Civil liberties in a post pandemic society.
Our general idea of civil liberties involves the concept of
being free to do certain things. For
example freedom of speech, freedom of movement within one’s country, freedom of
information, freedom to gather in groups and so on.
Unfortunately, with our subject we are trying to predict how
the world of civil liberties will emerge from the coronavirus pandemic right in
the middle of the pandemic with little or hardly any solid scientific facts and
information are available. But this does not mean we cannot think and discuss
the topic.
The key civil liberties problem these past few weeks (Mid February-April)
has been the issue of lockdown (stay at home orders). Some people object to the
lockdown because their freedom of movement and right to congregate with other
people has been taken away from them by a government dictate. We can safely
assume that these people are either misinformed or at the worst mischief
makers. These people clearly don’t have the capacity to distinguish between
protecting one’s life and that of others and the right to do what one feels
doing.
This means that this and future pandemics will have to be
managed on scientific criteria and not political ideology. Don’t forget that
the coronavirus pandemic happened right in the middle of the climate change
debate. And with a high dose of irony it took a deadly virus to demonstrate how
serious climate change is to humanity.
A more serious concern the coronavirus pandemic has created
is the fear for the economy, local and global economy, of failing to the extent
of creating a long term recession. Even at the time of writing, millions of
people have lost their jobs or income creating economic hardship for many
people. Some even worry what will happen to certain sectors in the short and
medium post pandemic terms: the aviation and tourist industries would be prime
victims.
What is also clear is that the economic welfare of people in
the world is as important and their healthcare. It is not sound policy to take
advantage of people in developing countries, who don’t have a voice to protect
themselves, since their wellbeing in a global economy is tied to our wellbeing.
For example in the 1980s we had the UK Acid Rain* scandal when emissions of
sulphur dioxide in the UK (due to coal burning) was affecting Scandinavian
countries; exploitation of the Amazon forest: Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima
Daiichi (2011) nuclear disasters: and of course the coronavirus. The point is
that natural or human made global disasters are not limited by national
boundaries and no one is naturally immune to the effects of nature.
For better or for worse, and no doubt to the chagrin of
politicians, the coronavirus pandemic has shifted social behaviour and social
restrictions based on scientific evidence and not political fiat. Evidence the
ideological nonsense of President Trump, and Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, at
the beginning of the pandemic and now: this should not be a surprise given both
share the same ideological dogma. It is clear that when and where politicians
tried to deal with a biological crisis (e.g. Chernobyl) by referring to
political dogma, their policies fatally failed. The most dangerous of such
dogma was the reckless British policy of “herd immunity” so much touted by the
British cabinet and Prime Minister. Today it is estimated that the UK will have
the highest death rate in Europe when this pandemic is over. Many argue that
this ideological failure delayed the lockdown policies.
Countries like New Zealand, Taiwan and Germany took decisive
action early in the pandemic to lockdown and test for the virus that paid off
with the limited death rate in these countries. But the problem of civil
liberties after the pandemic started well before the coronavirus pandemic even
mutated into a dangerous virus for human.
Civil liberties start with the role played by politicians in
protecting people especially in law and order and economic wellbeing. Today we
know that privatised healthcare including the supply chain are not conducive
with modern society. Mainly for two reasons, the first is that it is absurd to
burden businesses with moral decision making that involve the whole nation when
their model is profit motivation. Indeed, the philosophical idea behind the Hippocratic
Oath is “do no harm” for example see the Declaration of Geneva*: I WILL NOT USE
my medical knowledge to violate human rights and civil liberties, even under
threat.
And secondly it is morally unacceptable to allow private
companies to decide who gets medical treatment and who doesn’t. This is the
worst form of conflict of interest imaginable: profit vs doing no harm. And the
best work around of this dilemma is not having to decide who gets treated but
to offer treatment to those who need it.
I would expect that post coronavirus pandemic civil
liberties stand a good chance of being boosted by creating a movement towards
healthcare systems that provide the necessary care for free at the point of
need. Plus a demand for better equitable income distribution. Let us not forget
that the coronavirus proves extremely fatal when people are already compromised
with some underlying disease. So it makes no sense to withhold normal health
care treatment from people because of money and price and then go into spasms
of panic when we are hit with a life threatening disease such as the
coronavirus.
We also have to be clear and distinguish between providing
free health care at the point of need and managing such health care. The
advantage of this strategy is that this system would be managed by
professionally qualified people who are independent from the political system. Indeed,
standard Hippocratic Oaths emphasise the professional conduct of health carers
and the integrity of medical knowledge.
Some would ask how are we supposed to pay for this service?
It is well documented for example that the EU estimate that member states lose
one trillion Euros a year due to tax evasion and tax avoidance. Although health
care is expensive it is also an activity where there can be huge economies of
scale and efficiencies. Take the standard campaigns of flu vaccination: as a
cost the bill for such vaccines must be quite high but the benefits of limiting
flu incidences would pay off in the general population. And equally important any
competition in the profession is competition to improve the service and
treatment and not profits.
Another possible development in civil liberties post
pandemic is that people will demand that politicians are really held
accountable for their actions especially when they act from ideology or vested
conflict of interest and not objective criteria such as biological criteria. Holding
politicians to account is a civil liberties issue because our wellbeing and
economic standards depend on their decisions. Dr. A. Roberts* in a YouTube
lecture “Why Hitler Lost the War: German Strategic Mistakes in WWII” presents a
very strong argument that Hitler lost WW2 not because he was mad but because
his decisions were always based on his dogma or ideology of National Socialism.
Thus the protection of the Reich was constantly being compromised.
My approach to the topic of civil liberties post pandemic is
based on two arguments. The first is that our idea of civil liberties must now also
include what those in authority have to do for us. The idea that civil
liberties are things we are allowed to do is as useful to us as suing an 18th
and 19th centuries horse and cart to distribute goods from an
operation like Amazon. It is not enough we have the right to do something but
today the authorities must by their actions and policies guarantee such rights.
The second aspect of civil liberties post pandemic is that
our civil liberties would be better guaranteed if all aspects of society are
managed by people who are professionally trained in their technical fields.
This does not mean that mistakes and failures won’t happen but it does mean
that people and their methodology is open and transparent. Basically scientific
facts and methodology cannot be falsified and manipulated: any tampering with
reality would fail miserably.
Take care
Lawrence
: telephone/WhatsApp 606081813
:email philomadrid
*UK Acid Rain at Environpedia
http://www.enviropedia.org.uk/Acid_Rain/UK_Acid_Rain.php
Declaration of Geneva
*Dr. A. Roberts presents Why Hitler Lost the War: German
Strategic Mistakes in WWII.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5agLW7fTzBc
No comments:
Post a Comment