Ahh the old "greater good", most violations of human rights begin with a speech about the greater good...
>Putting thousands of people at risk in order to qualify
Quantify and prove that risk, and prove that Tesla's mitigation are not effective.
Do so with out using Appeals to Authority, or making a claim that "well the government says"
We are (or are suppose to be) a free society, not serf's of the government
And yet, plenty of controls to protect people don't turn into permanent revocations of human rights. Why, when this argument comes up, do we conveniently forget about those? Do you really think that the plan of governments around the world is to cripple their GDP output and keep everyone locked inside as some sort of mass population control exercise? And a pandemic that would benefit from these types of actions was just a great time to pull the trigger without anyone noticing?
I honestly don't understand this argument. On one end of the spectrum you have complete freedom with no laws, police & fire departments, public education, militaries, government welfare programs, airport security, etc. On the other hand, you have whatever world you fear we'll end up in when all of our rights are stripped. It would seem to me that most first world countries sit somewhere between those two, because we've generally decided there are many freedoms we're happy to give up (some temporarily, some permanently) for the betterment of society overall. Particularly those where one person's freedom would directly impact another person's right to life.
You can certainly say that you think we should open the country back up and that these restrictions are unnecessary, and provide your supporting data for that argument. But suggesting that this is some fundamental violation of human rights feels like quite a reach.
I am sure we are going to disagree on many of those. I am sure my definition of human rights, and liberty is very different from yours.
>Do you really think that the plan of governments around the world is to cripple their GDP output and keep everyone locked inside as some sort of mass population control exercise?
No, I do not believe it is conspiracy of population control, I think it run of the mill every day incompetence, panic, and fear at work
the road to hell is not paved with evil conspiracy, it is paved with good intentions
To be clear, I would not oppose all of the governments response to this pandemic, however I do oppose many many of the provisions of the lock down orders. I also oppose many of the individual actions of government officials, things like threatening a teen with arrest for an Instagram post, or the mayor of Chicago threatening to arrest anyone for getting a hair cut while posting on social media her getting a haircut... or releasing thousands of inmates from prison then arresting a business owner, putting her in the same jail that was deemed to unfit for convicted criminals all for refusing to close her business...
>I honestly don't understand this argument.
it is clear you do not understand the argument, you probably also do not understand why anyone would want to put individualism over the collective, or rights above safety
>> But suggesting that this is some fundamental violation of human rights feels like quite a reach.
I guess that depends on what you call human rights. I believe that all human rights flow from the Principle of Self Ownership. I believe in individualism and voluntary cooperation. I reject collectivism and cooperation via force.
I believe tyranny is defined as that which is legal for the government but illegal for the citizenry and I do not believe the majority has the ethical right to deiced that I give up my rights for their safety, or that because the majority agrees to "give up" their rights they then have the ethical right to use force to compel me to give up mine.
I believe the law is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense, the law is the organization of the natural right of lawful defense. In that defense there is some room for government action to defend people from COVID, however I believe many of the governments actions moved far beyond justifiable defense, into organizing injustice.
The analogy fails because serfs couldn't vote for their king. We have a democracy here, albeit an imperfect one. So far California has a low COVID death rate, especially for a state that was hit early with outbreaks in its two biggest metropolitan areas: LA and the South Bay. It's almost certain that our early shelter in place orders (from our elected government) has saved hundreds of lives.
The reality is that, for many Americans, our boss exercises more power over our lives than our government. Billionaire CEOs like Elon Musk threaten our health and livelihoods by pressuring workers to come back to unsafe work environments early. Elon spending a day taking selfies on the assembly line notwithstanding.
> Quantify and prove that risk, and prove that Tesla's mitigation are not effective.
The burden of proof is not on me to to show that an auto assembly plant is safe for workers during an epidemic. The burden of proof is on the owner of the plant. The US has a long history of sweatshop, factory and mine owners coercing employees to work in dangerous conditions. Elon telling his employees to expose themselves to COVID to keep his plant running on time is keeping in that shameful tradition.
https://www.google.com/search?ei=vM-5XtjsIJLM-gTIm6CIDw&q=ca...
Ahh so we have traded serfdom to the king, for serfdom to the majority.. I thought the idea was for individual rights, and those rights were to be security from the mob mentality of the majority.
we have a Constitutional REPUBLIC for a reason..., and one of those reasons is to prohibit the government from doing some things even if the will of the majority demands it
>>It's almost certain that our early shelter in place orders (from our elected government) has saved hundreds of lives.
There are a many of reasons why CA may be doing better than NYC, down to the type of housing, type of public transport, the weather, and 100's of other factors unrelated to the lockdown. It is far far far from certain that the locked played the key role.it is very dangerous to just cede that fact to them with out debate or analysis of data
>>The reality is that, for many Americans, our boss exercises more power over our lives than our government.
only if you allow it. a Boss does not have the power to put you in a cage, or even kill you for disobeying, the most they can do it cause temporary economic harm, the fact that you discount that difference or even elevate the denial of a paycheck over that of the monopoly of violence is crazy to me.
No your boss does not have more power over your life than the government, No where near it.
>>The burden of proof is on the owner of the plant.
I believe they have done that, and the workers can choose to come back or not. We have have choices in life, unlike mandates by government which are backed by men with guns who will kill you if you defy them, Elon has no power to force anyone back into that factory, they can all choose to stay home.
Further to compare today's employment with the past of coal mines, and sweatshops either shows your ignorance of those times, or is purposefully disingenuous, Coal mines of those days for example paid their employees in Company Script, and they lived in company housing, there is no comparison to that and today's economic reality and doing so just makes you look foolish and/or ignorant