From Politico:
The Shutdown Backlash Is Coming Soon—With a Vengeance
I’m going to skip over the introduction of them making fun of Rand Paul, because it’s tiresome.
Far from rendering Paul’s brand of politics irrelevant, it seems possible, even probable, that the wake of the coronavirus will be a powerful boost to the animating spirit of libertarianism: Leave me alone.
Among the questions looming over American politics is about the nature of what promise to be multiple backlashes over different dimensions of the coronavirus crisis. Most obvious is what price Trump pays for his administration’s tardiness in responding to the contagion in its early stages. Less obvious is what price supporters of activist government pay for the most astounding and disruptive intervention in the everyday life of the nation since World War II.
If anything I suspect that Trump will pay less of a price than Politico wants him to. It is Democrats in the House and Democrat governors who are pushing a shut down in perpetuity. Trump is being hounded for wanting to reopen America.
“Trump wants you to die for Wall Street” is the Left’s slogan.
What I can say about Trump is that he seems to fall on the side of as little shut down as possible for as short as possible. It’s Democrats closing Churches and saying you can’t go fishing or buy paint.
The imminent libertarian surge is not a sure thing but it is more than a hunch. In informal conversations, one hears the sentiment even from people I know to be fundamentally progressive and inclined to defer to whatever health officials say is responsible and necessary to mitigate the worst effects of coronavirus. It is possible both to support the shutdown and powerfully resent it — the draconian nature of the response, and the widespread perception that to voice skepticism of any aspect of its necessity is outside respectable bounds.
The shutdown has be the antithesis of what it means to be American. Hiding in our homes, not being productive, with a government micromanaging our lives.
We begrudgingly accepted it for a short period of time to save lives. With the curve flattening, we need to get back to the status quo fast. Drawing out the shutdown one second longer than it needs to be tells us it’s not about the lives saved it’s about politicians not wanting to give up power.
On top of that, every ridiculous and capricious decree, like the Michigan Governor banning the sale of grass seed ads to this belief that its about control.
The pandemic response arguably could represent liberal values at their best. Government, guided by scientific expertise, protected vulnerable people through a noble exercise of shared sacrifice for shared benefit.
That’s very rosy. It also displayed the Liberal values of repression of free speech, religion, and peaceful assembly. It’s been anti-gun, remember that states were shutting down gun stores until Trump issued his list of essential services to include gun stores. It’s been driven by emotional hysterics about “if you go outside you’re gonna kill grandma” instead of statistics considering population density.
So the lockdown reflects the worst of Liberal values too.
The pandemic response arguably could represent a caricature of what critics disdain about liberalism. Government, responding in a panicky way to headlines and hysteria, ran roughshod over individual freedom and the private sector, a problem whose only remedy was even more remorseless expansion of government.
I just said that.
These protesters surely would cite the widespread shaming of people who go to the beach instead of sheltering at home or refuse to wear masks as evidence of the scolding, sanctimonious character of the supposedly progressive mind.
Yes, yes they will. They are doing it now. Just look at the memes on any moderately conservative blog.
Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot has drawn praise, and some mockery, for driving around Chicago sternly scolding people at parks and trails to go home. But then she got skewered when she personally ignored the order that haircuts are a verboten non-essential activity. Lightfoot responded that as mayor she is the “public face of this city” and has to look good.
Hypocrisy is the worst and most significant Liberal value. If Liberals didn’t have double standards they’d have no standards at all.
Under normal circumstances we just mock the hypocrisy. Now the hypocrisy is unbearable because we are subjected to life altering restrictions.
When the politician who criticizes the rich gets a $1,000 we mock. When we’re cutting our hair at home because the salon has been closed by the politician who just got her hair done, it’s not funny and now we’re angry.
Even non-libertarians, for instance, might be glad to have someone like Paul being heard about the proper rules if government proceeds with proposals to use mobile phone apps to track the movements of people who test positive for coronavirus. The pandemic may be one of those historical moments that rewrite ideological lines— but we can be sure it won’t erase them.
Sometimes I think we’ll count ourselves lucky if we get out of this without shooting.
When Nancy Pelosi calls a tax return “crumbs” during a down economy, we get offended. We’re used to that.
When the House Democrats who demanded the entire US economy be shut down by government fiat delay a program to lend money to the small businesses they forced closed and then Nancy Pelosi shows off her two $25,000 refrigerators full of $12 per pint ice cream that’s more than the usual offensive. That’s pushing a new level of “let them eat cake” that we’re not used to. We know how that story ended.
The writer here got a peek of the other side. I suspect that the backlash is coming and the more resistance to American reopening there is the worse it will be.
Alabama Governor Kay Ivey (R-obviously) announced today that most places in the State can open immediately, with most of the rest opening by May 1 (to make adjustments – for example, gym equipment needs to be spaced six feet apart). Masks are required for most employees and recommended for customers.
An op-ed in the WSJ today made the point (the same my wife made a month ago) that the question isn’t essential vs. not, but rather safe vs. not.
Today’s WSJ also had an article about VW reopening its German factories, with adjustments: more spacing between workstations when possible, masks mandated otherwise, no cafeteria (bring lunch), no changing room (put uniform on at home), one shift leaves before the next shift arrives.
One wonders when Detroit will adopt this sort of thing. Or do they prefer not to work? It’s hard to tell sometimes.
I’ve been thinking for some little time now about reopening… (Sorry for the extended rant here.)
If the rule is to stay X feet apart, then everyone needs a minimum area of (pi/4) X^2. Let’s just round that up a little to X^2.
Every business space – industrial as well as commercial – has an occupancy limit set by the local fire code, this is based on among other things the square footage of the space; it’s also usually the basis upon which rent is calculated. So the square footage is known.
Now if I take that square footage, and divide by X^2, I have the number of people that can be in that business’s space (including staff) without violating the stay-apart guidance. (If the guidance is accurate, the building air exchange is decent, etc.)
Divide that by two, for a safety factor and to account for things like floor displays and shelves, and voila! I have the number of people who can safely be in the space according to current guidelines. For industrial and manufacturing, that’s your max. staffing; for retail businesses, subtract the number of staff, and you have the max. customer occupancy.
It’s easy to calculate, it’s scalable if the guidance changes, and it works for any business that doesn’t involve physical adjacency (hair salons, barber shops, the nicer sit-down restaurants, etc.) as part of the business process.
It seems to me, if the stay-apart guidance is adequate and people are reasonably conscientious about washing their hands, sterilizing surfaces, etc., then this should allow us to reopen most businesses to at least some degree.
Why aren’t we doing this right now?
Boris: TDW-Mark II has been responding to my comments about , say, fishing (while not “essential) being not-obviously-disease-spreading, yet motorized fishing boat forbidden, by noting that idiots (“Gilligans” in Raconteur Report’s Aesop’s spot-on characterization) will find a way to fark even fishing up, and therefore it’s “reasonable” to limit it.
My response is that the nuns did that in parochial school, I’m told that the DI did that in Basic, yet, as free adults, not in a military (or paramilitary ) organization, it is both offensive as well as counterproductive.
Howzabout limiting only the clearly disease spreading activities, and ignore the others. If Gilligan has to huddle up at the launch site, ticket his ass, impound his boat for the duration, let him make his case in court that the DNR officer is wrong (as things of this sort typically go), and off we go!