Enjoyed this. Sort of thing @Malarkey might pen
2 Likes
'Travelled"
finally someone calling out this kind of behaviour
3 Likes
4 Likes
Lads in Ireland might be shocked to find that media can be something other than a state propaganda tool
4 Likes
That’s a great article. In the wail of all places
1 Like
The mail and the guardian seem to have swapped places lately
Do you really think that article is well reasoned? Or is it the pleasant odour of Sumption’s ermine?
I wonder, among many facets, about this passage:
"Meanwhile, we’ve been told the policy has been to protect the NHS from being overwhelmed. It must be said that the frontline staff are beyond praise but the NHS is a public service which exists to protect our national life, not an established church. To treat its limitations as a reason for suspending our national life is a perversion of its purpose.
It also diverts attention from where responsibility lies. If hospitals are overwhelmed, it is not our fault for getting ill and needing them. The responsibility lies with successive governments which have mismanaged and underfunded the NHS for years.
The number of NHS beds has fallen continuously since 2000. Despite years of pandemic planning, the UK has by far the lowest intensive care capacity in Europe. In a bad winter, the NHS is overwhelmed even without Covid-19."
Is it actually true to say, empirically, winter flu has been (and remains, supposedly) as serious a threat to economic life as this virus? Is this contention correct or a product of specious reasoning (‘all strain on hospitals amounts to the same thing, without differentiation’)?
If so, why did this crisis not transpire in 2019, in 2009? By Sumption’s own logic, there should be such a crisis nearly every winter. But of course this logic chokes itself. Something that happens each winter, by definition, is not a crisis but an expected event.
Would it not trouble you that Sumption is effectively offering this scenario? ‘The NHS is essentially fucked for the last 20 years. So we may as well use this situation as a means of letting the hospitals be overwhelmed and moving on to Mad Max herd immunity.’ What level of public support do you believe exists, in Britain and in Ireland, for this scenario, embraced hypothetically by Sumption (who could of course sequester himself and his family in his French chateau for the duration)? At what point would anti lockdown protests become anti overwhelmed hospitals protests? Would there be rioting and looting as social order broke down? Would whatever sort of protests happened over an extended period facilitate a resumption of normal economic activity?
Then there is this passage about Boris Johnson and his (jolly good) government:
“We have witnessed constant U-turns and lurchings from pillar to post. Eat Out To Help Out was followed by the enforced closure of pubs and restaurants. Schools continued, but were then shut. There was the absurdity of tiers being relaxed for Christmas Day, only to be reimposed three days later.”
Is Sumption not implicitly acknowledging that premature attempts to OIUTF are actually counterproductive in the longer run? Then again, and rather in contradiction of himself, Sumption is precisely calling for people to start eating out again and to start drinking out again – without face nappies – same as the kango wing of the Tory Party did at the time. Remind me: how did that pressure work out?
And what about his concluding passage? Sumption goes sonorous: “The rhetoric of suppression evades the reality that we must learn how to live with disease, as our ancestors have always done.” But how are we to achieve this end? Sumption offers no concrete advice beyond vague high flown banalities about ‘liberty’, save for an implicit exhortation: this virus should not be suppressed at all, should be ‘let rip’, in the phrase.
Another sonorous banality to finish: “Then, hopefully, we can rebuild a world in which limits are placed on the power of an irresponsible state to direct people’s lives.”
Ah, dreadful state power… Alpha and omega, for a certain cast of mind. Yet would it not have to be the state that forced people to go back out to eat, to resume ‘normal life’? A fierce pancake, in the phrase.
2 Likes
Yes, I think it’s well reasoned, even if he did pull his punches a little. The nhs is in a mess, they’re sending home healthy staff, reducing bed numbers on a yearly basis, opening and closing exhibition centres, playing silly buggers with government statisticians (for reasons that I’ll let you explain), unable to employ sensible measures like their counterparts in india and sweden, incapable of offering standard health care and despite having 1.2 million employees, unable to look after 67k patients.
Is winter flu as serious as this virus? I suppose this virus is a bit more serious than some of the worst flu years over the last 20. It’s hard to tell, though…what with the behaviour of government statisticians mentioned above, dodgy pcr tests etc. Either way there’s plenty of coherent argument to say that it’s in the ballpark, though it would be a shame not to mention the high proportion of people who contracted/tested positive covid while in hospital for other reasons: The polite silence around deaths caused by lockdowns will only last so long however, I’d hope!
And he criticises government u turns, I really dont see this as tacit approval of lockdowns. The fact is that western democratic governments had a plan for pandemics, they abandoned it, choked up a new one in the space of a few hours and have crashed from failure to calamity since. Maybe he’s saying something absurd about sticking to a plan rather than aping public reaction to chinese twitter videos of a man falling over and some diggers parked in a field?
He says we must live with the disease? That seems reasonable. Vitamin d has proven highly effective, so has ivermectin. The immune system worked for millions of years is seemingly working well in sweden - and seems to have been a deciding factor in the low deaths seen in Japan and China.
As for face masks, no reasonably informed person thinks they’re useful, and there’s plenty of science to suggest the opposite.
Anyhow, what will happen if we open up? Well anyone can see that the graphs follow the same trajectory regardless of lockdowns, they even follow more or less the same trajectory back in the days before incidences of flu mysteriously dropped by between 95 and 100%. Admittedly some countries and US states have fared better by not locking down. I suppose that’s where the lockdown argument really falls apart.
As for me being beguiled by ermine, not really. Priests wear collars, judges wear wigs, trans lads wear dresses and socialists wear donkey jackets. I’m cool with all of it.
(Say what you like about the daily mail- they ran a front page exposing multi million pound covid contracts awarded tender free to tory cronies. I doubt if the Irish media would do likewise…though i only ever get a glance at the oul lad’s indo)
2 Likes
Okay. Thanks for detailed answer. I will try to make a few points, because I find it quite disorienting how much I am in disagreement with people in this area.
Yes, I think it’s well reasoned, even if he did pull his punches a little. The nhs is in a mess, they’re sending home healthy staff, reducing bed numbers on a yearly basis, opening and closing exhibition centres, playing silly buggers with government statisticians (for reasons that I’ll let you explain), unable to employ sensible measures like their counterparts in india and sweden
The logic here, both on Sumption’s part and on your part, is bizarre – twice over First, did ‘pro lockdown’ people – ever before this pandemic unfolded – somehow anachronistically undermine the NHS and therefore cause in advance its current inadequacies? How could this scenario, even in mere chronological terms, have transpired? Does rain come out of the ground because the ground is wet?
Second, why does the NHS’ current inadequacies somehow make it all the more ‘appropriate’ to drive the service ‘over the cliff’ altogether via overloaded virus response? This notion of appropriateness is both your tone and your logic. Are you just opposed to non private medicine? To the NHS per se? Would seem so. Which is a whole other argument. Do you feel a ‘hard rain’ should come for the NHS, via this virus, so that the NHS can be dismantled and American healthcare companies introduced into the market?
There is no point, by the way, in adducing Sweden. That boat has sailed – as even the Swedish helmsmen themselves now concede. To hark continually after a false example betrays far more than the desire for an example.
To be strict about it, there is no point in adducing nearly ever other country. They might be getting on terrifically well in Montana, say, but does this facet really bear upon the crux in 26 county Ireland: should the government have locked down, as happened, on December 24, 2020? I am not interested in cookie cut ideological biases. I am interested in pragmatic assessments of specific situations – and in learning from prior errors, as you will agree, on this front.
Is winter flu as serious as this virus? I suppose this virus is a bit more serious than some of the worst flu years over the last 20. It’s hard to tell, though…what with the behaviour of government statisticians mentioned above, dodgy pcr tests etc. Either way there’s plenty of coherent argument to say that it’s in the ballpark
This nonsense lies at the heart of what I find disorienting. Are you really asking people to believe that governments all across the planet have maimed themselves economically more or less for the craic, out of sheer capriciousness? Are you really?
So much becomes your position. If Covid-19 is only like winter flu, why did the various governments not treat Covid-19 like – well, like winter flu? Why not save themselves trillions? How do you account for such irrational behaviour? Is the prompt to such boggling irrationality a conspiracy by Big Pharma?
Now, this question is separate from whether Covid-19 is economic warfare by the Chinese. And a supposed winter flu would be a rather piddly martial effort by the Chinese, no? You would imagine the Chinese could do a fair bit better than a winter flu with frills on it
though it would be a shame not to mention the high proportion of people who contracted/tested positive covid while in hospital for other reasons: The polite silence around deaths caused by lockdowns will only last so long however, I’d hope!
More nonsense, after a fashion. True, incompetence in hospitals is an awful element. Entirely true. But there is a more coherent argument to say such infections occur because of high rates circulating in the community and the consequent near impossibility of keeping care homes and hospitals impregnable. Besides, what would happen if the NHS capsized, as you appear to covet, on the internal infections front? Would you and anyone who agrees with you be prepared to break the silence? To put up your hand and say ‘Yeah, that’s on us, for we got it wrong’? I wonder.
A core problem for the OIUTF contingent is the unwillingness to appreciate the central problem as infection rates rather than death rates. For one thing, infection rates drive – in a non lockdown situation – a rolling de facto 14 day lockdown of close contacts. There is no way around this reality. You therefore cannot resume normal economic activity while a certain infection rate persists. What is the purpose of OIUTF if not to resume normal economic activity? Is the dynamic merely reflexive anti government animus?
And he criticises government u turns, I really dont see this as tacit approval of lockdowns. The fact is that western democratic governments had a plan for pandemics, they abandoned it, choked up a new one in the space of a few hours and have crashed from failure to calamity since.
Well, Sumption implicitly recognized the connection between premature relaxation of restrictions and u turns. But then he flinched from that realization, due to ideological bias.
Maybe he’s saying something absurd about sticking to a plan rather than aping public reaction to chinese twitter videos of a man falling over and some diggers parked in a field?
Thankfully, I know not what this allusion means. Not all Twitter videos are important. Probably very very few of them are of the remotest significance.
He says we must live with the disease? That seems reasonable.
Reasonable, yes – in the vein of utter banality. A slogan is not a road map. We need specific plans around schools and universities in particular.
Vitamin d has proven highly effective, so has ivermectin. The immune system worked for millions of years is seemingly working well in sweden - and seems to have been a deciding factor in the low deaths seen in Japan and China.
I salute you for raising vitamin d and ivermectin. But a clear problem is that the logistical issues associated with vaccines would be easier with but not absent from rolling out these two resources. No magic bullets, despite your implication, lie to hand.
There are more grave problems. Vitamin d, while promising, is unproven. Face value, you have been asking people – ever before a vaccine was produced – to risk becoming seriously ill or to risk giving the virus to other people who could become seriously ill. Your position, stripped down, is of this nature. I think it is reasonable for people – at least before being vaccinated – to refuse such risk on the basis of vitamin d consumption alone.
A cognate point, albeit a more worrying point, applies to ivermectin. If I properly understand your case, which is an important one, ivermectin does not prevent a person contracting the virus. Instead ivermectin, if said person becomes seriously ill or faces death, mitigates those two prospects. By this light, I find your all out enthusiasm for ivermectin as a magic bullet quite strange. I think it is perfectly reasonable for anyone to say they do not wish to risk serious illness or making someone else seriously ill simply because there exists a drug named ivermectin, one that has still to be properly trialled and processed as regards Covid-19. I think it is perfectly reasonable for anyone, to take the prospect of such serious illness on tick, to want rather more insurance and reassurance than ivermectin currently provides.
The Sweden reference, as broached, is null and void. This obsession greatly weakens your position. There is no way in which the Swedish response constitutes a paradigm – and certainly not a portable paradigm. To give over clutching this straw would help.
Nor can China, given its non democratic nature, easily provide a paradigm for European democratic states. I am truly amazed that someone so anti government and so anti state, on supposed principle, would look to China.
As for face masks
Depends on quality of face mask. If you were correct, most surgery could never take place.
Anyhow, what will happen if we open up? Well anyone can see that the graphs follow the same trajectory regardless of lockdowns, they even follow more or less the same trajectory back in the days before incidences of flu mysteriously dropped by between 95 and 100%. Admittedly some countries and US states have fared better by not locking down. I suppose that’s where the lockdown argument really falls apart.
This stuff is utter nonsense. You are basically arguing that the 26 Counties, without a hard lockdown on Christmas Eve last, would be better off or no worse off than currently applies. I find such ‘logic’ a river from a poisoned source. No matter how healthy-looking the fish in it, I would not eat them. And going back to the spurious flu equivalence cleanses nothing.
.
Say what you like about the daily mail- they ran a front page exposing multi million pound covid contracts awarded tender free to tory cronies. I doubt if the Irish media would do likewise.
I agree, naturally, about endemic corruption at the top of current Tory Party. But this issue is separate from the wisdom (or not) of lockdown measures. Not everything can be folded together if a bed is ever to be made.
Man dear, I don’t know where to start, and there’s only so many times I can be right about everything.
BUT
There is no magic bullet…but sure if 89% of the time it works all of the time it will do rightly…and neither vitamin d nor ivermectin will kill anyone, which is a lot more can be said for vaccines or lockdowns.
AND
I’ll tell you something that hasn’t been properly trialled, processed, tried before, won a nobel prize etc: Lockdowns.
And this risk of giving it to others. The risk is still there…and the risk will be there when a bad flu comes along and kicks covid into touch. That’s life. The fact is that this is nowhere near as bad as all the experts predicted ,modelled for etc.
They didn’t all lockdown, or they didn’t all lockdown to the same degree. My point about Florida, sweden, north Dakota, Croatia etc stands.
The nhs…the uk government are spending billions on testing and tracing…spend it on something that works instead.
2 Likes
Those observations are not even remotely adequate, sorry.
But we will leave it…
A fine read. American centric but issues are universal
Anyone subscribe to The Currency?
200 euro a year seems pricey
There’s a lot of good stuff on it. Definitely more business focussed though.
1 Like
John Rawls.
1 Like
The sun mother of God what a shower of cunts