Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
No to ‘COVID Amnesty’
“We have to put these fights aside and declare a pandemic amnesty. We can leave out the willful purveyors of actual misinformation while forgiving the hard calls that people had no choice but to make with imperfect knowledge.” — Emily Oster, Economics Prof. at Brown University in Let’s Declare A Pandemic Amnesty, Atlantic Monthly Oct 31, 2020.
I found this article so presumptuous as to be offensive. The same self-regard and sheer narcissism among so many privileged Americans that wound up providing cover for cynical and destructive policies because we were Doing Something (and doing it in ways that hurt the deplorable more than the cloud workers) permeate this article.
In a truly spectacular instance of false equivalence, the author of the piece cited above equates misquoted nonsense about bleach as a cure for COVID-19 (disinformation!) with the economic, social, and political disaster wrought by officials who always had sufficient information to prevent that policy disaster. It was never about honest mistakes from “imperfect knowledge.” The science did not “change.” Science told us from jump that these measures would be costly failures.
In fact, Emily Oster deserves to bear far more blame than the average American. The cynical, incompetent self-promoting authorities and politicians pretending to Do Something continued to get away with it because they appealed to the sensibilities of people like Emily Oster, exhibit A for the knowledge-worker class.
It was not about science but the theater of submission to Experts. It was about a very satisfying scenario in which people who could work from home were not just socioeconomically superior but now demonstrably morally superior to those who resented and resisted lockdowns. The surrender of civil liberties and normal governing processes to those Experts was clearly a big plus for some people — a feature, not a bug.
Mostly I resent the fact that a professional academic (a) is still clearly not well-informed about the state of the science and (b) not the least bit offended by the abuse of scientific authority and the overt suppression of best evidence and best practice. People who make their living in the realm of scholarship should be manning the guillotines made ready for those who betrayed first principles in scientific methods and academic integrity. There are people in the CDC and universities who should be made to watch their diplomas, certifications, and building passes burned.
Many of the most educated, privileged Americans abandoned the scientific method, honest discourse, the general welfare, and fundamental freedoms to endorse (and enforce) disastrous policies solely because they conformed to preferred narratives and sensibilities. It was not possible to look at the science and expect mask mandates, drawn-out or random closures (or vaccines for a rapidly changing virus) to have any measurable effect on transmission.
And in the final insult, we are now subjected to a demand that history deems this fiasco the result of good intentions by well-informed people. There is a point where narcissism is so harmful as to border on the criminal.
I suspect that many Emily Osters out there don’t object to a massive economic hit for much of the world for restrictions on fossil fuels which restrictions will produce no measurable benefit. That harm is OK because we are Doing Something and We Believe in Science. Or do they cheer the destructive and decisive nonsense of the 1619 Project and systemic racism because endorsing such nonsense is personally uplifting and relieves self-manufactured guilt? Or are they soaking up the self-praise for their personal openness and inclusivity for any and all sexual identity disorders, even if it is ultimately harmful to kids and the entire social order?
And as with COVID, in each of these contexts, we will be expected to look past any and all horrific damage because it was all just a matter of honest mistakes and good intentions.
Published in General
Oh by all means, let’s crucify anyone who has made any mistakes. That will encourage people in the future.
After Apartheid in South Africa they had a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Wouldn’t that be better than attacking people who made wrong decisions in good faith?
How easily you forgive the bastards who abused everyone. It’s almost like you had a stake in it. My employer is the one who made wrong decisions in good faith. Your Democrat pals in the Permanent Bureaucracy knew they were lying to everyone, all to get rid of Trump for you. No wonder you want to go easy on them. It’s like they acceded to your wishes.
The question is whether good faith is involved. I would be more selective than Old Bathos in condemnation of the people involved, but I certainly wouldn’t go around claiming all the bad decisions were made in good faith.
When you knowingly advance a policy or a position you know to be wrong, it is not a “mistake.”
But even if you want to characterize these as mistakes, isn’t there a duty of competence by health authorities? Can a surgeon say ‘golly, I did not know the patient would need those organs’? You can characterize it as negligence or deliberate malfeasance but either way, it is culpable.
I do want a deep probe of Rachel Byrx and Anthony Fauci et al. I want the names of those at Facebook and Twitter and YouTube who made the decision to suppress the Great Barrington people and what they were told by government officials. I want to know who in the CDC selected bogus mask and vaccine studies for promotion on the website while ignoring far better data. I want to know the names of everyone involved federally and locally in deciding to close schools.
I want them branded and to change professions. Absolutely none of this was done based on available science. The science did not “change.”
If this was all an honest mistake (by the way, Gary, I still have a couple of bridges for sale if you are interested) then let the accused prove it– explain why they did not avail themselves of the science that would have obviated that mistake.
A duty of care was breached causing great harm. There should be consequences.
Yes. “Pour encourager les autres” is a time-tested tactic.
And . . . it works.
Without consequences, your Democrat pals in the Permanent Bureaucracy will do it again. And they’ll do even worse things, using fear to manipulate.
This is America, guy. Don’t like freedom? Move to China.
It sticks out that it’s the people who were on the wrong side of everything who are begging for “Amnesty.”
They demand “amnesty” aafter they spent two years calling everyone who questioned the lockdowns, and mask mandates, and forced vaccinations “granny-killers” “anti-science” “heartless,” “selfish,” ‘pro-Covid,” “stupid,” “anti-vaxxers” and even worse.
They demand “amnesty” after they continued their authoritarian excesses — bulldozing skateparks with sand, arresting people for walking alone on an empty beach, locking up parks and playgrounds, not allowing people to hold funerals for their loved ones — long, long after they knew they weren’t necessary or effective.
They demand “amnesty” after spreading the lies that Trump told people to inject bleach; that Ron DeSantis wanted schoolchildren to die; that Andrew Cuomo was a hero even after he killed thousands by forcing Covid patients into nursing homes and then lied about it.
And then there was the mind-bending authoritarian hypocrisy. *You* couldn’t go to a concert or a football game, but *they* could protest and riot. *You* were not allowed to go to church or bury your loved ones, but *they* held four state funerals for their heroic martyr George “Fentanyl” Floyd. *Your* small business was forced to close, while they held lavish dinners at places like The French Laundry. *You* were told to stay home; *they* went on vacation wherever they wanted.
And it’s really the authoritarian hypocrisy that shows their “mistakes” weren’t really mistakes at all. This entire thing… all of it… was an experiment/psychological operation in seeing how much authoritarianism they could push and get away with.
So they can shove their “amnesty” into a a deep dark place that doesn’t smell very nice.
Remember. They literally not figuratively wanted us to die.
This is the crux of the issue. So many people suffered from their self-aggrandizing declarations that continued to be made in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. It was all about appearances and power, and it will take a very long time, if it ever happens, for people to recover from the physical and emotional abuse they wrought. The guillotine!
Preach, brother!
The Great Barrington people were exactly right in everything. Francis Collins tried to destroy them. Collins needs an orange jumpsuit, not just for his perjury and for funding the creation of COVID. But for his stupid folk music.
My family has been in America on both my father’s side and mother’s side since well before the Revolutionary War. They weren’t on the Mayflower, but we fought for freedom in North Carolina and Pennsylvania. You don’t like people who were here likely well before your family? Drew, feel free to move to China yourself.
When people like Fauci, Cuomo (both of them), Newsom, Whitmer, and all the other Covidictators are in prison, then maybe we can talk about forgiveness.
They wouldn’t let you see your loved ones in the hospital. They wouldn’t let you hold their hands when they passed. They wouldn’t let you have funerals. [REDACTED] George Floyd got SIX funerals.
They kept the elderly locked up in their assisted living facilities and wouldn’t let you visit. They wouldn’t even let them visit with each other. Elderly people spent months in isolation. Many died simply for lack of human connection.
And you want us to just move on?
No. There must be punishments.
Old Bathos is correct, but he is too soft on the bastards. I saw dozens of people fired for refusing the jab even after its usefulness was in question, by administrators who were too soft in the scrotum to object. I saw state health authorities misrepresent data to keep skeptics in line.
One could go on, but you get the point. Do not forgive. Do not forget.
Selective condemnation is so five minutes ago. I remind you that if you are a conservative and even (Heaven forbid!) a Trump voter, then you are responsible for hurricanes, slavery, and the end of our democracy.
The sensibilities of upper-middle-class white liberals are poisoning the culture. There comes a point when one is morally compelled to examine the actual fruits of one’s “good intentions” and distinguish that from toxic narcissism. I will become more selective in my condemnation when I see evidence of corrective reflection emerging within the lefty monolith.
So you piss away your heritage of freedom. And you’re proud of it. Cool.
Drew, your anger and resentment is not healthy for the body politic, and frankly, for you. I suggest that, for your own sake, that you let it go before it consumes you.
If Gary cannot forgive people who walked through the Capitol building on January 6th, why should I forgive people who willingly and deliberately inflicted Hell on the country for two years?
You take care of your own mental health, and I’ll take care of mine.
You’re going to need it next Tuesday.
We (the Republican Party) is going to sweep the elections due to our better ideas on Tuesday, and because Trump is not on the ballot.
But Trumpers (or whatever you call them) are on the ballot.
If only they had been honest and said, “We don’t know.”
Amnesty, dialogue, justice, bi-partisan, undocumented, gender – in the mouths of certain people, these become trigger words. Anybody have any more you would like to add?
Sometimes they said “we don’t know” with malicious intent, as in “We don’t know about long covid or asymptomatic transmission, therefore we’ve got to keep people isolated.”
To the degree that they run on election denial they will lose. To the degree that they run on crime and inflation they will win.
Am I the only one who is wondering about the timing here? In my perception of how events are unfolding, I have noticed over the last month a series of things that have happened including the New York State Supreme Court ordering reinstatement of jobs and restitution of back pay for those who declined the vaccine.
It’s like watching a hologram collapse around us.
Something stands to be gained politically from this retreat. I just can’t figure out what. It’s not like the Biden-Fauci administration to back off no matter how wrong they are.
Something sinister is afoot.
@oldbathos I disagreed with you when you first proposed this a year or two ago. Now, I am in complete agreement.
I can always forgive people who do things unknowingly, but I’m not seeing that way out for any of them. If little me knew they were making one wrong call after the other, they knew it too.
Every headline here from The Atlantic.
OB, why are you so hard on Oster? Do you know something about a part that she personally played in making some bad decisions?
From her article, she confesses to having been overly strict about masking and social distancing on a hike, with her family, at the very start of the pandemic in April 2020. She also reports that she argued that schools should reopen, and was called a “teacher killer,” though she doesn’t tell us when this happened.
I think that her use of the word “amnesty” doesn’t make sense, when coupled with the argument she makes, quoted in the first two sentences of the OP:
What kind of an “amnesty” is this? She’s still making a distinction between “willful purveyors of actual misinformation” and other people.
I take it that Oster is arguing for rhetorical “amnesty,” which is essentially the suggestion that we shouldn’t keep criticizing people for bad decisions made with imperfect knowledge. As a principle, I think that this is something to consider when evaluating public officials.
However, if a public official, and even the entire healthcare bureaucracy, made major errors and seriously overreacted to this pandemic, then I think that we should consider judging those officials harshly. Fire them for bad judgment, and put someone else in place.
There were some “lockdowns” in Arizona, though we ended it pretty early as I recall, around the summer of 2020. I thought that our governor, Doug Ducey, overreacted a little bit, but I agree that information was more limited at the time, so I don’t hold it against him. I thought that he actually did quite a good job, ordering schools to reopen in August 2020.
My objection is to those who persisted in such unwise policies, into the 2020-21 school year, and even into the 2021-22 school year in some places (I think).