There comes a time when one
must step back and evaluate circumstances to be clear about something vital to
one’s life or livelihood or cause. It occurs to me that such a time has
arrived.
Here we are in the midst of
probably the worst pandemic many of us will ever see. And, there is evidence that a portion of the population – estimated by NBC to be about 12% -- are essentially
unaware of (or maybe indifferent to) what we have here compared to other disease pandemics. Here are some brief factoids presented by
BusinessWorld.com:
·
The new coronavirus has killed more than
183,283 people around the world (as
of 11:08 p.m. on 04/22/2020); over 2.3 million active cases have been
reported
·
It's extremely
contagious and spreads from person to person easily through close contact (nursing homes and prisons seem to be especially
vulnerable).
·
The most
severe coronavirus cases often include difficulty breathing and can require hospitalization, in which patients
may have to be hooked up to ventilators to blow more oxygen into their lungs
·
Too many die an agonizing death, isolated from family
·
Robert Redfield, the Director of the Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention, said a second wave of the coronavirus
outbreak in winter could be even worse than the current outbreak. Redfield said that a winter outbreak would be
particularly catastrophic for hospitals when layered on top of the usual winter
flu season and higher rates of other illnesses prevalent in the winter months.
·
A New York
hospital struggling against the coronavirus says PPE price gouging is so bad
that it's paying $7 for gowns worth 50 cents, and $25 for shields worth $1.25.
·
Attorney
General Bill Barr threatens to sue states over prolonged social distancing.
·
Trump bans
immigration for 60 days, insists testing is best of anywhere else; insists that
virus will not return in the fall
·
California
identified a person who died with COVID-19 on February 6, suggesting that the
first known US coronavirus death happened at least three weeks earlier than
previously thought.
·
The novel
coronavirus is both more contagious and more deadly than seasonal influenza,
and a vaccine against it almost certainly won't be available by the time flu
season comes around.
(More facts and interactive maps are available at:
https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-live-updates-latest-news)
It is certainly difficult to
absorb all that is being said, done, and not done about this virus and its
effects on the whole world, and on our nation that is now the epicenter of its
spread. The sorrow alone that is being
brought to bear on so many innocent lives is devastating, as are the effects on
human livelihood and daily living. Plus, we remain the object of more attacks
of this virus in future months as the search for an effective vaccine goes on
apace.
As much as some do not want
to acknowledge this, it appears from experience so far that the best practical
action for controlling its spread has to do with staying indoors away from
other people, and venturing out only when necessary, practicing certain prescribed
guidelines for encountering others, such as social distancing and wearing face
masks.
Yet, in spite of global
experience and whatever data is available to support such measures, some
right-wing protesters have decided that those requirements and guidelines are
somehow related to government interference in their lives and freedoms, and
must be rejected and society re-opened.
In other words, it appears that some small fraction of our population favor
risking their lives and those of others in order to make a political point that
government is exercising too much control over individuals and must be stopped.
What is missed, of course, is
that government is -- in exercising such restrictions and issuing national and state guidelines --fulfilling its primary duty of protecting all its citizens.
Nonetheless, we now have some
acting as though their desire to be back at work, back
at sporting events, at large gatherings of all sorts is more important than the
lives that are being saved by everyone abiding by a few rules and restrictions. We should say that there are also some
economics involved here that are understandable. After all, nobody wants to be “out-of-work”
and out-of-pay – it’s not a desirable situation for anyone, including the
businesses that are suffering.
On the other hand, the threat
of the cessation of life itself is not exactly a desirable outcome. In fact, it is a horrible quick ending to all
of the "freedom" that protestors demand. The
protesters may not have the virus catch-up to them, but someone known to them will
– it is inevitable. Someone in those
crowds was a carrier; someone in those crowds contracted the virus and is now
infecting others. Someone from those
crowds will die – a stranger to others most likely. But not a stranger to those close to him or her;
not a stranger to a family left behind. And once the virus spreads again, because restrictions are lessened or removed, the outbreaks will come flooding
back perhaps more virulent than before affecting all age groups including young
children. Who will protestors blame when
they are directly or closely affected? Certainly not themselves.
And therein lies the dilemma
we all must face. This whole thing is
not just about our individual desires nor our individual lives. This is a global pandemic and it is about the
entire human family. It is about
something we just don’t get around to very often in a country focused mainly on
individual rights, individual freedoms, individual property, individual
responsibility, individualistic “don’t tread on me” attitudes; plus, the myths of
individual initiatives, rags-to-riches stories that glorify pulling oneself up by one’s
own bootstraps. Too often, when we do recognize a corporateness to living, we
tend to translate the characteristics of individualism right into the clubs,
cults, organizations, teams or entities we build, so that “membership” gets
distorted into “us-against-them” mentality, excluding rather than
embracing “others.”
Some build
walls and barriers to protect their individual space, but balk at building a
world order that looks after everyone. “Let
them fend for themselves,” some say. “I’ve
got my own life to worry about.” And
then comes reality hammering at our
inner biases and we realize, perhaps, that there is a human family that needs immediate
attention. Some take that as a threat to
their own well-being, rather than as a human family responsibility. And so, one hollers insults at a person of
Asian descent on a subway, threatens him and tells him to go back to where he
came from. Or Asian-Americans (and others) are denied equal treatment at public offices or
entrance to private ‘clubs’ or ‘gatherings.’
Or, protestors take to the
streets to take back what they see as their “God-given right” – to go where
they want to go and do what they want to do. They say re-open society we want
our lives (and livelihoods) back. Do
they have a right to protest? Yes –
everyone does. Do they have a right to
live their lives as they choose, without government interference? Yes, in most cases -- but not when living their
lives as they wish results in violent harm coming to others in the form of
COVID19.
That is the dilemma we do not
always accommodate well enough. It is
the 2nd Amendment contradiction all over again; just as it is with
all individual rights – speech, religion, press, etc. When an individual (or
group) uses individual freedom to threaten, harm or hurt the many or the
vulnerable few, that right becomes a tool of destruction not a tool of justice
or equality, and therefore a candidate for reasonable restrictions, like:
Ø Not being able to yell “fire” when there is none in a
crowded venue;
Ø not being able to make slanderous or libelous
statements in the press;
Ø not being able to segregate schools or services;
Ø not being able to institute a poll tax;
Ø not being able to buy military-style guns
These
are instances where the rights of the larger family take precedent over harmful
use of individual rights. It is just
such a dilemma we face today in putting national and state restrictions on our
daily lives in order to save the lives of strangers (and perhaps ourselves and
our loved ones). Understandably, not
something we tend to want to do.
This brings us, thankfully,
to that larger portion of the citizenry who see the other side. Those who act as though their lives are
inextricably linked to the lives of others, and who act upon that
premise. Many even take that premise
into their field of work, becoming what some might call members of the “helping
professions.” We are becoming more aware
of the risks being taken by our first responders, our medical professionals and
associates and peripheral staff in hospitals and temporary treatment centers.
We are also somewhat aware of individuals stepping up to initiate and innovate
in ways that help others to cope with this disease, like making PPEs or
collecting food or clothing and many other home-style projects. The motivation
seems to bear a commonality – “we’re all
in this together” or “I just want to help” or “I feel it’s my responsibility.”
Examples include:
- the therapists, nurses and doctors finding themselves in the role of family for a stranger who is dying; or
- a young couple gathering artists to create works that capture the agonies, triumphs and other moments of hope and despair on the front lines of hospitals;
- the child who starts to use a sewing machine to make masks for others
- the kid who raises money on line to give to hospitals
It includes those who see
themselves as part of a human family, not just as an individual standing alone.
It is a sense of interdependence with and mutual responsibility for others that
propels the saving of the lives of strangers just because they are human and
not because they look like us or act like us or behave like us or share our
beliefs, but just because they are a part of a global family; in this case, a
global family in dire need.
The hope of something good
emerging from something bad seems to be an innate human hope. What we need to recognize is that hope is already
contained within the actions of people who believe that individual
responsibility for familial well-being on a global scale is everyone’s personal responsibility. The protesters have their right to protest
about their situation (we are all frustrated by the restrictions and sacrifices
required of us), but we all have a duty to humanity to look and to act beyond
what is our own comfort zone.
Compliance with common sense
restrictions helps to save lives. What
is more injurious to human rights and freedoms than contributing to loss of lives that might
have been saved? Willingly exposing
oneself and others to this life-taking virus is a threat to the very freedom being
demanded.
Our
hope lies in responsible people taking responsible actions to bring about hopeful
outcomes for all of us; and, that includes our national, state and local
governments acting responsively and responsibly. If it demands sacrifices, so
be it.
After all, we couldn’t have defeated the global
plague of Nazism if we had not taken actions as a people to live with rationing
of many of the staples of life, with unemployment, and with the heartbreak of social
separation and the deaths of so many troops and civilians in World War II. Most of us who lived during that four-year
War, have never forgotten what was sacrificed and how we persevered, and how
grateful we felt on VE and VJ Days for our nation and our world restored to
peace. As a nation joined with allied
nations, we did what had to be done to bring peace to the whole world. In this new War, we are being asked to do the
same in order to defeat this new global threat.
Freedom
is not just getting what we think we deserve.
Freedom is a responsibility that must be broadly and equally shared to
be effective and to be viable. We are at
Global War again and “rationing” and personal sacrifices are necessities of
life for a significant time in order to overcome this sneak attack by invisible
forces.
WE ARE NOT THERE YET, BUT WE
WILL GET THERE IF WE WORK TOGETHER.
LET RESPONSIBLE
FREEDOM RING!
