Each year when August rolls around, I am reminded of how bad things really can get within a society. This is because, 328 years ago this month, a bunch of people in Salem, Massachusetts, decided that an ancestor of mine (along with a number of other people) was guilty of "witchcraft" and that the "correct" thing to do was to hang her "by the neck until dead." Which they then went out and did on August 19, 1692. To me, this provides us with a picture of how low human society can get. Yes, I deplore slavery, anti-Semitism, and any other form of discrimination which one can think of. And, certainly Americans have been guilty of many, many varieties of these sorts of behavior focused on whichever group(s) our society had decided to pick on at that particular moment.
I think this is why I have a problem with those who feel that some economic and personal sacrifice is too much to pay for the health of us all. After all, I would argue, what about the wide variety of laws and regulations which have been adopted in an effort to "...promote the General Welfare,"? These would include: “No Shirt; no Shoes; no Service“ laws; speed limits and other traffics restrictions; airport security restrictions; "Blue" laws and other regulations restricting business hours and practices; laws REQUIRING the removal of snow from sidewalks (which are on our, personal property!); etc. Certainly, such laws inhibit one's freedom to behave as they might wish. Yet I don't see many people demanding the "right" to some sort of "absolute" personal freedom in those situations. Yet, requiring a mask and/or social distancing is said to be an offense against "Constitutionally protected rights," according to some people. Read the Preamble, people. It says that the Constitution was written to establish a government "... to promote the general Welfare...." It seems to me that that could be construed to allow requiring masks to help keep citizens alive.
I confess a certain desire to suggest to some of the "never maskers" that if it's YOUR "right" to endanger me, is it not MY "right" to apply a Second Amendment solution to protect me from your actions? Somehow, I see some logic here, although I really don't favor that as a wise course of action.
I'm not happy to be mask-wearing, isolating, "social distancing," etc., but I accept that my rights end where they interfere with yours. If I have a "right" to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," so do I. If you wish to endanger me by refusing to engage in a bit of preventive social action, I have the right (established in the Declaration of Independence) to suggest that the government should enact laws to protect me from you.
It does NOT include, in my opinion, the right of political leaders to force us to conform to THEIR ideas of desirable behavior through the use of the military, however. I'm dating myself, but I remember the Kent State University massacre when National Guard troops fired on civilians protesting the expansion of the Vietnam War into Cambodia and managed to kill some people who were just walking across the campus to go to class. Violence as a part of protest is not good, but neither is it acceptable as a means of stopping/preventing legitimate protest, especially by the military. But enough of this political philosophy.
Strangely enough, there IS the possibility of some humor in the current pandemic. To me, this is what separates the current situation from what happened in Salem. I can't find any humor in that situation, which was a REAL witch-hunt, as was the McCarthy era.
As some of my lighting design students may remember, I sometimes used Edward Hopper's Nighthawks as an example for them to figure out how to create lighting effects. I'd tell them to, "Turn the picture into a floorplan, then make that a light plot for the purpose of recreating the picture." Most found it a challenge. I thought it a valuable exercise. If you don't know the picture I'm referring to, here it is from the Art Institute of Chicago website:
I think this is why I have a problem with those who feel that some economic and personal sacrifice is too much to pay for the health of us all. After all, I would argue, what about the wide variety of laws and regulations which have been adopted in an effort to "...promote the General Welfare,"? These would include: “No Shirt; no Shoes; no Service“ laws; speed limits and other traffics restrictions; airport security restrictions; "Blue" laws and other regulations restricting business hours and practices; laws REQUIRING the removal of snow from sidewalks (which are on our, personal property!); etc. Certainly, such laws inhibit one's freedom to behave as they might wish. Yet I don't see many people demanding the "right" to some sort of "absolute" personal freedom in those situations. Yet, requiring a mask and/or social distancing is said to be an offense against "Constitutionally protected rights," according to some people. Read the Preamble, people. It says that the Constitution was written to establish a government "... to promote the general Welfare...." It seems to me that that could be construed to allow requiring masks to help keep citizens alive.
I confess a certain desire to suggest to some of the "never maskers" that if it's YOUR "right" to endanger me, is it not MY "right" to apply a Second Amendment solution to protect me from your actions? Somehow, I see some logic here, although I really don't favor that as a wise course of action.
I'm not happy to be mask-wearing, isolating, "social distancing," etc., but I accept that my rights end where they interfere with yours. If I have a "right" to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," so do I. If you wish to endanger me by refusing to engage in a bit of preventive social action, I have the right (established in the Declaration of Independence) to suggest that the government should enact laws to protect me from you.
It does NOT include, in my opinion, the right of political leaders to force us to conform to THEIR ideas of desirable behavior through the use of the military, however. I'm dating myself, but I remember the Kent State University massacre when National Guard troops fired on civilians protesting the expansion of the Vietnam War into Cambodia and managed to kill some people who were just walking across the campus to go to class. Violence as a part of protest is not good, but neither is it acceptable as a means of stopping/preventing legitimate protest, especially by the military. But enough of this political philosophy.
Strangely enough, there IS the possibility of some humor in the current pandemic. To me, this is what separates the current situation from what happened in Salem. I can't find any humor in that situation, which was a REAL witch-hunt, as was the McCarthy era.
As some of my lighting design students may remember, I sometimes used Edward Hopper's Nighthawks as an example for them to figure out how to create lighting effects. I'd tell them to, "Turn the picture into a floorplan, then make that a light plot for the purpose of recreating the picture." Most found it a challenge. I thought it a valuable exercise. If you don't know the picture I'm referring to, here it is from the Art Institute of Chicago website:
My brother-in-law shared this version from The New Yorker by Jason Adam Katzenstein, who adapted the painting for masks and "social distancing."
Or, a bit more grimly, there's this version which I saw in The Economist.
One of the more interesting developments of surviving the pandemic, at least to me, has been my discovery that we can, in fact, "socialize" on a wider scale than email. No, I still do not do Facebook or Twitter. My experience with this has been via Zoom meetings of the Omaha Sherlockian Society. I gather that there are other, similar apps available, but Zoom seems to be what people are talking (and cartooning) about.
On the other hand, Thatababy pointed out that one can TRY to cheat on Zoom business meetings, but it IS possible to get caught,
On the other hand, Thatababy pointed out that one can TRY to cheat on Zoom business meetings, but it IS possible to get caught,
Between Friends, on the other hand, was, I felt, quite eloquent about the rules for appropriate dress, etc. while "Zooming."
The possibilities are endless, and amusing, at least to me.
I, obviously, find the whole "anti-mask" thing a demonstration of the fact that one should "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity." After all, if it is true that following the advice of public health experts to wear a mask is certain to kill these people because "they can't breathe!"; I am forced to wonder how is it that the medical staff who routinely wear such devices during (sometimes lengthy) surgery, etc., manage to survive to operate again? It does make me wonder if some of these "anti-maskers" are just selfish jerks who don't want to have to worry about having any social responsibility. After all, "If you get sick, what do I care? And if I get sick, you'll take care of me, won't you?"
I know it won't be done (nor should it be) but I am tempted to suggest that, if people who refuse to wear masks, social distance, etc. get sick; then they should be denied medical treatment because they have purposely engaged in behavior which is dangerous to society as a whole, not just to themselves. After all, we put people who engage in other endangering behaviors in prison, perhaps they all should just be allowed to "... decrease the surplus population," since they have demonstrated their unwillingness to participate in responsible social behavior. Even this, however, can be approached with a modicum of humor, from the just amusing, to the somewhat serious.
Non Sequitur seems to take the idea of "masking up" with a degree of seriousness.
I, obviously, find the whole "anti-mask" thing a demonstration of the fact that one should "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity." After all, if it is true that following the advice of public health experts to wear a mask is certain to kill these people because "they can't breathe!"; I am forced to wonder how is it that the medical staff who routinely wear such devices during (sometimes lengthy) surgery, etc., manage to survive to operate again? It does make me wonder if some of these "anti-maskers" are just selfish jerks who don't want to have to worry about having any social responsibility. After all, "If you get sick, what do I care? And if I get sick, you'll take care of me, won't you?"
I know it won't be done (nor should it be) but I am tempted to suggest that, if people who refuse to wear masks, social distance, etc. get sick; then they should be denied medical treatment because they have purposely engaged in behavior which is dangerous to society as a whole, not just to themselves. After all, we put people who engage in other endangering behaviors in prison, perhaps they all should just be allowed to "... decrease the surplus population," since they have demonstrated their unwillingness to participate in responsible social behavior. Even this, however, can be approached with a modicum of humor, from the just amusing, to the somewhat serious.
Non Sequitur seems to take the idea of "masking up" with a degree of seriousness.
On the other hand, Mike Luckovich, the cartoonist, has used the current situation to suggest that education may need to take a hand in resolving this situation, at least for the future.
I will admit, however, that for many people, this staying at least semi-isolated can be something of a concern. Personally, I have done a LOT of reading (and re-reading) from my all-too-extensive library of all sorts of stuff, but I will admit that it IS getting tiring. My library, however, has helped me survive the "vast wasteland" which still makes up a large amount of television. Somehow, having a couple of hundred channels providing a greater amount of the same sort of junk that we use to get on fewer than a dozen (yes, I AM dating myself!) really isn't a vast improvement. I still find it easier to "escape" into a good book, although that has been hampered by tight restrictions on the local public libraries. Thank heaven for my shelves full of books.
Remember, it still COULD be worse:
Remember, it still COULD be worse:
Or, for those of you who watch television:
Eventually, of course, this too will pass, as did the "trials" in Salem. There have already been many more deaths from COVID-19 than there were in Salem, but at least we aren't pretending that COVID deaths are some form of "justice." At least, not yet.
If we think that heroism only occurs on the battlefield, we should save some thoughts for those who leave their homes, families and safety every day to go off to risk their lives to fight this disease and to provide essential services for the rest of us. Real courage is going out every day knowing that you are endangering your own life in order to prevent others from dying. Those who won't put up with some inconvenience because they insist that "I'm not going to get sick, so I don't have to worry about spreading it to others." are NOT worthy of being part of "We, the People...."
LLAP,
Dr. B
P.S. Wear a mask, practice social distancing, respect the lives of others, be informed, register, VOTE! If you don't accept the responsibilities of citizenship, you don't deserve the privilege of being a citizen.
If we think that heroism only occurs on the battlefield, we should save some thoughts for those who leave their homes, families and safety every day to go off to risk their lives to fight this disease and to provide essential services for the rest of us. Real courage is going out every day knowing that you are endangering your own life in order to prevent others from dying. Those who won't put up with some inconvenience because they insist that "I'm not going to get sick, so I don't have to worry about spreading it to others." are NOT worthy of being part of "We, the People...."
LLAP,
Dr. B
P.S. Wear a mask, practice social distancing, respect the lives of others, be informed, register, VOTE! If you don't accept the responsibilities of citizenship, you don't deserve the privilege of being a citizen.
RSS Feed