Dear Friends,
I hope you had a lovely Thanksgiving, and I hope you were able to gather with friends and family to share a meal and express your gratitude for all of God’s blessings to you.
We defied the “recommendations” and took a road trip to an undisclosed location to meet with friends. Because we hate people.
You may have noticed that I have not said much about COVID-19 since the very earliest days of this outbreak, and the reason for that is pretty simple. If I don’t have anything intelligent to say, it’s better to not say anything at all. I am not an expert epidemiologist, so I haven’t bothered to pontificate. I’ve basically been a silent observer of all things COVID-19 and the mask and lockdown wars. And much of that isn’t really about the virus at all—the virus is just a proxy for preexisting cultural and political battles.
I must confess that I am baffled at the latest rash of hysteria and lockdowns. Not too long ago it was announced that not one, but two, and very soon three vaccines are on the way. And they are effective beyond our wildest hopes. And it is long since actual Infection Fatality Rates (what percentage of people die from the disease) collapsed as our knowledge increased and therapeutics improved. Yet the immediate reaction to the vaccine news was more alarm: case numbers are surging! We need more lockdowns! I cannot be the only one to find this very curious timing.
Here’s what I am not going to do today: opine on virus transmission and infection rates and so forth. All that information is dizzying and somewhat conflicting anyway. What I am going to do is express some opinions about some basic principles I think need to be remembered and underscored. This is the state of things as I see it.
Back To Basics
First, remember where the goalposts are. In March, what we knew is that a mysterious virus was rampaging around the world and, in places like Italy, hospitals were overrun and people were dying by the thousands. That was a scary time. You might recall that our country locked down for one purpose, and one purpose only: “flatten the curve.” The idea was to slow the rate of transmission so that we didn’t overwhelm our medical resources. It seemed obvious to everyone at the time that the virus was going to spread. People were going to contract it. It was the rate of transmission that needed slowing.
A few things happened. First, the medical community bent here and there, but didn’t break, thank God. Flattening the curve was a success. In the meantime, we improved in ways of treating COVID patients, and the infection fatality rate plummeted over the summer. And the national conversation shifted from flattening the curve to being alarmed by any and all transmission of the disease. “Case number” growth now completely dominates the discussion, even though it is not remotely the most relevant statistic. As of right now, it seems like it is intolerable for anybody, anywhere to contract the virus. Hence, universal masking orders, more lockdowns and church and business closures. The original “let’s not overwhelm the hospitals” has morphed into we cannot allow anybody to get this disease.
That is a metric we will never meet, and the fact that governing authorities view this as some kind of achievable goal should tell us something important about the self-regard of our governing authorities. We should not be surprised, I suppose, when government officials who think they can command and control the climate also think they can command and control a virus. My armchair, common sense observation is that they cannot. Crazy, I know.
Second, we know a lot more at the end of November than we knew at the beginning of March. We know that COVID-19 does not kill babies and toddlers (like the Spanish Flu did a hundred years ago), nor does it often kill Twentysomethings and Thirtysomethings and Fortysomethings and Fiftysomethings and early Sixtysomethings. This is abundantly clear: the “at risk” community is 65 and older. The current surge of cases is broadly the younger cohort of society getting the disease, and I find the hysterical alarm in most quarters completely unnecessary.
Third, we have reversed the basic principle of a quarantine. Isolate and protect the vulnerable few for the sake of the many, not isolate and protect the many for the sake of the vulnerable few. Forgive me for seeing this as blindingly obvious, but there it is. Locking down healthy, able-bodied, low risk adults, and keeping them from business, commerce, entertainment, and leisure for the sake of the actual at-risk portion of society is entirely backward.
Maybe you’ve seen a film or two where there’s a medical patient with an extremely poor immune system—say, a chemo patient. They lock the patient in a sealed isolation room to protect them from any bacteria or viruses, and when the doctors want to go in to examine them they don their PPE gear and head in through an airlock system. You know what they don’t do? Turn the entire hospital into an isolation unit. Well, that’s what our government is trying to do: turn our entire society into an isolation unit. My armchair, common sense view is that this is idiotic.
Fourth, the government sees us as subjects, not free citizens. It would be one thing for the experts to compile all of the relevant information and distribute it to the public so that we could make informed decisions on what to do. But they don’t. When have you seen the experts say anything at all about the real co-morbidities involved in COVID-19 deaths? Obesity, for instance? That would be politically incorrect, wouldn’t it? No, we just get alarming press releases about “case number” growth and we are told what to do. We are not given information and recommendations based on various risk categories; we are commanded what we can or cannot do. I was talking with a friend who hypothesized: “If I was 80 years old and wanted my kids and grandkids to come for Thanksgiving, that is a decision I should be able to make.” I find it very hard to disagree with that assessment.
We threw tea in the harbor for far less.
Fifth, I don’t have strong opinions on masks and I think making them a culture war skirmish is really silly. I do note that early on the CDC told us that masks were worthless and that we shouldn’t wear them (flagrantly lying to keep a run on masks at bay). So, yeah, there’s that. How we got from “masks are worthless” to “well, they work, but only if it’s an N95,” and then all the way to “any old chinsy piece of cloth over your mouth and nose is required at all times” is a story that I’m not sure can be told in any coherent or satisfying way.
We should don masks for the sake of at-risk people, in the places where at-risk people are likely to be. My church is entirely made up of this category. They should be at church, and I’m happy to oblige them. What I am saying is that it is the at-risk who should probably not be out at the grocery or retail stores or gyms or restaurants and so forth. From my armchair, I think those places should be wide open for business and people who are at-risk should either self-isolate from those arenas or participate at their own risk and comfort level. The one-size-fits-all lockdown measures for the whole of society (making the whole hospital an isolation unit) is unwise, unworkable, and catastrophic for the segments of society reliant on the retail and service economies.
Sixth, from my armchair we are a dangerously soft people. I am not saying that to put down people who are genuinely anxious, whether rightly or wrongly. What I mean is this: the virus is now known to have a fatality rate far, far lower than we feared. But our societal anxiety levels have not dropped. They’ve increased. Just imagine our hysteria if COVID really did kill all age groups indiscriminately, or if our babies and children were dropping dead left and right. It does not strike me that we are a resilient people. God has seen fit to shake us out of our decadent slumber ever so much, and I don’t think we’ve reacted with maturity, sober realism, and practical wisdom.
Seventh, one final observation. The government is going to face the law of diminishing returns whether they like it or not. The State fancies itself a parent (hence, the “Paternalism”), and that is a designation I flatly reject. Again, in our Republic we are citizens, not subjects. We do not have a king. Our leaders have constraints placed on them by the people they represent—the “consent of the governed.” That’s all contained in the Constitution and a vast thicket of laws. But let’s just say for the sake of discussion the State was a parent. It seems to me that if you have a teenager flexing their freedoms, the worst thing you can do is tighten your grip. You’ll produce the very rebellion you fear.
If the executive branches, from the President on down to Governors and county commissioners and mayors and city councils keep strangling their communities, something will eventually break. And I don’t think it will be pretty. So pray for your leaders, particularly the ones closest to you in your community ecosystem. Maturity, realism, and wisdom is desperately needed. There has to be a better way of protecting the truly vulnerable without impoverishing millions of people; and that means a great deal of political courage is going to be needed. And we are desperately short of that these days.
Miscellany
Speaking of Thanksgiving, today is our 21st wedding anniversary. Having seen far too many broken marriages and shattered families in recent years, I’m thankful to God that we are still standing. It is his grace, from start to finish.
I increased my portfolio of YouTube mechanic projects this week. Prior to our long road trip, I replaced the water pump, gaskets, thermostat and housing, and belts on our GMC Yukon. I shouldn’t have a slow coolant leak anymore, and sure enough. Upon arrival, my coolant levels are completely stable! Major, major fist pump!
I need to close it out here this week, as it is a beautiful day and I need to get outside for some sunshine. In honor of my anniversary, I’ll leave you with comedian Tim Minchin performing his hilarious song, “If I Didn’t Have You.” You will immediately see how confident I am in my marriage.