Psychopath Diary – A call to Adventure.

MorganLeave a comment

Anyone who knows me well knows that I love Korean dramas. To me they are the ultimate escape and are preferable to anything in english. Well… my taste has become more discerning over the years but I give my Korean dramas more of the benefit of the doubt compared to american TV. I think it is because I know there are cultural differences and I also have never lived in Korea so there could be patently false and ludicrous scenarios that if they were set in the US would totally annoy me but don’t annoy me as much so I’m able to get absorbed in to the stories and characters more easily. I have acquired decent taste though so if anyone asked (no one has – haha!) I could give them a definitive list of really well done shows that any English speaker with an open mind would like.

One such show that I watched recently was definitely not the best K-Drama I’ve ever seen – I would give it a solid 7.8. BUT it was entertaining and it made me think a lot about myself, life in general, stoicism philosophy that I’ve been reading lately… it spoke to me on a unique level. Psychopath Diary is a dark comedy about an annoyingly timid office worker (Yoon Shi Yoon). He’s the ultimate victim – and he knows it and hates himself for it. If you have ever had depression or know anyone who has you will relate to his self loathing and the lack of fight he has to stand up for himself and go after what he wants in life. The first episode is a series of unfortunate events that make you so mad at the injustice and his lack of ability to fight it which culminates in him standing on the edge of a building trying to get the courage to jump.

Now here’s where it gets good and you need to start your suspense of disbelief: after his lack of courage (or more positively – finding his will to live) to kill himself he then witnesses a murder by a serial killer (Park Sung Hoon) but immediately loses his memory after he gets in an accident. One of the clues he has about who he is – is the serial killer’s diary which is in his possession (while witnessing the murder shit happens). He of course reads this diary where the killer has recorded in painstaking and gory detail all of the horrific murders he has committed and his utter contempt for human life. Believing this diary is his he returns to his day to day life fighting a battle of trying to reconcile his timid and sensitive personality with his belief that he is actually a dangerous murderer who only uses people around him to his own ends. This gives him the confidence to stand up to people that in reality need to be stood up to. He even gains popularity because he has the confidence to speak up and talk to his peers and superiors with an amount of guts and cleverness that he believes is in his capacity as a dangerous psychopath who has to navigate the world in order to hide how evil he truly is. (Then there’s 15 more episodes about who the real killer is, he finds out he’s not a murderer… etc etc. It was funny I recommend it!)

After thinking about this concept for a few days I realized: that the amnesia and reading the psychopath’s diary was a ‘call to adventure’ and in fact that the whole show is a Hero’s Journey archetype. It is a disruptive jolt that takes this character out of his mundane life. The consequences of all his actions are now heightened and it takes him on an unexpected journey where he meets helpers and villains along the way that change him fundamentally as a person.

Reflecting on my own life I am jealous of the character. I can relate to the character in the first episode to some extent: cognizant of my anxieties, my flaws, and infuriated by the lack of progress that I perceive I have made in some areas. The self loathing and subsequent depression can be a cycle that is difficult to get out of. I have been so low that brushing my teeth seems like a victory. So imagine being in that state of mind and then trying to rally to stand up to oppressive forces in the office, lose 30 lbs, or get out of an unhealthy relationship! When clean teeth is an accomplishment, ‘living your best life’ or other meaningless bumper style affirmations make you more depressed. My best life? In this life?

But what about a ‘call to adventure’! Those three words make me feel excited. How can a person manufacture their own personal psychopath diary? Do you really have to wait until you’re at the end of your emotional tether and witness a gruesome murder scene then get amnesia in order to grow as a person? I’ve tried to motivate myself to change and be more disciplined and focused for years. I’ve never been at peace with myself and have always wanted to improve. The fatal mistake I have made though is looking at the finished product of what I wish I was and then analyzing how I don’t measure up. That’s not a call to adventure. That’s just a miserable goal and a delusion that if only I was thinner, prettier, more interesting, richer… then I wouldn’t be unhappy. A call to adventure is just that: A call! Can you manufacture that call to adventure and take action in your life? And if so what would it be?

See – K dramas are great. Hit me up if you want my top 10 list – I need to go brush my teeth.

US 3rd Party Disillusionment – The Libertarian Party

Morgan, , , , 1 Comment

I can’t say that I’m highly disillusioned because I didn’t have a lot of hope for the libertarian party to begin with. But I decided to try and get involved last year after seeing the then chair of the LP Nick Sarwark debate comedian and podcast host Dave Smith at the Soho forum. I was so appalled at the lack of adherence to libertarian principles that the chair demonstrated. After this debate Dave encouraged his listeners to join the party and get involved in the Mises Caucus so that there would be more grass roots activists voting in leaders and supporting candidates who were truly aligned with libertarian principles (not just washed up republican party drop outs): freedom of association, private property rights, and the non aggression principle. In particular the candidate that Dave Smith endorsed was Jacob Hornberger. Definitely a committed and principle person even if he doesn’t have a lot of political gravitas. So I joined and tried to get involved, started donating to the Mises Caucus but joined too late to become a voting delegate. I attended the CA state convention in order to see what it would be like and I can’t say that it was an inspiring experience. A highlight was seeing a pet ferret being walked in a harness. In the recent National convention the Mises Caucus made some gains but the candidates supported for party chair and presidential candidate lost.

The strategy of the libertarian party for many years has been to entice tired and washed up republicans to run as their candidates and to appeal to disaffected left wingers who cared a lot about legalizing marijuana. In fact the strongest libertarian to have run in recent memory who was able to persuasively and passionately speak about libertarian ideals and hold up a mirror to the establishment was a republican – Ron Paul. People like Sarwark and many of the libertarians in the party seem to have disdain for Ron Paul and the people that like him i.e. members of the public who could be a solid voting block for local and national candidates. They make the same mistakes that republicans have made for decades: instead of standing up for their principles and fighting hard for the policies they supposedly believe in they are frightened by the character attacks from the opposition. If someone on the left calls you a racist and homophobic bigot then it must be true right? One thing that Trump has proven time and time again is that character attacks only become assassinations when you let them. An additional challenge for the LP is a lack of talent and funding – which I believe is not just a result of the two party domination but of the feckless leadership and bitter infighting of party operatives. My experience at the CA state convention showed that anyone with true talent would be completely off put by the lack of organization and the ridiculous antics that I witnessed.

Case in point recently is the bland new LP presidential candidate Jo Jorgensen who has been doing what she probably thinks is necessary virtue signalling by tweeting out #blacklivesmatter – taking on the hashtag of a marxist political movement. She’s so bland that when she was nominated she tweeted asking if she should make her campaign slogan “I’m With Her” since Hilary no longer needed it. She also tweeted about BLM that could (and in fact might actually be) a Hilary Clinton tweet:

Meanwhile Sarwark and the LP have been tweeting saying that if you question what this actually means and how this can be part of the libertarian ethos – you are probably racist! This is a strange combination of the destructive tactics that republicans and democrats have been using: democrats – if you disagree with specific views and statesments you are a bigot, and republicans – before I tell you what I think I want to clarify first that I am not in any way a bigot and I am willing to use your definitions and slogans in order to not be cast this way. This is destructive to your own ability to persuade and argue your position as well as destructive to political discourse in general. Dave Smith & Michael Malice did a great job of taking down her and the party down in their recent podcasts together. Kind of hilarious to me is Sarwark white-splaining to black libertarian Kmele Foster on twitter:

also listen to Kmele on this podcast here: https://reason.com/podcast/kmele-foster-black-lives-matter-is-hostile-towards-free-markets-and-capitalism/

Sarwark spent a lot of his time as chair alienating and snarking at influential libertarian commentators like Dave Smith and Tom Woods who have broad audiences that have the potential to be a good sized donation – activist – and voting block. All things a political party needs in order to fight for the candidates and policies that they believe in. If Sarwark really cared about libertarianism and the liberty movement he wouldn’t be 1. adopting the terms and narratives used by left wing activists and 2. fighting in public with super smart and well spoken people like Dave Smith and Kmele Foster (who btw both look great on TV and have actual personalities). The new party chair is also so bland I don’t even feel like mentioning him.

The libertarian party is doomed in its current direction to stay irrelevant. Minority movements can and DO influence the main stream political parties when they are led by well spoken, principled, passionate, strategic and smart people. Black Lives Matter knows this! The Me Too people know this! Fringe groups like this sway the culture because most people don’t pay close attention and listen for catch phrases that make them feel good. And without any opposition to the catch phrases – ‘silence is violence’ etc etc the liberty movement looks to be completely sidelined and stalled.

My questions now are:

  1. How could a liberty focused activist group hold the same kind of political power that Black Lives Matter does?
  2. How do individuals in the US hold on to their own freedoms and effectively stand up with other like minded individuals against current tides in our society that threaten our freedoms (cancel culture, heavy taxation and regulations, moral panics, big tech censorship just to name a few)?
  3. Is there an optimistic spin about this current state of affairs?

Stephen Blackwood – a 21st Century Gentleman.

MorganLeave a comment

I was re-listening to this really interesting and at the end very inspirational podcast where Stephen Blackwood interviews Douglas Murray today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBr7m4lFE6I. One of my new life goals (OK let’s face it, more of a fantasy than a goal) is to have a conversation where I sound half as erudite and wise as these two. They talk about Douglas Murray’s book The Madness of Crowds and then the discussion turns to Murray’s advice for young people trying to make their way in the world. He also talks about his favorite works of art – literature, poetry, and music that are meaningful to him.

I came across Stephen Blackwood over a year ago. I heard him talk about the Consolation of Philosophy and it was a slap in the face, or a harsh reminder about how inadequate my education is. I have a BA and MA in political philosophy and I was in an advanced program in high school but I never had heard of this book. That’s only partially my fault right? The high school program was overrated. I bought The Consolation of Philosophy and read it as well as the book that Blackwood wrote where he analyzes the structure of the original work in latin and how there is meaning and intention behind how it would have sounded if it was read aloud.

My almost manic purchasing (don’t go on Amazon when you have insomnia) in the last year of books of poetry, literature, philosophy and history can be traced back to the moment of “Who the heck is Boethius?!” It was really a chain reaction – it leads you down infinite rabbit holes of things you have never read and/or didn’t even know existed. Reading more intense history books has also put me off documentaries in general. They are superficial you actually don’t learn much of anything. But I understand why – I still haven’t made it through the first book by Stephen Kotkin on Stalin. The time and attention it takes to comprehend the level of detail in a book like this can’t be underestimated. I have been reading this book slowly while churning my way through others.

But back to Stephen Blackwood… he makes me think that time travel exists. He’s an intellectual from a time gone by – as if he walked out of one of those BBC adaptations of Bleak House. He would have walked cap in hand to ask the Vicar for his smart and steady daughter’s hand in marriage. She would have been a sensible but intellectually lively woman who… oh wait now it’s getting more Jane Austen and less Charles Dickens. Just watch this conversation he had with Jordan Peterson last year if you doubt me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_Aiv6xJxkE.

You’re welcome!

Check your Social Media Privilege

Morgan, 3 Comments

Seeing so many people post the same things on social media lately I have been thinking about how people come to decisions on what to post, and what do they get out of it? Some of the more recent posts that really made me think about this are the black squares on instagram and other posts that say things along the lines of “Silence is Violence” or sudden lists that have appeared to tell us what businesses are owned by black people we should support, what movies to watch, or books to read. I won’t call anyone out specifically but this mass posting by everyone is strange and disturbing to me – Because why feel the need to give your opinion!? Would you have recommended the books on the list before knowing the race of the person who wrote it? Is it actually a good restaurant that you are recommending?

I am convinced from the quality and repetition of what I see that 99.9% people do not have well researched and thought out views that are actually worth hearing. What difference do people think they are really making!? Even if you are sincerely wanting to make a difference and you are making some kind of an impact please don’t think you are being brave and righteous. Speaking out in this way when almost everyone on your friend list is doing so is pretty much the LEAST brave thing you could possibly do. This is also not a new phenomenon. People have been virtue signaling in social media for a long time and before there was social media we just did it in other ways to fit in with our social groups and/or make people around us think that we are decent people. Social media is just the new street corner.

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.” Matthew 6:5

What makes it irksome to me is how pompous it is to think that being outraged by a certain topic and then expressing that outrage on a social media platform is evidently seen as a moral virtue in itself. Is it just me who doesn’t understand why being offended and seething with moral outrage is something to be proud of? It really doesn’t matter what the topic is and I think people all across the political & social spectrum practice outrage on any hot topic of the day: ‘Me Too’, the Kavanaugh hearings, Trump, Covid, Brexit, kids in cages, the list is never ending. It is common to see people post statements such as: “If you are friends with me on here and you support [insert person/political statement/belief], please unfriend or unfollow me. I do not want to be associated with [insert preferred slur here – mysoginist, rape apologists, racists, fascists, etc]”. This kind of mentality is seen from national journalists and commentators all the way to family members and friends. If I disagree with someone’s facebook post should I (can I) just not show up to Christmas this year? The lack of wanting to understand why someone might disagree and blasting out that level of moral outrage and self righteousness (and the massive amount of it that happens online that spurs corporate america and big politics to be swayed and has created the cancel culture we live in today) is disappointing and fascinating to see at the same time.

I have created a checklist for anyone who thinks they might want to be more thoughtful about what they put out online and who actually cares about the quality of public discourse. You might want to ask yourself these questions before posting:

** disclaimer: I am a free speech absolutist so I don’t advocate for any censorship by private or public entities. **

  1. Have I researched this topic fully? Or did I just read a couple of articles that popped up on my phone (or worse did you just hear someone on youtube or cable news rant about it)? This is really hard to do because our media outlets are so agenda driven (this sketch is funny because it’s true: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiYZ__Ww02c).
  2. What are the philosophical and ethical underpinnings behind my beliefs? Why do I believe this so strongly? What are the counter arguments and why might a reasonable person disagree with me?
  3. Examine your motives. Do people need to know my opinion and hear/feel my outrage? Will my social media post cause a change in the world that will increase compassion/love/understanding in my social and familial circle where I have the most impact? Have I examined my motivations for wanting to share my opinions?
  4. Do my private actions live up to my public proclamations?

I would like to think that following the guide above would help people to develop their opinions in a more intellectual and reasoned way. Patient investigation and self reflection mixed with the willingness to change our minds and appreciate nuance could help the quality of discourse to such a degree that we could actually hold the media and public figures accountable for the way they spread division in order to distract us from the corruption and follies that they engage in and that really hurt ordinary people on so many levels.

Please continue to share whatever you want on any platform just as I am doing on this blog. I am aware that my criticism and judgement doesn’t make me a better person or more moral than anyone else. What truly matters is how I treat people around me and the choices I make when no one is looking – which by its very nature is not something that can be shared on a blog or any social media account.

“Rare is the life which remains ordinate even in privacy. Anyone can take part in a farce and act the honest man on the trestles: but to be right-ruled within, in your bosom, where anything is licit, where everything is hidden – that’s what matters. The nearest to that is to be so in your home, in your everyday actions for which you are accountable to nobody; there is no striving there, no artifice.”

Michel De Montaigne, On Repenting.

“The World Needs More Blogs!” anon.

Morgan, Leave a comment
Sybil questioning why people bother writing blogs

To paraphrase Jordan Peterson, writing and dialogue with others is helpful because most of us are not good at thinking. I think a lot – quantity over quality. Sometimes I have to admit I have really good ideas, but most of the time my mind plays the same old tired loop of thoughts that at best are confused fragments of different things I’ve been listening to and reading about and I’m trying to make sense of. At worst they are soul sucking thoughts that obsess over jealousies, loss and various fears. Some of the best ideas I’ve had have come as a result of dialogue with others, or in the process of writing out (and at least getting out of my system) some of the hair brained ones I come up with when I’m on my own. I also have a very long ambitious reading list as a result of reflecting back on the inadequacies of my education.

So I thought I’ll start writing down reflections on life and my ridiculous reading list on a blog. If I know some people might actually read it I will have the motivation to read and write about (and potentially proofread) my thoughts. You never know people might comment or talk to me about some of these posts.

Currently I am reading some essays written by Michel de Montaigne first published in 1580. So far I am loving how thought provoking they are and how accessibly they are written – so much writing from long ago is hard to read so I can never really picture the writers as actual people. Apparently in his middle age he took up the habit of isolating himself so that he could write because of what the book calls “melancholia”. As an introvert with a flair for drama (at least in my head) and depressive episodes I can relate. The topics of the essays he wrote are wide ranging and hilarious sometimes. For example I learned that before the discovery that women had eggs in their bodies people thought that reproduction was caused by the intermingling of female and male sperm. And if women didn’t have children this unused sperm would result in lumps in their bodies. Huh? So even though some of the ‘science’ and metaphors used are not always applicable there were lines in his essay titled On Educating Children I could relate to as I am publishing my musings on the internet.

In this essay he is writing to a friend of his named Madame Diane de Foix who is pregnant and wanted his advice on how to raise and bring up her incoming child. I first loved this part: “I can see – better than anyone else – that these writings of mine are no more than the ravings of a man who has never done more than taste the outer crust of knowledge… and who has retained only an ill-formed generic notion of it: a little about everything and nothing about anything…” This really sums up how I feel about my own knowledge and education – which is scary for someone as opinionated as myself.

He goes on to say about his own intelligence and abilities: “My concepts and judgement can only fumble their way forward, swaying, stumbling, tripping over; even when I have advanced as far as I can, I never feel satisfied, for I have a troubled cloudy vision of lands beyond, which I cannot make out.” He then compares his own abilities to those of the greats like Cicero and Epicurus as totally lacking and embarrassing. Not only am I nowhere near those greats I cannot compare myself to Montaigne as far as knowledge or writing ability. The same fundamental problems about human existence have to be wrestled with by every new generation and reading his thoughts is comforting just like reading Ecclesiastes is to me in a weird way. There is nothing new under the sun.

So like Montaigne I will not guarantee anything profound or ground breaking, learned or especially well thought out. But also like him, in my self made seclusion I need to write a blog. And who knows – maybe someone needs to read it.

Why I am a Libertarian

MorganLeave a comment
“Statue of Liberty” by be11boy is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

I have been thinking a lot about why libertarian thought is appealing to me and why I embrace these philosophies. Libertarian principles make up a bulk of my worldview so it is hard for me to not make this a personal answer. I can trace my attraction to these philosophies to some themes in my upbringing.

Firstly the biblical notion that God gave man free will – including the freedom to make decisions against his laws and instructions. The freedom to sin and to hurt other people and ourselves. The question of why God did this – why couldn’t he just make a world without suffering is one that was hard for me to comprehend. Secondly it is probably my temperament: I always hated being told what to do – and if I didn’t agree with instructions (even from someone in authority that I respected) I would usually try and find a way to not do it or somehow get out of it.

As a young adult I was heavily influenced by philosophers such as Kierkegaard and Nietzsche who questioned authority, were fiercely individualistic and made me realize how alone I was. I have felt alone before God, alone in society, and when I face my death I will be alone. I alone am held accountable for my actions in life – I can try and blame others or circumstances for my failings – but the idea of doing that on my death bed is not an inspiring vision to me. The fact that I am alone and as an individual am responsible for my actions is scary but also empowering. If I as an individual can do something different and better – that I have power in any situation.

Now as a more experience adult I have also come to value community and relationships much more which has influenced my existentialist outlook as well. I know that while I might be judged individually to determine what circle or heaven or hell I reach – during our lives we are not alone and we have the power to affect people and processes around us in profound ways just as they affect us. I have been helped my family and friends at times of crisis, by thoughtful words and gifts that have been a shining light in moments of darkness. These were not governmental programs or public policies, but people who reached out and cared about me out of love and compassion. I have also been helped in many areas by people and services that I have bought such as personal trainers, books and classes, medical providers and so on. They make a living out of providing services that are meaningful and helpful to people. Then of course there are the organizations that have employed me and have given me the opportunity to build my skills and the value that I bring as an employee has risen exponentially.

Living as an individual within a society is fraught with difficulty, pain, loneliness, but also encouragement, meaning and joy. A prerequisite for making the most out of what nature and nurture has given us then has to be freedom. The definition of freedom in this sense is as was described by J.S. Mills among others as: “liberty of tastes and pursuits… doing as we like… without impediment from our fellow creatures, so long as what we do does not harm them.” There are others who dispute this definition of freedom who espouse positive freedom theories and that dismiss this theory as being selfish and not caring about someone’s community or society as a whole. I believe this is a shallow reading of philosophers like Mills, Mises and Hayek among many others.

Human beings need the freedom to build the societal bonds that are meaningful to us. The freedom to do the right thing or the wrong thing, to care for other people and let people care for us. To be productive and be able to freely trade with others who find our goods or services productive. We are not born equal in our nature and nurture abilities – but we all have equal worth as human beings. Therefore we must as a rule fight against forces that restrict our freedom as human beings no matter what the purported reason: for the public good, public safety, or economic security. These are terms often used by governments and private organizations alike in order to restrict our freedom for another end.

I embrace libertarian principles because the more freedom we have as individuals to act without impediment, we have the freedom to choose the economic, social, and charitable goals that give meaning not only to our own lives but also to the lives of others.

The libertarian party – which I am now a member of… is a hot mess.

I am hopeful that there is a potential for a new generation of Americans to care about freedom over shiny but anti-liberty ideals such as ‘equity’ and the state employed at every level to help people achieve supposed security and equality. That it might be possible to red pill young people who are growing up and realizing that the statist policies that are supposedly there to help them make it hard for them to get a job, open their own business, buy a house, and start their own families. If the principles of libertarianism could be seen as a way for individuals to be empowered to stand up for themselves and the people in their communities against forces who want to keep people enslaved in victimhood mentalities and in restrictive and costly regulations that mostly harm and not help the average person.

I hope it is possible for the liberty movement to unite behind an inspirational and empowering message, that helps individuals to see how they and their families will be helped by the roll back of the state.

Flip the Switch

MorganLeave a comment
‘O look, look in the mirror,
   O look in your distress:
Life remains a blessing
   Although you cannot bless….” from As I Walked out one Evening by W.H. Auden

I jokingly told my mom a couple days ago: “I decided to just not be depressed anymore. Did you know that you can just decide NOT to be depressed?” She laughed but also seemed relieved that at least I was making a joke. I’ve been severely depressed on and off for about nine years. I’ve been on and off medications, spent a lot of money on therapy and focused a lot of my time and money on self help interventions – and a lot of it has helped but I still feel depressed more days than not.

The last year or so have been especially tough. I’ve been focused on my goal of getting married. This is one life goal where only a certain amount of your ability to achieve it is under your control. And what is within your control is not easy to deal with. This is what the dating coach who I hired and spent thousands on teaches his students. On a group dating coaching call last week I asked him, “My mood is so low and I’m just going through the motions of dating. I can’t get excited about anyone I’m meeting and going on dates with.” Well, I asked him something along those lines… it must have sounded much more pathetic because he started off with a caveat that he can’t give me therapy etc. He did point out though that there is a possibility that I meet someone good and it will help me to feel more positive about the situation. Whereas doing nothing means I’m not making any progress. Point taken. So I continue on with what what I’m doing. I met a nice guy for a first date and we have a second date planned this weekend.

I do feel better – but not because of the dates. I feel better because I re-listened to a chapter in a book called “Feeling Good”. The chapter is about being how not to be dependent on love and affirmation that you get from this type of relationship to be happy. I had listened to this chapter before but I didn’t like it because it hit too close to home – I didn’t want to accept that I had to give this up. I wanted to find a love relationship that would make me happy. And when I finally met a solid person last year that I started to feel real love for I was happy – but not for long. This person ultimately didn’t reciprocate my feelings but also didn’t push me away. I know he liked me but didn’t want to be in a relationship and hadn’t even thought of the possibility of a potential future with me. When I cut things off with him I was devastated. My happiness – it was gone. I based my mood on the existence of having a relationship and on this one in particular. I never did that when I was young. But in my early 30s I have the fear of not being able to have my own family so the emotional stakes have become high. But the perceived high stakes – that is my problem – and this is what really is within my control.

Listening to that chapter again I had a quiet epiphany. I can have happiness and joy without being in a relationship – it is such an easy thing to say. But I didn’t want to accept it. I wanted to have an intense relationship that was capable of making me happy in every way. So when I haven’t succeeded in this my sense of self worth and the loss that I felt was intense and long lasting. When I listened again with an open mind I felt a weight lift off my spirit, and I even started to feel a little excited: what can I do and plan for to bring joy and meaning to my life outside of a relationship? I started to question, if giving birth to my own children really the only goal that would make me happy? People with husbands and children also have depression and have all kinds of stress and drama. My life is free from a lot of that which I actually enjoy.

I still feel sad about the last relationship and I wish things were different. But then again, if I hadn’t gone through that I wouldn’t have had this epiphany at this time. And I finally start to feel hope for my future in general and also hope that I can one day fall in love again and with a person that will feel the same about me. Now for a person with chronic depression and an ingrained habit of fearing and expecting the worst – that is pretty great.

MH

Thoughts on Infringement on Liberty in times of Emergencies: COVID 19

MorganLeave a comment

 

EV3GSnvUEAAkFL6

Below are incomplete thoughts on topics around how the COVID situation is impacting the lives of people in the US and around the world. As information changes and experts are proven wrong or right I believe that there are principles that we should live by despite what the latest science says about the pandemic. These principles are valid no matter what the nature of this pandemic or any other major threat to public health and safety. It is apparent that in this current climate cool heads have not prevailed. Open and frank discussions not tainted by virtue signaling and partisanship (on both sides of the aisle) is largely not happening. Finger pointing and shaming with those who disagree with you is the norm.  

Safety vs. freedom?

We got this! & Government is not the only threat to personal liberty.  Our fellow citizens can infringe on our rights just as easily and in some cases make it even harder to defend ourselves against government interference. There are many mechanisms by which a person’s liberty can be infringed upon – and some may be more legitimate than others. I have the assumption that most people do not want to spread a disease to other people passively or actively. I also assume that close to 100% of people do not want to contract a disease. When knowledge of how to prevent catching a life threatening disease  by peer pressure or

Social Media Virtue Signalling: Since it has become taboo to post pictures of your ass overlooking a mountain panoramic (go on a hike and people will die!) or next to a waterfall… or a selfie of yourself looking cute with a protest sign at a ‘believe all women’ march the latest feel good virtue signalling is looking like a hot mess on your couch congratulating yourself for saving lives. I want to go back to the days of the ass in tight yoga pants, or the cleavage holding a bouquet of wild flowers… at least they didn’t pretend they were LITERALLY saving lives.

Believe “Science” or Else…!  Why can’t individual businesses choose what they want to do? Why can’t consumers choose how they want to buy? There actually isn’t scientific consensus on whether or not a Shelter in Place is a better strategy vs. Voluntary Social Distance measures.

Federal vs. state vs. county vs. city: does it matter?? What validity is there to government enforcing personal sanitation habits in order to stop the spread of disease – does it matter at what level? There are many practices that avoid the spread of disease that it is impossible and would be immoral for any government to enforce. Does it really matter if your city government shuts down your business or the state? They are all an illegal over reach of government power. Not only are the policies reactionary and a ‘one size fits all’ solution that are catered to what might make more sense in the densely populated urban areas,

The Hypocrisy of the Elites. There are many examples of those advocates of social distancing and societal shut down – including those currently in power – violating the rules that they want everyone else to live by despite the devastating consequences.

  • Mayor of Chicago – she got a haircut
  • Illinois Governor & his family – the wife traveled to her $12 million estate in Florida to avoid Sheltering in Place in Illinois.
  • Barack Obama – Went out golfing while Michelle Obama filmed a PSA about sheltering in place.
  • Neil Ferguson in the UK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnGoPvOB0EI

Politicians as our saviors. Thank God we have Governor Newsom, (believer in science), to make sure that not only can many Californians not work, we cannot go outside and enjoy public spaces such as beaches and trails – as all of the evidence points to people who are healthy and enjoy exercising and spending time outdoors are likely to spread COVID in these locations and subsequently cause the deaths of their elderly and sickly relatives. Once we know the cause of how a virus is spread we can all be empowered to take care of ourselves and our families. We can and people do change their lifestyle habits in order to not contract diseases. People buy and wear condoms on their own without government enforcement. People who care about personal hygiene and not catching colds already did wash their hands, stay home from work if they were sick in order not to get others sick. The only viable government role in a pandemic or enforcing any public health safety measure would be to investigate the causes of an outbreak, mobilize specific and narrow actions to respond to and prevent  Prevent a disease from reaching a population from external threats (actions like shutting the border from specific regions, and stopping or testing those entering the countries borders whether they are immigrating or just visiting).