It's not a bug, its a feature.
Seriously, the very idea of democracy is to only have laws accepted by the people.
So if there is no acceptance, there should be no law. Unless it is accepted to have emergency authorian rule, like in this case.
It does matter what the people like and not. The problem in this case is just, that most people do not at all understand the implications of breaking encryption. Actually most barley know what encryption is at all. Thats why there is no outrage.
Post socialist seem to understand what a national emergency is and when it's on, you shut up and do as told. I'm a Hungarian, living in England; the brits have no grasp on this scenario. Somewhere deep down it feels like we needed this pandemic to:
a, undestand one's "rights" doesn't always apply
b, to realize we're living in the golden years* - it's cushioned, comfortable, wonderful, and that we should cherish it and value it.
* Iron Maiden - Wasted Years https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mmszv0jpvSY
It's funny, movies got it wrong, you don't need mass deaths, zombies or giant deadly global disasters to have people accept their rights being suspended and acquiesce to being herded like sheep under strict authoritarian rules under threat of monetary punishment or even incarnation....you just need to make them scared of being sick...
It's not an excuse to lose rights outside the confines of the emergency.
It might be true post-Russian dominated states might still have recent memories on how to obey a central authority (mainly on pain of 'disappearing' into something like a gulag or being executed), it's not a lesson we need to learn thanks.
It's still hard for many of us to take the threat seriously, but that'll change.
There's plenty of laws that your average person agrees with because they want everyone else to follow them: pay your taxes, follow the speed limit, don't be loud after 10 PM, and clean up your dogs poop. But at the same time, they have no problem making exceptions for themselves.
So whether or not any individual follows a certain rule is not indicative of their support of the rule, and a lot of people breaking a certain rule doesn't make it nondemocratic.
I can definitely tell you that up to around a week ago, there was a certain anarchy, that is people carelessly meeting in crowded places (Italy has a mix of both strongly social behavior, and cultural aversion to rules), but things changed drastically.
Until people is scared, they'll honor the rules (of course, one will always find exceptions); I think that it's not about acceptance, but fear.
If this is true, then while the epidemic is (sadly) going strong, people will do what's necessary in an acceptable manner.
As one of the locked up people in Italy, I don't think it is completely true. The media did quite a nice job at cherry picking the bad apples. But if we go by the number of fines levied for breaking the rules, it's around 45K (figure taken from a day). A drop in the bucket compared to the population that's staying at home.
And it's still not clear why the people were fined: were they breaking intentionally the rules, or were they not in possession of the required documents? (You have to go around with a piece of paper stating wh you're out of your house, and if not found truthful you risk a fine and an arrest).
Therefore, the reference "around a week" that I've made is wrong, considering that March 9th was the lockdown date.
My experience with another country with lockdown is still different - people started to be wary of social gatherings/interactions earlier, however, at this point, the anarchy argument is weaker :-)
That's what I meant by cherry picking. Some were ignoring the requests, but a lot of others did respect them. I was already working from home from a few days before.
However, I live a villagers life. Wuhan is a huge city with much less public space. So I argue, it is not only democratic vs. Non democratic society but also depends on the location dramatically.
But i think you are right: The infection risk out in the countryside must be magnitudes smaller than in any major city (so long as mass-events are banned).
Non-compliance will increase the longer it goes on, I suspect. There's a reason isolation is used as punishment/torture in prisons.
Those are two different things! Most people think they are the same, but they are not.
Nonetheless,thats why i wrote, soon or later we accept the dead people as part of doing "business"
The cold truth -- if the bodies that keep stacking up are nearly all 80+ years old, as it seems to be now, then people of working age aren't going to tolerate a forced quarantine all that long. If gov't tries to force the issue, they may only succeed in demonstrating the limits of gov't power.
As soon as it will start getting nice outside, I don't believe you will be able to detain people for long.
Rules can be enforced even in western democracies.
I can't imagine this is true. Not many drivers overtly claim to support rules against speeding, but I expect most people would not campaign to remove them because it's not hard to imagine potential problems in their absence.
Most people would agree that most traffic regulations makes sense in general. Not just necessary in that specific situation. Like "yes speed limits make sense but in this street it should be 20km/h higher then it is". "Yes speeding cameras make sense when used at places where speeding is quite dangerous. But do they need to use them here where it's not really dangerous just to earn more money with fines" etc.
Still you can enforce regulations the _population_ doesn't like, but it's really hard to do so effectively for more then just a short amount of time.