Hacker News Reader

Comment by dexen | Hacker News Reader

>Sweeping generalizations aren't really adding to the discussion here

That sentiment fits individualist views and policies, where it behooves us to hear out individuals and consider them on their individual merits.

However the view and policy discussed (limitations on individuals for common good) is explicitly a collectivist view and policy. Applying a sweeping generalization to a collectivist view and policy is fit and proper by the very nature of collectivism.

Edit: corrected a typo from "individuals" to "individualist".

View on HN

It is possible that people who support(ed) lockdowns are not motivated solely by marketing. The original quote calls out people, not views.

I disagree.

It is not possible because it is not possible to arrive at the stance via logic.

If not for the marketing campaign; certainly if not for the "original sin" of Italy's lockdown; we wouldn't even be speaking about this.

If coronavirus were highly transmissible ebola it would make sense. It's just not, most of us know tens or hundreds of people who've had it at this point (the UK has a _confirmed_ case rate of over 17%).

It's illogical to consider lockdowns when hospitals are overwhelmed by a highly contagious respiratory disease?

The original “lockdowns” were literally good for some businesses. Conventions and restaurants would have failed (they can’t survive on 10% attendance) but can’t get out of their vendor contracts without the government canceling for them.

Attendance dropped due to lockdowns and the fear campaign.

I was there, remember? The pubs were rammed, Boris started saying "don't do X", numbers decreased a lot, he said "we make this legal now", the world stopped.

I'm bored of debating this now so whatever, all I get online is a stream of trolls. Good luck.

No, attendance dropped in 2020 because nobody wants to get sick. This would be true if there was a flu pandemic as well.

(And because of travel bans. But the anti-lockdown people mostly support those because that’s the ironic position.)

This comment does not represent the reality I live in. Nice try.

I’m sorry you live in the UK. That must be very difficult for you.

In other places we weren’t nearly so concerned about shutting down pubs; actually the bad case that often happened in the US was leaving bars open (for tax revenue) but closing schools (because parents and teachers are more neurotic than bar goers).

Still I haven’t met a whole lot of people complaining they weren’t allowed to work. Our stimulus worked quite well there.

I don’t think lockdowns are necessary or reasonable in 2022 but at least, as someone temporarily in the UK, I’ll be able to get out of my local family trying to make me see some ridiculously quaint British thing called a “panto”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com