Coronavirus thread

[Mandryka]

The Guardian is reporting some events in Austria which seem unprecedented in post war Europe to me. If the article is correct, they will be effectively imposing a form of soft house arrest on the unvaccinated teenagers and adults living there - leave your home for work and other basic activities but you can't leave for anything else. No visits to friends, they are banned from restaurants and swimming pools, cinema, theatre, concerts, exhibitions, beaches and holiday resorts. This is being monitored by the police.

[Todd]

The Guardian is reporting some events in Austria which seem unprecedented in post war Europe to me.

It is a public health police state.  Some people will think it acceptable.

[Mandryka]

It is a public health police state.  Some people will think it acceptable.

Pfizer macht frei.

[SimonNZ]

Pfizer macht frei.

Seriously? A holocaust comparison?

[Mandryka]

Seriously? A holocaust comparison?

I don't know if locking down a ubiquitous group in a society is morally and politically more problematic than locking down a region. I need to think about it.

[Florestan]

Pfizer macht frei.

This is literally true. If you're jabbed, you're (relatively) free. If you are not jabbed, you are not free. It's as simple as that.

What we've been witnessing since March 2020, the vast majority of people's reactions ranging from indifferent passivity to enthusiastic support, is global capitalism's latest (and possibly final) assault on whatever vestiges of democracy and freedom were still in place (and be it noted that actually the said democracy was never anything else than the creation and the tool of the capital). Usually, totalitarianism creates and exploits fear in order to establish and keep itself in place. In this case, though, the cleverest trick was to use an already existing one, the oldest and greatest of man's fear: fear of death.  A stroke of genius, no doubt, but one which (will) have grim and dire consequences.

[Holden]

I don't know if locking down a ubiquitous group in a society is morally and politically more problematic than locking down a region. I need to think about it.

I have thought about it. It's reprehensible. The comparison to this is what happened in the '30s. The Star of David mandated to be worn on the clothing of Jewish persons could be directly compared to having that double vax certificate on your phone or in your wallet. You aren't vaxxed so you become untermenschen? You are now a part of society that is discriminated against! Simply because you don't want to be vaccinated?

This is also happening in Australia in two states. When QLD reaches 90% double vax then anyone unvaccinated will not be able to enter the state without going through some serious quarantine. They will then be barred from various establishments, including the local pub. The unvaxxed locals will be treated similarly. Constitutionally this is a major concern.

I have no issues with sitting next to an unvaxxed person. They are far more at risk than I am and that's their decision and I respect it. If I have caught Covid then I pose them a problem and not the other way around. I am double vaxxed and will get the booster next February.

[Karl Henning]

I don't know if locking down a ubiquitous group in a society is morally and politically more problematic than locking down a region. I need to think about it.

Really, the holocaust was "locking down" the Jews? Man, when you jump the rails, you jump the damn rails.

[amw]

Strangely, for some reason I only ever see people who are not Jewish (or Roma, etc) comparing restrictions on unvaccinated people to the Shoah. I wonder why that is.

[Todd]

Usually, totalitarianism creates and exploits fear in order to establish and keep itself in place.

An implication here is that the fear-mongering and hyperbole regarding Radical Islamic Terrorism are being recycled anew.  'Twas more or less always thus.  In the modern USA, the CPI set the pace, and its techniques are used to this very day. 

[Mandryka]

Really, the holocaust was "locking down" the Jews? Man, when you jump the rails, you jump the damn rails.

Don't be silly. That's the sort of logic and argumentation that Trump people used to use. Come back to me when you're in a more rational frame of mind.

Strangely, for some reason I only ever see people who are not Jewish (or Roma, etc) comparing restrictions on unvaccinated people to the Shoah. I wonder why that is.

Nobody here as far as I know is comparing restrictions on unvaccinated people to killing however many people died in the Shoah. However I note that in passing that in Nazi Germany and maybe, interestingly, Austria,  Jewish people and others were

banned from restaurants and swimming pools, cinema, theatre, concerts, exhibitions, beaches and holiday resorts.

and this was

monitored by the police.

[Florestan]

An implication here is that the fear-mongering and hyperbole regarding Radical Islamic Terrorism are being recycled anew.  'Twas more or less always thus.

Yes, precisely, The enemy changes constantly, the methods are the same.

  In the modern USA, the CPI set the pace, and its techniques are used to this very day.

What is this CPI?

[JBS]

Don't be silly. That's the sort of logic and argumentation that Trump people used to use. Come back to me when you're in a more rational frame of mind.

Nobody here as far as I know is comparing restrictions on unvaccinated people to killing however many people died in the Shoah. However I note that in passing that in Nazi Germany and maybe, interestingly, Austria,  Jewish people and others were


and this was

Under the Reich Jews had no way of avoiding these restrictions. Under the present situation, the unvaxxed do have a way: get vaxxed.
This is a matter of making a choice for which there are consequences.

[Yes, I know there is a relatively small group who can't be vaccinated for valid medical reasons. But if it was only that group, there would probably be no need for these restrictions.]

[Mandryka]

Under the Reich Jews had no way of avoiding these restrictions. Under the present situation, the unvaxxed do have a way: get vaxxed.
This is a matter of making a choice for which there are consequences.

[Yes, I know there is a relatively small group who can't be vaccinated for valid medical reasons. But if it was only that group, there would probably be no need for these restrictions.]

This is right.

The comparison with the Reich is designed to make people aware that Austria and maybe other western states could be sleepwalking not into a second Shoah, but into a highly authoritarian way of governing.

[amw]

It's interesting because there is a potential comparison to make regarding the Shoah; specifically, Aktion T4 (the planned Nazi extermination of the elderly, disabled and otherwise "undesirable" via gassing, which was eventually forced to a halt by public protest and open revolt). A variety of events early in the pandemic suggest this comparison: COVID-19-positive patients being quarantined in nursing homes, where they were almost guaranteed to infect others, leading to thousands of unnecessary deaths; the U.S. government allowing the virus to spread unchecked on Native American reservations and, when asked for help, sending body bags instead of protective equipment; public statements by various economic and political authorities claiming that life didn't have much value anyway after age 75 and triage should focus on saving the youngest and healthiest patients rather than the most seriously ill; and of course widespread protests by ordinary citizens who claimed that since COVID-19 mostly killed people who were already old or sick, no restrictions were necessary, life should go back to normal, and nature should be allowed to take its course, etc. I rarely make this comparison because it's more plausible that most of these events were the result of ignorance or mistakes, rather than a deliberate extermination action. Anti-vaxxers rarely make this comparison because, of course, in this situation, they would be the Nazi analogues.

As for vaccination restrictions? I'm not sure how effective they would be for public health, given that most infection seems to occur within the household. The goal of any public health policy should be to protect people who are vulnerable to the virus even when vaccinated—since COVID-19 functions much more as an autoimmune disorder than a respiratory one, fully vaccinated cancer patients, transplant recipients, HIV-positive individuals, etc, are still at high risk because their immune responses are already dysregulated. As such an unvaccinated person can pose a threat to someone in this position, especially if they also refuse to wear masks or wash their hands etc (as many do). But vaccinated people can also transmit the virus to some extent, even if it's less likely. Possibly they think that if 95%+ of people become vaccinated the virus will simply become so rare that people will be safer by default, and the purpose of the restrictions is simply to encourage this. I have no idea how that will play out in reality, especially with the possibility of new variants; developing a new generation of vaccines that stimulate T cell response rather than antibody production seems more effective but is probably a few years away.

[Florestan]

This is right.

The comparison with the Reich is designed to make people aware that Austria and maybe other western states could be sleepwalking not into a second Shoah, but into a highly authoritarian way of governing.

Could be? It's already happened all across Europe and most people didn't even blink an eye. Governments and Big Pharma are greatly concerned about people's health and working hard to protect it so get the jabs, follow the orders and keep quiet, folks, or else you'll be placed under house arrest and police surveillance until you get the jab, follow the orders and keep quiet.

[Spotted Horses]

In the United States the number of confirmed deaths due to Covid-19 is about 800,000. Epidemiologists think the real total is substantially higher. The preventable loss of life exceeds the deaths in WWII by a substantial amount. The urgency of this situation is comparable to war, and that means real war, not just bombing undeveloped countries who might have been involved in a terrorist attach.

In the case of war the government is embowered to draft people into the military, remove them from their homes and send them to a foreign country to kill people or be killed. I don't think it is unreasonable in this case of comparable urgency to require people to go to a pharmacy and receive a vaccination whose safety has been rigorously verified, although its long term efficacy is still in question.

[Karl Henning]

Got boosted this morning.

[vandermolen]

Got boosted this morning.

Excellent Karl. I'm not eligible for several weeks.

[Mandryka]

In the United States the number of confirmed deaths due to Covid-19 is about 800,000. Epidemiologists think the real total is substantially higher. The preventable loss of life exceeds the deaths in WWII by a substantial amount. The urgency of this situation is comparable to war, and that means real war, not just bombing undeveloped countries who might have been involved in a terrorist attach.

In the case of war the government is embowered to draft people into the military, remove them from their homes and send them to a foreign country to kill people or be killed. I don't think it is unreasonable in this case of comparable urgency to require people to go to a pharmacy and receive a vaccination whose safety has been rigorously verified, although its long term efficacy is still in question.

Suppose the person who is required to take the vaccine decides that they would prefer not to, and does so understanding the risks to himself.  Am I right to think that in such a case the justification for the requirement would come from the harm they may do to others -- in particular, others who are vaccinated?

I am not saying a case can't be made, I just want to map out the logic of the situation.