The Best Intentions

I think that the intentions of psychologist Pamela Paresky and sociologist Bradley Campbell as expressed in their New York Times op-ed are good. Here’s their conclusion:

Solving the complex problems of the pandemic cannot be accomplished without considering ideological opponents’ views. We just don’t know how long lockdowns can serve as a life-saving, medically induced coma, and at what point they become lethal. Partisans need to replace “us versus them” thinking with the intellectual humility necessary to get the best thinking from political opponents.

Blame and recrimination are certainly common responses in pandemics. But they’re also counterproductive. Those who fall on the safetyism side of the spectrum are not fascists, and those who fall on the anti-saftetyism side are not human sacrificers.

If politicians would reject the tribalism of partisanship and do the hard job of listening — with open-mindedness and curiosity — to those with whom they disagree, we’d stand a much better chance of protecting both lives and livelihoods from not only the effects of the pandemic, but the effects of our responses to it.

What they don’t seem to recognize is that there’s good money to be made from demonizing your political opponents. Not to mention the power. You’ll never get rid of the “tribalism of partisanship” without changing the incentives.

7 comments… add one
  • Guarneri Link

    Bullshit. The total lockdown had, for any thinking person, the chance to do its supposed work for only 2-3 weeks. You didn’t need to be an epidemiologist, in fact much better not to be, to understand that. You just needed to be a non-comatose or ideologically driven observer.

    The empirical evidence is in. Game over.

  • steve Link

    The empirical evidence has shown that the lockdowns have had a positive effect, here and everywhere else in the world. It looks like we might get a second chance to test it out.

    Steve

  • steve Link

    “Limbaugh is among the highest-paid radio figures. In 2018, Forbes listed his earnings at $84.5 million.”

    Lots of money.

  • Guarneri Link

    No it doesn’t, steve. It shows it to be a third or fourth order effect.

    And it shows the costs to outweigh the benefits by multiples.

  • Andy Link

    The problem is that the goals are changing. The original reasoning for the lockdowns – which I supported – was to “bend the curve” to manage health care capacity. That succeeded.

    Now many people seem to have forgotten that and want to maintain the lockdowns to prevent anyone from dying, minimize infections to the greatest extent possible, or because of some vague desire about preventing a second wave.

    The reality is than any policy is going to have tradeoffs and those tradeoffs need to be recognized. And if the goals are constantly changing then it becomes difficult to plan and implement a coherent set of actions. And, it shouldn’t have to be said, but apparently it does, you have to plan and make policy in the world as it exists and not some ideal world in one’s head.

    That latter consideration is one reason why I’ve been very impressed with our Governor here in Colorado because he understands the limitations of state government authority and plans and implements the state’s response accordingly.

  • steve Link

    “That latter consideration is one reason why I’ve been very impressed with our Governor here in Colorado because he understands the limitations of state government authority and plans and implements the state’s response accordingly.”

    It sounds like someone might be committing leadership. In most states we have followership on the part of the governors. The governors figure out what their base wants, the ones who vote in primaries, then that is what they do.

    I would agree that the original goal was to bend the curve so that we didnt overload the medical system. However, I think too many people got fixed on that nice bell shaped curve. It went up quickly and then down quickly, at the same rate. What we have seen is the rapid rise, but a long plateau. No one planned for that. I dont think anyone really knows what to do since we haven’t seen this before. So some places are having faster openings and others slower. (OK, Drew is the exception. He does know exactly what to do and what will happen.)

    Steve

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    On the bright side; it seems Trump was right, “Coronavirus will just go away”….

    I don’t think I heard a single mention about coronavirus on the local news tonight.

    My state looks like they will abandon the benchmark based reopening they are on and reopen everything as long as businesses take “preventative” measures to prevent spread.

Leave a Comment