Why Don't You Just Care About People?
I have a real problem with a continuing conversation I've been having with someone (let's call him Bob) about this whole COVID-19 thing. And it's pissing me off.
In general I've always realized Bob does not share my civic ideals of people coming together for the common good. Instead, he leans toward that whole worry about your own profits and pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality that I detest on a very deep level. Policy is something I'm very interested in and passionate about, and I love hearing about different policy responses to society's pressing questions on sustainable development, education, energy efficiency, immigration reform, health care reform, etc. What I don't love is when we come to a place where we can't agree on what basic human decency is. Let me explain.
So here's the crux of the argument:
My general thoughts on governmental response to COVID-19 (as a big government liberal) -- The disease is spreading, kudos to the municipalities and states that have made the decision to shut down non-essential businesses. It's scary to think what's going to happen to jobs and the economy as a result, but they did what they had to do to address the issue as best they can.
Bob's general thoughts (as a wannabe libertarian who for some reason sees himself as entitled to a lot of things he hasn't worked for) -- We should be concerned the government is overstepping its rights. Telling me I can't go outside is infringing on my civil liberties. (Then he keeps going to Chipotle and 7 Eleven every other day for no goddamn reason.)
When asked what the response should be to COVID-19, he thinks we should just kind of let individuals make their own decisions about how to respond. Old/vulnerable folks can just stay in the house and try and separate themselves from young folks. (Never mind that this isn't possible/feasible for a lot of older/vulnerable people who depend on younger, healthier people.) Even that opinion is a step less extreme than his initial thought that the pandemic could be benefit the economy because older, nonworking people would die. Though Bob conceded he would not want his family or friends to die from COVID-19, it was a really hard leap for Bob to conceptualize why he should care about the family and friends of someone he doesn't know or understand why he should inconvenience himself by not going outside. (Bob is a young dude. If he gets COVID-19 he'll be fine, so he should be able to go outside like normal!)
And to cap it all off, Bob thinks this "debate" we're having is a perfectly legitimate one. As if it's comparable to the way he dislikes banana pudding but I love it. Disagreeing about desserts is one thing. Politics and policy is personal and it is most definitely a problem if someone with a college degree in Government can't find the bandwidth to figure out why he should care about anyone who hasn't been as fortunate as he has been.
In general I've always realized Bob does not share my civic ideals of people coming together for the common good. Instead, he leans toward that whole worry about your own profits and pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality that I detest on a very deep level. Policy is something I'm very interested in and passionate about, and I love hearing about different policy responses to society's pressing questions on sustainable development, education, energy efficiency, immigration reform, health care reform, etc. What I don't love is when we come to a place where we can't agree on what basic human decency is. Let me explain.
So here's the crux of the argument:
My general thoughts on governmental response to COVID-19 (as a big government liberal) -- The disease is spreading, kudos to the municipalities and states that have made the decision to shut down non-essential businesses. It's scary to think what's going to happen to jobs and the economy as a result, but they did what they had to do to address the issue as best they can.
Bob's general thoughts (as a wannabe libertarian who for some reason sees himself as entitled to a lot of things he hasn't worked for) -- We should be concerned the government is overstepping its rights. Telling me I can't go outside is infringing on my civil liberties. (Then he keeps going to Chipotle and 7 Eleven every other day for no goddamn reason.)
When asked what the response should be to COVID-19, he thinks we should just kind of let individuals make their own decisions about how to respond. Old/vulnerable folks can just stay in the house and try and separate themselves from young folks. (Never mind that this isn't possible/feasible for a lot of older/vulnerable people who depend on younger, healthier people.) Even that opinion is a step less extreme than his initial thought that the pandemic could be benefit the economy because older, nonworking people would die. Though Bob conceded he would not want his family or friends to die from COVID-19, it was a really hard leap for Bob to conceptualize why he should care about the family and friends of someone he doesn't know or understand why he should inconvenience himself by not going outside. (Bob is a young dude. If he gets COVID-19 he'll be fine, so he should be able to go outside like normal!)
And to cap it all off, Bob thinks this "debate" we're having is a perfectly legitimate one. As if it's comparable to the way he dislikes banana pudding but I love it. Disagreeing about desserts is one thing. Politics and policy is personal and it is most definitely a problem if someone with a college degree in Government can't find the bandwidth to figure out why he should care about anyone who hasn't been as fortunate as he has been.
Comments
Post a Comment