed.

No, you don't have the freedom to destroy someone else's property.

I get the point of view that "you don't have the freedom to infect others", but where do you logically draw the line with something like that? Why weren't we already required to wear biohazard suits in public? Humans have been spreading disease as long as we've been around.

Your reasoning is so blunt, saying that just become some laws are justified, all laws are justified. Should you not have the privilege to drive, because every time you do you risk your life and others?

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

#350

Post by thebeefytaco »

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]

I get you're responding to the other guy there saying we should look at science instead of popularity, but both are invalid if we're talking about responsibility of goverment.

There's plenty of scientific evidence that sugar, alcohol, and tobacco are all horrible for you. Scientifically, it might make sense to ban those things health wise, but that's not the role of government, and would be authoritarian rules that limit freedom for "safety".

"Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

Post reply on HN