Avatar feed
Responses: 1
LCDR Joshua Gillespie
0
0
0
There's two lessons one could learn from this; (a) That just as it was over a century ago; some level of "inconvenience" may be required to neutralize this threat.... or (b) Just as it was over a century ago; Americans are not universally apt to lay aside their personal freedoms in the face of fear. Personally, and with no intention to denigrate the sensibilities of anyone in disagreement... I think the various state governments are actually doing more harm than good by "mandating" anything. The article points to a lack of confidence in public authority in 1918... nothing's changed since then. By and large, Americans do not regard the "authorities" highly; after all- we are a nation borne out of rebellion. I think that if masks are indeed a sufficient defense against spreading this contagion...the most powerful inducement for people to wear them is protecting others. However, I must admit that in my opinion, the sources of information "shot themselves in the foot" by perhaps capitalizing on the apparent "shortages" of N95 masks (indicating anything less was inadequate)... then reversing position suggesting even a handkerchief about the face was sufficient. The natural reaction of most people to such changes over position is to regard all subsequent information coming from the same sources as suspect.
(0)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close