Plague Journal (43): On Quarantine-Fatigue

In my state the re-opening of the economy is going to happen with extreme caution, according to the latest directive from the governor. It seems too cautious to me, but the governor, like her counterparts around the country, claims it is "driven by the science," which is quickly becoming an annoying mantra similar to "abundance of caution," which was used incessantly in the early stages of this crisis.

See, the thing is, I don't want it to be driven exclusively by science. Putting the scientists in charge is always a bad idea. Not only because they're often wrong, but the power goes to their oversize heads. I want the decision-makers to factor science into their considerations, but to factor economics in as well. When does the damage to the economy (that is, to the economic well-being of people, of families, their ability to retain their jobs, to put food on the table, etc.) begin to outweigh the damage to be expected by the spread of the virus if the state re-opens? That seems a legitimate question, to say the least. In my state, where exactly seventeen people are in critical care for the COVID-19 virus, the current regime of extreme physical-distancing will be in place for another month at least, and many elements for months beyond that.

This article contains a nice synopsis of the conundrum: 

Negotiating between lives and livelihoods is not only a political and economic issue; it’s a philosophical one, with consequences that will resonate for years to come. “It’s really a terrible moral choice,” Boris Cyrulnik, a French psychologist and neurologist, told me. “Freedom will lead to death, while constriction and denying people their freedom will stave off death but will bring economic ruin.”

Ah well, these are only the idle musings of one who has no choice but to obey these directives. But it's clear that quarantine-fatigue is setting in for many. As for me, though I'll never join an anti-quarantine protest, I wouldn't want to live in an America where its citizens accepted restrictions on their freedom with a yawn. In politics, there should always be a pull to work against every push. Let economics pull against science's push, let love-of-freedom pull against love-of-safety's push. When there is only one, when there is only push, no pull, that quickly becomes tyranny. The frustrating and incessant push-pull of American politics is one sign of its health.