Coronavirus Thread of Doom

[Kory]

The Boss read yesterday that one of ocean cruise companies started taking bookings for late summer and the response is crazy intense. Between that and the flooding of restaurants that have opened in some states, it's just astonishing how goddamned clueless people are to their own health and those around them.

I've been wondering what will happen when they open restaurants back up. Wisconsin has had it pretty mildly compared to other states. We closed up fairly early and it feels like we're on our way to containment (mass testing and contact tracing).

Our current "Safer at Home" order expires on May 26th and our governor has said he sees no reason to extend it. This means we will enter phase 1 of reopening on May 27th. This includes restaurants.

Wisconsin has a very lefty governor. He's erred on the side of caution thus far (to the point that the GOP led legislature is currently suing him).

Getting back to my original point, I see a short period of caution, but then I think people will start dining in again. The governor just eased restrictions on strip mall retail (you need a separate entrance and you can only have 5 people in your store at one time) and it appears people are happily taking advantage.

I don't know. I do think we're going to have to adjust to a new normal that doesn't include locking everything down. I think it can be done in a manner that make sense and minimizes risk. I worry about the states that have just jumped back in, but I think Wisconsin's measured approach might work.

I've been reading since about early March that this will likely be normal until we have a vaccine. Periods of increased freedom interspersed with lockdown periods when infections spike. The problem is these fucks who act like 6 year olds when their moms tell them to clean their room. Keep your tyranny off my body and all that shit. The peril of fetishizing freedom is that people act like children. What the fuck ever happened to "freedom isn't free?"

[WestwayKid]

I think the success of opening back up will come down to the work done to get to that point. I was always under the impression that lock down was not meant to last forever. It was meant to last until we could test & trace enough people to move towards containment. My state has done that. We're not quite there, yet, but getting closer every day. On the other hand, it seems that there have been states that simply ran out of patience and just decided to throw the whole lock down thing out of the window.

I'm hoping the states that have done their homework will be able to open back up and contain the virus. Wisconsin is now offering free testing to anyone who wants to get it (which is awesome). The lines have been long (which is one reason I'm not getting myself tested).

[WestwayKid]

The Boss read yesterday that one of ocean cruise companies started taking bookings for late summer and the response is crazy intense. Between that and the flooding of restaurants that have opened in some states, it's just astonishing how goddamned clueless people are to their own health and those around them.

I've been wondering what will happen when they open restaurants back up. Wisconsin has had it pretty mildly compared to other states. We closed up fairly early and it feels like we're on our way to containment (mass testing and contact tracing).

Our current "Safer at Home" order expires on May 26th and our governor has said he sees no reason to extend it. This means we will enter phase 1 of reopening on May 27th. This includes restaurants.

Wisconsin has a very lefty governor. He's erred on the side of caution thus far (to the point that the GOP led legislature is currently suing him).

Getting back to my original point, I see a short period of caution, but then I think people will start dining in again. The governor just eased restrictions on strip mall retail (you need a separate entrance and you can only have 5 people in your store at one time) and it appears people are happily taking advantage.

I don't know. I do think we're going to have to adjust to a new normal that doesn't include locking everything down. I think it can be done in a manner that make sense and minimizes risk. I worry about the states that have just jumped back in, but I think Wisconsin's measured approach might work.

I've been reading since about early March that this will likely be normal until we have a vaccine. Periods of increased freedom interspersed with lockdown periods when infections spike. The problem is these fucks who act like 6 year olds when their moms tell them to clean their room. Keep your tyranny off my body and all that shit. The peril of fetishizing freedom is that people act like children. What the fuck ever happened to "freedom isn't free?"

We had a few protests in Wisconsin, but they have tapered off. There was one woman (who looked like a Karen) who had a sign that said "I want a haircut" and she became a bit of a viral sensation for a few weeks. She just personified the idiocy of some people. Yeah, it's been hard being patient. My job is connected to restaurants opening back up. It's on my mind, but I realize there is a right and a wrong way to do it. Wisconsin's measured approach has made sense and I feel like it's working.

[Kory]

The Boss read yesterday that one of ocean cruise companies started taking bookings for late summer and the response is crazy intense. Between that and the flooding of restaurants that have opened in some states, it's just astonishing how goddamned clueless people are to their own health and those around them.

I've been wondering what will happen when they open restaurants back up. Wisconsin has had it pretty mildly compared to other states. We closed up fairly early and it feels like we're on our way to containment (mass testing and contact tracing).

Our current "Safer at Home" order expires on May 26th and our governor has said he sees no reason to extend it. This means we will enter phase 1 of reopening on May 27th. This includes restaurants.

Wisconsin has a very lefty governor. He's erred on the side of caution thus far (to the point that the GOP led legislature is currently suing him).

Getting back to my original point, I see a short period of caution, but then I think people will start dining in again. The governor just eased restrictions on strip mall retail (you need a separate entrance and you can only have 5 people in your store at one time) and it appears people are happily taking advantage.

I don't know. I do think we're going to have to adjust to a new normal that doesn't include locking everything down. I think it can be done in a manner that make sense and minimizes risk. I worry about the states that have just jumped back in, but I think Wisconsin's measured approach might work.

I've been reading since about early March that this will likely be normal until we have a vaccine. Periods of increased freedom interspersed with lockdown periods when infections spike. The problem is these fucks who act like 6 year olds when their moms tell them to clean their room. Keep your tyranny off my body and all that shit. The peril of fetishizing freedom is that people act like children. What the fuck ever happened to "freedom isn't free?"

We had a few protests in Wisconsin, but they have tapered off. There was one woman (who looked like a Karen) who had a sign that said "I want a haircut" and she became a bit of a viral sensation for a few weeks. She just personified the idiocy of some people. Yeah, it's been hard being patient. My job is connected to restaurants opening back up. It's on my mind, but I realize there is a right and a wrong way to do it. Wisconsin's measured approach has made sense and I feel like it's working.

It takes a whole lot of faith in people doing the right thing (wearing masks, staying distant) which is something that I struggle with. I have a lot of cognitive dissonance tied up in being a leftist and having a pretty dim view of human nature.

[Dr. Medulla]

I have a lot of cognitive dissonance tied up in being a leftist and having a pretty dim view of human nature.

That doesn't make sense to me. Leftists, as a whole, are distinguishable from liberals and those on the right for their essential faith in human nature. Others are guided by a belief that we are bathed in Original Sin or that we are fundamentally selfish. The attitude towards organizing society and government stems from that—we need to be ruled by elites or power has to be spread about so that our selfishness doesn't impinge on others. The left, however, sees poor human behaviour as the result of environment or ideology, We are generally born good and innocent, but are taught to be cynical and antisocial. While I generally don't identify as a leftist because my problem with most ideology, I fit in there because I do believe that people are, at heart, good, and that whatever evil inclinations they have are largely the result of ideology (excluding stuff like mental illness and the like).

[Marky Dread]

I have a lot of cognitive dissonance tied up in being a leftist and having a pretty dim view of human nature.

That doesn't make sense to me. Leftists, as a whole, are distinguishable from liberals and those on the right for their essential faith in human nature. Others are guided by a belief that we are bathed in Original Sin or that we are fundamentally selfish. The attitude towards organizing society and government stems from that—we need to be ruled by elites or power has to be spread about so that our selfishness doesn't impinge on others. The left, however, sees poor human behaviour as the result of environment or ideology, We are generally born good and innocent, but are taught to be cynical and antisocial. While I generally don't identify as a leftist because my problem with most ideology, I fit in there because I do believe that people are, at heart, good, and that whatever evil inclinations they have are largely the result of ideology (excluding stuff like mental illness and the like).

Yep brilliantly put doc.

[Kory]

I have a lot of cognitive dissonance tied up in being a leftist and having a pretty dim view of human nature.

That doesn't make sense to me. Leftists, as a whole, are distinguishable from liberals and those on the right for their essential faith in human nature. Others are guided by a belief that we are bathed in Original Sin or that we are fundamentally selfish. The attitude towards organizing society and government stems from that—we need to be ruled by elites or power has to be spread about so that our selfishness doesn't impinge on others. The left, however, sees poor human behaviour as the result of environment or ideology, We are generally born good and innocent, but are taught to be cynical and antisocial. While I generally don't identify as a leftist because my problem with most ideology, I fit in there because I do believe that people are, at heart, good, and that whatever evil inclinations they have are largely the result of ideology (excluding stuff like mental illness and the like).

Well I did say it was a dissonance.

edit: by which I mean I hope it's true, but I have no way of knowing, and I don't see a lot of evidence for it.

[Dr. Medulla]

I have a lot of cognitive dissonance tied up in being a leftist and having a pretty dim view of human nature.

That doesn't make sense to me. Leftists, as a whole, are distinguishable from liberals and those on the right for their essential faith in human nature. Others are guided by a belief that we are bathed in Original Sin or that we are fundamentally selfish. The attitude towards organizing society and government stems from that—we need to be ruled by elites or power has to be spread about so that our selfishness doesn't impinge on others. The left, however, sees poor human behaviour as the result of environment or ideology, We are generally born good and innocent, but are taught to be cynical and antisocial. While I generally don't identify as a leftist because my problem with most ideology, I fit in there because I do believe that people are, at heart, good, and that whatever evil inclinations they have are largely the result of ideology (excluding stuff like mental illness and the like).

Well I did say it was a dissonance.

edit: by which I mean I hope it's true, but I have no way of knowing, and I don't see a lot of evidence for it.

Well, it's an article of faith. But it assumes that without an external authority—government, religion, ideology, etc—we'd turn on each other because we're basically savages. As opposed to government, religion, ideology, etc. teaching us that as justification to impose control. That's one of the things I dislike about so much post-apocalyptic fiction, like zombies and stuff. It has an essentially negative view of human nature, that if society (meaning external order) collapses, we all become monsters. I refuse to believe that human nature is that debased.

[Mimi]

Same, Doc.

[Kory]

I have a lot of cognitive dissonance tied up in being a leftist and having a pretty dim view of human nature.

That doesn't make sense to me. Leftists, as a whole, are distinguishable from liberals and those on the right for their essential faith in human nature. Others are guided by a belief that we are bathed in Original Sin or that we are fundamentally selfish. The attitude towards organizing society and government stems from that—we need to be ruled by elites or power has to be spread about so that our selfishness doesn't impinge on others. The left, however, sees poor human behaviour as the result of environment or ideology, We are generally born good and innocent, but are taught to be cynical and antisocial. While I generally don't identify as a leftist because my problem with most ideology, I fit in there because I do believe that people are, at heart, good, and that whatever evil inclinations they have are largely the result of ideology (excluding stuff like mental illness and the like).

Well I did say it was a dissonance.

edit: by which I mean I hope it's true, but I have no way of knowing, and I don't see a lot of evidence for it.

Well, it's an article of faith. But it assumes that without an external authority—government, religion, ideology, etc—we'd turn on each other because we're basically savages. As opposed to government, religion, ideology, etc. teaching us that as justification to impose control. That's one of the things I dislike about so much post-apocalyptic fiction, like zombies and stuff. It has an essentially negative view of human nature, that if society (meaning external order) collapses, we all become monsters. I refuse to believe that human nature is that debased.

I would guess that it would probably be some sort of fraction that settles into cooperating groups, and another fraction that gets involved in antagonistic tribalism. If we went from where we are now to a lack of external authority, I have a really hard time believing that toilet-paper hoarders are going to go quietly, even within a couple generations. There's a lot more to environment than external authority, and a part of me believes that resources would be a real bone of contention, not cooperation, when it came to that. However, as you say, I prefer the idea of that setup and do take it on faith (however risky) that it would work out in most cases. I just fret about the idea of Ford Tough dads passing down stories of the good old days of when the world was great, and having that implanted idea continue to create problems.

I think it's just easy to get caught up in how the world works and have a hard time seeing the good in anyone. I probably have more faith in people than I say, I just have that balanced with a lot of cynicism and bitterness based on personal experience and constant media.

[Dr. Medulla]

I would guess that it would probably be some sort of fraction that settles into cooperating groups, and another fraction that gets involved in antagonistic tribalism. If we went from where we are now to a lack of external authority, I have a really hard time believing that toilet-paper hoarders are going to go quietly, even within a couple generations. There's a lot more to environment than external authority, and a part of me believes that resources would be a real bone of contention, not cooperation, when it came to that. However, as you say, I prefer the idea of that setup and do take it on faith (however risky) that it would work out in most cases. I just fret about the idea of Ford Tough dads passing down stories of the good old days of when the world was great, and having that implanted idea continue to create problems.

I don't think you need to swing all the way to utopianism or a change that would be instantaneou. Animals are still competitive and territorial, so I'm under no illusions that it would be hippie cook-outs all the time. But it doesn't mean desperate efforts to control populations and prevent their existence and the like. We're social creatures at heart, not anti-social.

I think it's just easy to get caught up in how the world works and have a hard time seeing the good in anyone. I probably have more faith in people than I say, I just have that balanced with a lot of cynicism and bitterness based on personal experience and constant media.

And believe me, I get the cynicism. It's my default setting. That old line about scratching a cynic and you'll find a disillusioned idealist. But I'm actively working to be less cynical, to be more romantic, and to always remind myself that the problem is what people learn and experience, not who they really are or are capable of being. That most never are or will be is a tragedy, not truth playing itself out.

[Kory]

I would guess that it would probably be some sort of fraction that settles into cooperating groups, and another fraction that gets involved in antagonistic tribalism. If we went from where we are now to a lack of external authority, I have a really hard time believing that toilet-paper hoarders are going to go quietly, even within a couple generations. There's a lot more to environment than external authority, and a part of me believes that resources would be a real bone of contention, not cooperation, when it came to that. However, as you say, I prefer the idea of that setup and do take it on faith (however risky) that it would work out in most cases. I just fret about the idea of Ford Tough dads passing down stories of the good old days of when the world was great, and having that implanted idea continue to create problems.

I don't think you need to swing all the way to utopianism or a change that would be instantaneou. Animals are still competitive and territorial, so I'm under no illusions that it would be hippie cook-outs all the time. But it doesn't mean desperate efforts to control populations and prevent their existence and the like. We're social creatures at heart, not anti-social.

I think it's just easy to get caught up in how the world works and have a hard time seeing the good in anyone. I probably have more faith in people than I say, I just have that balanced with a lot of cynicism and bitterness based on personal experience and constant media.

And believe me, I get the cynicism. It's my default setting. That old line about scratching a cynic and you'll find a disillusioned idealist. But I'm actively working to be less cynical, to be more romantic, and to always remind myself that the problem is what people learn and experience, not who they really are or are capable of being. That most never are or will be is a tragedy, not truth playing itself out.

Yeah, it's good to talk about it once in awhile, I definitely get in my own head about it. My old guitarist actually used that "disillusioned idealist" line on me once, thinking I'd be offended, that I had some pride in being a cynic. I told him I wouldn't disagree with him and he seemed disappointed that he hadn't had a "gotcha" moment with me. I go through patches where I try to be more positive and then recessions. It's definitely a hills and valleys aspect of my life.

[Dr. Medulla]

Yeah, it's good to talk about it once in awhile, I definitely get in my own head about it. My old guitarist actually used that "disillusioned idealist" line on me once, thinking I'd be offended, that I had some pride in being a cynic. I told him I wouldn't disagree with him and he seemed disappointed that he hadn't had a "gotcha" moment with me. I go through patches where I try to be more positive and then recessions. It's definitely a hills and valleys aspect of my life.

Now that's funny. I guess some cynics are smug about it, but most desperately wish the world was better. I wish the left could recover its pre-Soviet Union romanticism, of encouraging dreamers. One of the wretched legacies of Marxism is reducing things t science-y jargon and perspectives. It encourages dogmatism and endless mostly unproductive criticism. Academia has been lethal to a more romantic left, obsessed with breaking things down rather than allowing people to put forward a dream to attain. A poverty of imagination really, despite all the pessimistic analysis and theorizing. I can find a lot of that stuff stimulating, but I find it socially malignant overall.

[revbob]

Yeah, it's good to talk about it once in awhile, I definitely get in my own head about it. My old guitarist actually used that "disillusioned idealist" line on me once, thinking I'd be offended, that I had some pride in being a cynic. I told him I wouldn't disagree with him and he seemed disappointed that he hadn't had a "gotcha" moment with me. I go through patches where I try to be more positive and then recessions. It's definitely a hills and valleys aspect of my life.

Now that's funny. I guess some cynics are smug about it, but most desperately wish the world was better. I wish the left could recover its pre-Soviet Union romanticism, of encouraging dreamers. One of the wretched legacies of Marxism is reducing things t science-y jargon and perspectives. It encourages dogmatism and endless mostly unproductive criticism. Academia has been lethal to a more romantic left, obsessed with breaking things down rather than allowing people to put forward a dream to attain. A poverty of imagination really, despite all the pessimistic analysis and theorizing. I can find a lot of that stuff stimulating, but I find it socially malignant overall.

So on a less theoretical/more personal level my family/extended family have been doing regular zoom meets. They have been positive experiences mostly but it seems someone always needs to bring up supporting Trump somehow. My point being everything is good and cordial people enjoying catching up with each other but there's a few who have to be assholes.

[Dr. Medulla]

Yeah, it's good to talk about it once in awhile, I definitely get in my own head about it. My old guitarist actually used that "disillusioned idealist" line on me once, thinking I'd be offended, that I had some pride in being a cynic. I told him I wouldn't disagree with him and he seemed disappointed that he hadn't had a "gotcha" moment with me. I go through patches where I try to be more positive and then recessions. It's definitely a hills and valleys aspect of my life.

Now that's funny. I guess some cynics are smug about it, but most desperately wish the world was better. I wish the left could recover its pre-Soviet Union romanticism, of encouraging dreamers. One of the wretched legacies of Marxism is reducing things t science-y jargon and perspectives. It encourages dogmatism and endless mostly unproductive criticism. Academia has been lethal to a more romantic left, obsessed with breaking things down rather than allowing people to put forward a dream to attain. A poverty of imagination really, despite all the pessimistic analysis and theorizing. I can find a lot of that stuff stimulating, but I find it socially malignant overall.

So on a less theoretical/more personal level my family/extended family have been doing regular zoom meets. They have been positive experiences mostly but it seems someone always needs to bring up supporting Trump somehow. My point being everything is good and cordial people enjoying catching up with each other but there's a few who have to be assholes.

And speaking in generalities, I can say ideology and authority is a nasty addiction.