There is no conflict between liberty and security

Authoritarians love to trot out the liberty/security trade-off in order to justify their criminal acts, as we see almost every day now.They’re keeping us safe, we’re told. We won’t miss that small amount of liberty they’ve taken, we’re told. Well, I think now we can see fairly clearly what happens when government takes all our freedom in one gluttonous bite: 22 million tossed out of work, social unrest at the boiling point, a nation of petty tyrants that are running buck wild over their hapless communities.

There is no trade-off between liberty and security. Our security derives from our liberty. The more secure we are in our rights as citizens, the safer we are.  Our liberty protects us from the one institution that poses the greatest threat to our safety: the government.  A new virus doesn’t suddenly nullify our rights, but we must assert our right to be free if we ever want to retain those rights and pass them on to our children and grandchildren.

Scientists believe COVID-19 could have been present in the U.S. in September

From Newsweek:

Cambridge University researchers “…have created a network analysis using over 1,000 coronavirus genomes. This includes patient infection date and the “type” of virus the person was infected with. There are three types—A, B and C. A is closest to the coronavirus found in bats and is thought to be the original human virus genome. This type was found in Chinese and American individuals, with mutated versions in patients from Australia and the U.S.

However, A was not the virus type found in most cases in Wuhan, the city in China where COVID-19 was first identified. Instead, most people there had type B. Researchers suggest there was a “founder event” for type B in Wuhan. Type C, the “daughter” of type B, is what was identified in early cases in Europe, as well as South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong—but appears absent from mainland China.”

 

Coronavirus doesn’t kill children, but the economic collapse will

The new U.N. report on the effect of the economic catastrophe on children is grim, but the attention being given to the dire consequences of reckless lock-down policies is a positive development. The report predicts hundreds of thousands of child deaths, and tens of millions of children thrown into poverty. This may be an underestimation, as it underestimates the the decivilizing/rebarbarizing forces that have been unleashed. Populist fascist political movements are surely just over the horizon, and their effect on the course of events over the next decade will be significant.