Yesterday, the media was able to have a laugh at Matt Hancock, and to get all indignant that he had apparently forgotten all of the physical distancing rules, by standing next to another MP in the Commons. Hancock later apologised for his breach of the rules. But, the question is why?
Hancock himself was infected with COVID19 weeks ago. Like 80% of the population, he only suffered mild symptoms from it, and unlike Boris Johnson, who insisted on coming out into cold night air, for show to clap the NHS, Hancock had the sense to tend to his health and make a quick and full recovery. So, Hancock now has immunity from COVID19. As a result, he is in no danger of contracting the disease again, whether he comes into contact with any other infected people or not. But, also, because he has immunity, if he does come into contact with the virus, his own immunity kills it off, so that he also cannot act as a carrier of the virus. That is the whole point about creating herd immunity whether it is achieved by natural vaccination, as a result of people contracting the disease from others, or by artificial vaccination by means of injection etc. It means that an increasing proportion of the population become immune, so that their antibodies kill the virus, and so they cannot pass it on to others.
In fact, its one reason that attention should be focused on developing reliable antibody testing rather than wasting time with the current tests which can only tell if someone is currently infected with the virus, which is pretty meaningless, because it doesn't tell you if they had it a week, fortnight, or month ago, nor whether they might contract it an hour after having been tested for it. If we had reliable antibody tests, a large proportion of the population, who have undoubtedly had the virus without even knowing it, would be free to go about their business, safe in the knowledge they were not going to contract it, or pass it on to anyone else.
So, there was no reason why the media should have got on its high horse about Hancock's action, because he was not in danger of contracting the virus, nor of spreading it to anyone else. But, despite that, Hancock felt the need to apologise for having broken the regulations, even though that breach placed neither him nor anyone else in any danger. It is just another example of people feeling that they have to comply with some diktat completely mindlessly, simply to assuage public opinion that itself is being driven by a moral panic rather than reason.
That kind of irrationalism is typical of what is seen in societies that become overwhelmed with such moral panic, and those that are heading helter-skelter towards authoritarianism, in which what becomes central is just the blind acceptance of rules, no matter how irrational, and the "othering" of anyone who challenges or fails to unthinkingly comply with those rules. The moral panic, the hyperbole and hysteria created over COVID19, shows societies moving inexorably in that direction. The current irrational strategy of imposing open-ended lockdowns can never work. They can never be more than tokens as far as economic activity is concerned, otherwise society would collapse. But, nor can social activity be closed down in those conditions, because people will question why they can go to work - even where everyone colludes in pretending they are not - but cannot engage in other social activity. Lockdowns can never kill off the virus, which means that, as is happening now in Beijing and elsewhere, as soon as the lockdown is relaxed, those in the vulnerable 20% start to die once more, unless they have been isolated.
So, as societies have failed to take that rational action of isolating the at risk 20%, its inevitable that a second wave of deaths will erupt, like embers that rekindle a forest fire, because no one built firebreaks. And, when that second wave erupts, there is every sign that the hyperbole, the hysteria and moral panic will intensify along with it, but with an increasing number of people challenging the irrationality, expect even more draconian, more illiberal, and more authoritarian measures to be implemented, with society also being divided more brutally down those lines.
No comments:
Post a Comment