Locked into Chaos

People who have been fortunate in life have no idea what it does to a child to be locked up with a chaotic parent all day long. This is why they can’t comprehend how destructive they have been to children in such families with their support for lockdowns and school closures.

It’s impossible to hate them because they don’t do it on purpose. They are simply that clueless and sheltered. But it’s hard not to get very exasperated. These folks are wreaking horrible damage and it’s impossible to get through to them because they are extremely smug and don’t let any new information in.

Everybody should watch Hillbilly Elegy and imagine a hundred thousand kids like JD locked in a room with a mother like Bev for months. Just imagine it. How can you do this to people simply to gratify a neurosis? It’s inhuman.

56 thoughts on “Locked into Chaos”

  1. Respectfully, just yesterday, the virus killed 2800 or so people in the USA which is about 100 less than died in the 9/11 terror attacks.

    Therefore, in my opinion, the statement “How can you do this to people simply to gratify a neurosis? It’s inhuman.” is a flawed conflation.

    Like

    1. How many people normally die every day in the US? Are you mourning every single one of them? Or is your grief reserved only for the 80+ year-old covid deaths only?

      People die. Everybody will die. Covid deaths are mostly of people who are past life expectancy and usually in the last months of life anyway.

      So let’s not pretend that this is some kind of a shocking number.

      Like

      1. It’s not that easy to just let things be and that’s the end of it. Older people will also want to get treatment. Trump sure as hell got treatment, Boris Johnson did, Chris Christie did, why shouldn’t others? Who are you then to decide who gets treatment and who does not?

        Like

        1. No one here is advocating for people not getting treated. You may agree or disagree with the lockdowns, but that is a different conversation.

          Like

          1. Maybe not, but saying older people dying in massive numbers is OK, doesn’t account for the overwhelmed hospitals that are now rationing health care. Not to mention the incredible human toll several thousands of people dying a day from a new disease causes.

            Like

            1. When they start to edit what you say, it means they’ve run out of arguments. 🙂

              Not “older people dying is OK” but “people who were at death’s door died a week earlier, and that’s no reason to destroy the lives of thousands of kids.”

              Since you didn’t call for lockdowns during the bad flu season last year, should I assume that you welcome toddlers dying? Or can we agree not to pervert what the opponent days with bizarre assumptions?

              Like

              1. ““people who were at death’s door died a week earlier, and that’s no reason to destroy the lives of thousands of kids.”

                Maybe because this doesn’t really make sense? How can you know these people were at death’s door? Looking at the CDC data, 97,155 in the 45-75 age range have perished due to COVID. Were they all at death’s door? That’s a pretty big assumption to make.

                In any case, your argument goes out the window when hospitals become overwhelmed treating old people. That affects everybody, and it’s not like we’re going to start turning old people away at hospitals, right?

                Like

              2. It’s curious how in a thread about abused children nobody can be bothered even to pretend to give a crap. It’s the same old stale slogans but not a single mention of what I really wanted to talk about: abused children.

                This demonstrates my point better than I ever could do on my own. The fans of lockdowns sincerely don’t care about anything but proving that whatever they believed back in February is right. There’s no greater concern. It’s all about that.

                It’s very sad.

                Like

              3. As for the 97,000, that’s a little over the number of deaths in a bad flu season. If you multiply the number of flu deaths by every year of your life, your get at astronomical numbers. But you never noticed those deaths, did you? Never changed your life in any way to avoid them.

                And I’m not even getting into driving accidents, cardiovascular mortality, or diabetes mortality – all very preventable. Nobody cares about those, do they?

                So please, let’s stop the fake wailing over this very unremarkable respiratory illness and notice some real problems for a change.

                Like

              4. “Since you didn’t call for lockdowns during the bad flu season last year, should I assume that you welcome toddlers dying? Or can we agree not to pervert what the opponent days with bizarre assumptions?”

                Hospitals were not overrun during last flu season. That’s a key difference.

                Like

            2. Actually, Ed, hospitals HAVE been overrun in recent flu seasons. The reason you weren’t wringin your hands and wailing about it (much less changing your normal behavior to avoid spreading it) is because it wasn’t the chosen story spotlighted by ever media organization.

              https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2018/01/08/hospital-overrun-by-flu-cases-having-to-turn-them-away/

              https://time.com/5107984/hospitals-handling-burden-flu-patients/

              https://ktul.com/news/local/local-hospitals-clinics-overrun-with-flu-patients

              https://www.daytondailynews.com/lifestyles/health/local-hospitals-ask-flu-patients-stay-away/I5jeXotxyNmHmZDIxgGHgI/

              Like

      2. @ Clarissa: Respectfully, it is a shocking number. Not only is the number of people dying going up, but the age of those succumbing to disease is going down.

        If things keep on going as they are, this disease wont be a granny killing disease, but a parent killing/home wrecking/child orphaning one as well.

        Therefore, I don’t think that it is reasonable to talk about only the JD’s of the world who have dysfunctionally behaving parents without also considering things like the poverty that arises when children lose a parent. That is why I said that the original post was a flawed conflation.

        If the disease were truly only limited to the elderly meaning that the response to the disease by those much younger was truly neurotic, then fine – but neither of those things are true. The disease is affecting younger people and is very bad and getting worse, which means that the response to it is not neurosis but rather an acceptable response to a legitimate threat.

        Like

    2. “Respectfully, just yesterday, the virus killed 2800 or so people in the USA which is about 100 less than died in the 9/11 terror attacks.”

      “Respectfully” – you’re kidding, right? Your point is neither respectful to Clarissa nor to the tragic victims of mass murder you carelessly choose to employ for rhetorical effect in service of a completely false analogy.

      The 9/11 terrorists intended to kill thousands and they did.

      COVID is a virus and its associated deaths are of nature – i.e. natural. It kills mostly the very elderly who are already seriously ill. Total deaths associated with COVID in the USA this year are less than o.01% of the American population. Stop with the breathless drama.

      Like

      1. @ GSW: Okay. If you want to be like that:

        “‘Respectfully’ – you’re kidding, right?”

        No, I am not kidding. I use the word ‘respectfully’ at the beginning of a sentence to signal that I respect the human being that I am about to address, even as I say something that may be perceived as being controversial, oppositional, or even attacking about some idea or other that they may have expressed or hold.

        “Your point is neither respectful to Clarissa…”

        Yes it is. The presence of the word “respectfully” at the beginning of the sentence makes that plain.

        “…nor to the tragic victims of mass murder you carelessly choose to employ for rhetorical effect in service of a completely false analogy….”

        There was nothing careless about my choice to mention of 9/11 victims, since I hold the victims of this virus in approximately the same stead that I hold the victims of the 9/11 attacks in, in the sense that their deaths could have been prevented by public officials and were not, followed by those deaths being shabbily and shamelessly exploited by politicians in the same way those who have died of COVID are exploited.

        Since the two groups of victims are similar in both their treatments and their number, you are incorrect to say that the analogy is ‘completely false’, because it is in fact valid.

        “The 9/11 terrorists intended to kill thousands and they did. COVID is a virus and its associated deaths are of nature – i.e. natural.”

        I think you’re a bit confused. In point of fact, COVID is not a virus, but a disease state caused by the virus named SARS-CoV-2.

        The virus SARS-CoV-2 appears to have been modified in a laboratory somewhere, probably in China, probably using one of the strains of SARS-CoV-1 as a starting virus, in what is called ‘gain of function’ research – which is really just a nice way to say that viruses are modified using functional groups or features taken from other viruses to make them more and more dangerous, usually in some kind of bioweapons program.

        It isn’t at all reasonable for you to say that a virus that appears to have certainly been created in a laboratory is ‘natural’, since anyone who said that would have to agree that being killed by an atomic bomb is also ‘natural’ because nuclear fission is a ‘natural’ process, while it is also ‘natural’ to die when your body is heated to several thousand degrees in less than half a minute.

        “It kills mostly the very elderly who are already seriously ill.”

        I think that the word ‘mostly’ is the most important word in your sentence.

        “Total deaths associated with COVID in the USA this year are less than o.01% of the American population. Stop with the breathless drama.”

        No, total deaths attributed to COVID so far are about ten times the figure that you have stated. If you don’t know how to calculate the number, feel free to ask how.

        Anyway, GSW, I remember asking you if I had bothered or annoyed you in some way or words to that effect, because the tone of your replies to me aren’t very nice (imo). You didn’t reply.

        Like

        1. At the end of the day, this should be a pharmacoeconomic argument, and not one-dimensional disease-focused only. How much is a human life worth? An uncomfortable question, but officials have to consider everything, including overwhelming (or not) the healthcare system, along with what Clarissa mentioned, businesses lost, economy impacted on a grand scale, long-term mental issues, socially inept teenagers due to lockdowns, freedoms lost, etc. With $3.5+ T added to the national debt and 5% hit to the GDP, with the latter defining us as a superpower and the leader of the free world, human life’s worth can amount to millions per death. Is each one of us worth that much or to put it differently, what is the value of life? Most people refuse to put a price on it, and I am glad it is not my/our decision. Nonetheless, that is why we might want to focus on the big picture, take precautions, protect those more susceptible, and remind ourselves of what is collectively best for the country and our fellow citizens. Besides, we now understand the disease more and have drug combinations to treat it.

          Like

  2. “Total deaths associated with COVID in the USA this year are less than o.01% of the American population. ”

    0.01% of the US population is around 328k people. 56% of the population of Wyoming, 91% of the entire population of the country of Iceland.

    Like

    1. But the key is precisely in the percentage, not in the absolute numbers. If you live in a town of 5,000 people (the kind of community that can be still reasonably close-knit – you probably won’t know everyone personally but you’ll likely be no more than two degrees of separation from most) and 0.01% died, this would mean 5 deaths. You’ll likely know one or two of the victims personally and have some sort of connection to the other three or four. Substantial enough to make an impact in the community? Yes, particularly if the deaths come close together. Apocalyptic? “Massive numbers” as you said above? I wouldn’t call it that.

      Like

      1. “Apocalyptic? ‘Massive numbers’ as you said above? I wouldn’t call it that.”

        Look at the numbers any which way – it doesn’t bother me.

        These folks can cultishly believe we’re living in the Zombie apocalypse – it doesn’t matter to me one tiny bit. Please, please, hide deep in your Henny Penny hidey-holes until all and every disease has been banished from the earth by sainted and omniscient state bureaucrats and assorted political worthies!

        But it’s the sanctimonious/buttinski telling everyone else how to live the precious gift of their lives that I mind.

        And when a deserved, but mild, rebuke for trolling is delivered – aka “even as I say something that may be perceived as being controversial, oppositional, or even attacking” – we hear whining and whinging that the “tone” of the rebuke “isn’t very nice.”

        Like

      2. This is far from apocalyptic, a great majority of the population will be just fine. The problem is that even if only a “small” percentage of the population gets sick or dies, it is still far too many for our hospitals to handle and treat properly. This in turns affects absolutely everybody regardless of age who requires medical treatment.

        Like

    2. “0.01% of the US population is around 328k people. 56% of the population of Wyoming, 91% of the entire population of the country of Iceland.”

      I may be wrong, but the virus has killed about 280,000 people in the USA, while the population of the USA is about 330 million. For the sake of convenience, I tend to round the number of virus victims to 300,000 and the population of the USA to 300 million.

      Using the rounded figures, 300,000 dead divided by 300 million total population yields the quotient 0.001 which, when multiplied by the number 100 to give a percentage, yields 0.1%.

      ie so far, the virus has killed about 0.1% of the population of the USA.

      Can someone please double check and let me know that I’m not making some kind of silly error or oversight 🙂

      Like

      1. As of this posting the JHU COVID-19 dashboard lists 13,931, 901 cases of infection and 273,590 deaths from the novel coronavirus. Worldometer lists the US population 331,835,848 people.

        I haven’t looked at any of the umpteen dashboards in months.

        What I would like to know is how many of those recovered people are now covid long haulers. It’s not “You’re dead or 100% fine, that’s it, no other possibilities.”

        Like

  3. I don’t remember the exact numbers but back in April when my state was supposed to be in agony from COVID, I was looking at the statistics of other causes of death. Normal daily heart disease deaths were practically equal to those of corona at its worst time. What do we do about those deaths? We certainly are not mourning them. We don’t even put McDonalds on lock down to prevent them. Hell, our taxes are actually used to subsidize the production of unhealthy foods. Many people don’t get treatment for heart disease for various reasons and we don’t go into freeze mode because of that. But all of the sudden our main worry is that there will not be enough beds for COVID patients while destroying whatever is left of our sanity and economy.

    Like

    1. Exactly. Heart disease and cancer deaths are a fact of life. Heart disease and cancer deaths of people who also happen to test positive for COVID are now a screeching hysterical panic issue. I don’t get it at all. Several people of my acquaintance now have gotten COVID. Most of them have recovered. The one who died also happened to be undergoing lung cancer treatment after a lifetime of heavy smoking. Was it really the COVID that killed her? REALLY? Or did it just shave a few months off? Lots of things will shave a few weeks, months, even years, off your lifespan: unhealthy eating, smoking, head injury, some drugs (both legal and illegal types), sedentary lifestyles, a huge range of communicable, chronic, and hereditary diseases (lupus, RA, charcot-marie tooth, ALS, diabetes, Crohn’s, Coeliac, Huntingdon’s, HIV, mononucleosis etc. etc.), exposure to pesticides, alcoholism, chronic dust inhalation (potters, miners, sawyers, carpenters…), welding, painting, childhood abuse, bulimia, air pollution, lead exposure, and many more I’m sure.

      So where’s the freakout about refined carbohydrates in the diet, and sedentary lifestyles? Diabetes is an exponentially larger drag on public health resources. Where’s the white-knuckled, OMG this is everyone’s problem panic about workplace dust/toxin exposure? Ha! That only happens to working-class people so it doesn’t exist.

      When did maximizing lifespan of the wealthy become our culture’s core value?

      Like

  4. The Chinese communist invention the lockdown simply prolongs and delays the natural end of the wave and make sure the vulnerable are exposed to risk longer…
    People should want younger healthier people getting it, getting over it so the virus can burn itself out…
    Instead through the lockdowns they’re carefully nurturing the virus to hangaround as long as possible

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Respectfully, if that were true, then Sweden would still be chasing so-called ‘herd immunity’ (that cannot be achieved for this virus) but are not. The virus is too contagious for too long to burn itself out in large urban centres or in a highly connected world.

      If we all lived in small townships and didn’t move around too much, then yes, that would work. Since we don’t in the end, I’m willing to bet that getting things under control will require lockdowns all over again along with every therapy available, and further willing to be that we’re looking at another 12 or so months at this point (depends how badly the vaccines bomb).

      Like

        1. @ methylethyl: small townships are still being locked down because they are not isolated. With infectious diseases on the scale of SARS, you can control infections by having open borders and lockdowns, or closed borders with no lockdowns – but if your township has free travel to viral reservoirs in adjacent places with no lockdown, then your township may as well be a suburb of a large city in which the disease is rampant.

          I mean sure, you can open up if you like, but judging by the spike in cases in rural America in the past 10 or so days, it’s a bad idea imo.

          Like

        2. “Why should we be locked down?”

          Because we say so, peasant.

          Because if you don’t – “we will all diiiiiieeeeee” [Clarissa™]

          Because if you don’t – you’ll kill granny!

          Because “science” and “public health”

          Because if you don’t – you’ll start living a normal life, and we just can’t have that, can we?

          Because the sky is falling in, the sky is falling in!!!

          Because Orange Man Bad!

          Like

            1. “Yeah, pretty much.”

              Forgot to mention – because “if your township has free travel to viral reservoirs in adjacent places with no lockdown, then your township may as well be a suburb of a large city in which the disease is rampant.”

              Got it??

              And, don’t forget to count cases along with Count von Count…

              Like

      1. I will respectfully disagree. Lengthy lockdowns will enable the elitists to carry out their fascist experiment with the expensive new green deal, while having us obedient, and where exactly they want us to be, namely in our homes. In the meantime, economies of the western world are drained. Finally, when the lockdowns are lifted, those, who may be infected today, will still be infected as per your own argument.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. @ azide: I don’t see what there is any disagreement about, except that the people in charge don’t need to implement any green new anythings or drain anything any further. The treasuries of the West were drained in the first month when big business was “bailed out”, which is really just a polite way to say that a few individuals were given public money to buy their own stock back to own privately.

          After that, various vaccine/immunity passport schemes were bandied about so as to usher in a new kind of surveillance state, which, when combined with the horrendous censorship and outright propaganda in the media means that all of us are broke, surveilled, censored, and suppressed. Any who don’t like it will likely suffer persecution, or already are except that we don’t know about it.

          Honestly it’s enough to make me want to abandon everything and try homesteading somewhere as far away from people as possible.

          Like

          1. Check a recent history of Argentina after the collapse. Isolated homesteaders got tortured and murdered in their homes in the countryside. Nobody to hear you scream out there.

            Like

              1. @ methylethyl: The sense of my homestead comment was to communicate despair. Also in recent history in Venezuela, those with jobs who lived in the suburbs had their homes systematically raided by those left out of the economic system, were tortured, and then killed. Many people could hear them scream but no one helped.

                Regarding vaccine and immunity cards, my guess is that each country will do it to incoming travellers first. That way it is more difficult for anyone to complain.

                Like

          2. So, since the decline already started, we may as well accept our fate? That is where our disagreement lies. Why not be allowed to live our free lives and recover economically to an extent, whereas those who are so afraid go on lockdowns forever? Incidentally, the flu vaccine has only 60% effectiveness, depending on strains, but we are not talking about it “bombing”, nor are we forced to have it.

            Like

            1. @ azide: the flu vaccine has nowhere near a 60% efficacy rate. Typically it only works for a handful of flu strains in any given year when there are a couple of hundred or so going around.

              Regarding what everyone should do, in my opinion (not my commands, not my orders – just my opinion) people should avoid any possible infection source by avoiding public places, practicing excellent hygiene, avoiding groupings or gatherings with anyone outside of the house, for another year or so.

              The reason that I think that is because I personally think that it will take the winter of the Northern hemisphere to figure out in broad strokes which vaccines, therapeutic agents, prophylactics etc are better, and then winter in the Southern hemisphere to refine and implement those properly.

              The reason that I think that it is important to avoid as many infections as possible is because a COVID patient is very resource intensive and difficult to diagnose/treat. So, the more of them there are, including those who have recovered from the primary illness, the more overburdened the medical system is, which I think is important because medical error is the third highest cause of death (after heart disease and cancer).

              Using logic, if you burden your hospitals that bit extra this year, you end up grinding your medical system to dust for the next decade.

              Philosophically, I also think that people have a responsibility to one another to do anything reasonably possible to minimise and mitigate events like pandemics, which means that I think that people have an obligation to wear masks and things like that. Note: not a compulsion, not something with force of law etc, but an obligation.

              Like

              1. “avoid any possible infection source by avoiding public places, practicing excellent hygiene, avoiding groupings or gatherings with anyone outside of the house, for another year or so”

                Wont’ work as long the idea of ‘necessary’ workers remains….

                Like

              2. @ cliff arroyo: It worked in Melbourne, Australia. So, it can work, and would work, should people actually behave in that way.

                Like

              3. We missed Pascha this year, and haven’t been able to go to confession or participate in the Eucharist since last December, because Americans are so afraid of death.

                How did the primary, all-encompassing metric of good in America become not-dying? Maybe this is what happens when you don’t have God, or philosophy, or even a decent traditional system of ethics, to guide your life. Or, perhaps it’s cowardice. Hard to say. I’d give my eye-teeth for some good Stoics or Epicureans in government. Instead we’re surrounded by spineless devotees of the god Progress.

                According to Progress, we have conquered all the really bad diseases, and it is now impossible that we should ever again see a disease that kills more people, on average, than the flu. So we will now do Whatever It Takes to prove that we have complete mastery over primordial nature. No Excess Deaths will ever be Acceptable, because we have already conquered Disease.

                Admitting that disease is part of the natural cycle of animal life everywhere, and bound to get us now and then, is, of course, heresy. And heretics have to be burned. There is no Fallen World: Progress has redeemed it! Anyone who says otherwise is blaspheming Progress. We’ll achieve immortality any day now, and then nobody will ever have to die!

                Like

              4. I missed Pascha, too. :-((( I had so been looking forward to it.

                I’ve managed to squeeze in one confession and we go to communion once every 6 weeks. It’s better than nothing but we lost the Sunday School (it’s now all online, and I don’t see the point). Adults used to do Bible study while kids were in Sunday school. I loved that! I’m now writing this with tears in my eyes. We’ve been robbed.

                I haven’t seen my parents and sister and niece and nephew in a year. This is terrible.

                A very old, very sick Ukrainian lady from church defied orders and traveled to another state to see her grandkids. Her definition of “life” is based on seeing her grandkids. And she’s the normal one, not the lockdown fans.

                Like

              5. “Maybe this is what happens when you don’t have God, or philosophy, or even a decent traditional system of ethics, to guide your life… Admitting that disease is part of the natural cycle of animal life everywhere, and bound to get us now and then, is, of course, heresy. And heretics have to be burned.”

                Well said, you’ve hit the nail on the head.

                The other side is obsessed with counting cases, not for public health reasons, but because all cases, mild or serious, are evidence of anti-social sinning by willful, pride-filled, ignorant peasants. Only through full and total submission to “science” and the expertise of the bureaucratic state can we all be saved.

                I have resolved from this point to mock them mercilessly rather than engaging with their counting obsession since they brush off all reasonable attempts to discuss the actual nature of the disease. Apparently, nothing can be allowed to interfere with their religious devotion to counting. They’re all Count von Counts – without any of the humour.

                Like

              6. Another expression I hate is “he’s sick with COVID.” Every time I have to ask, “sick or tested positive?” And the reply, every single time, is “what’s the difference?” People have lost all contact with reality.

                Like

              7. “People have lost all contact with reality.”

                That’s a feature not a bug of our controlled public discourse. Obsessional case counting is the mantra here blocking out all other information. Obey or you will be placed among the counted who will die a painful lonely death in a ventilator.

                Liked by 1 person

              8. Patience is meant to be a virtue. Waiting until next year for Pasxa is the right thing to do. I’m sure everyone agrees 🙂

                Like

      2. ” Sweden would still be chasing so-called ‘herd immunity’”

        The current 7-day moving average of daily deaths in Sweden is 16… the highest it’s been in this wave was 47…. (around nov 24).

        Looking at a bunch of European countries here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries
        and just using the 7-day moving averages, daily deaths tend to peak and/or plateau about 10 to 14 days after the peak of new cases.

        ” getting things under control will require lockdowns all over again ”

        If true this means that the decision to open up trade with China was the single biggest foreign policy mistake since WWII and countries need to disengage from trade with China ASAP and institute travel restrictions and/or quarantines for those leaving China.
        The Chinese Communist Party’s bungling and coverup culture is a global public health menace.

        Like

        1. @ cliff arroyo:

          “The current 7-day moving average of daily deaths in Sweden is 16… the highest it’s been in this wave was 47…. (around nov 24).”

          Yes, that may be so, and yet the Swedes decided to tighten up.

          “If true this means that the decision to open up trade with China was the single biggest foreign policy mistake since WWII and countries need to disengage from trade with China ASAP and institute travel restrictions and/or quarantines for those leaving China.
          The Chinese Communist Party’s bungling and coverup culture is a global public health menace.”

          Personally I’d say that the USA acting as a hegemonic power that maintains very many very expensive bases worldwide is the biggest foreign policy mistake since WW2. If the US would simply leave the East alone, China would quickly find itself checked by its neighbours. So, in a sense, US hegemonic cover is providing conditions for China to grow into something much worse than it could be, which I think is a mistake.

          Anyway, I don’t think that the USA or any other nation should try to disengage from China for the sake of containing it, but rather, each nation should treat China in a way that matches the competence of that nation in whatever regard, which means things like reestablishing domestic supply chains so as to avoid or lessen reliance on an unreliable nation, plus establishing superior methods of domestic disease management that would probably be much less reliant on such entities as the WHO etc.

          Like

  5. I agree with Clarissa but I’d just like to point out that today everyone is locked in, not just with each other, but with the Internet. Bad things can happen but they can be recorded and shared which was not the case some thirty or forty years ago.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.