Covid rules ignored

[Notch7]

Too many childish people around having tantrums about "nappies" and "muzzles"

 

[motorbiking]

I was out running and this old lady stopped my running buddy and said you two should be wearing a mask. There is a lot of misunderstanding about this stuff out there.

 

[Mottie]

My mate travelled on the tube yesterday and he said he saw a few people on the train not wearing masks. All BAMEs. To balance it up, he did see one white person on the platform with no mask, fag in one hand, beer in the other and he wondered why the **** he wasn’t challenged.

 

[Brigadier]

A bit rich people complaining about selfishness and self centred people - this is what individualism is about and has been encouraged.

Thatcher "there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families."

Partial quoting, to misrepresent the person's point; full quote below:

"They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours."


The point being that, rather than hiding behind "society" (which is "other people"), people have to take personal responsibility for themselves, and their own actions and behaviour.
If people won't take responsibility for themselves, how can they realistically help others?

 

[durhamplumber]

The police should be going after proper crimes.

If prats wore masks they would have more time for that

 

[SirGalahad]

Partial quoting, to misrepresent the person's point; full quote below:

"They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours."


The point being that, rather than hiding behind "society" (which is "other people"), people have to take personal responsibility for themselves, and their own actions and behaviour.
If people won't take responsibility for themselves, how can they realistically help others?

Thatchers reference to society was the state or Government.

It's a false tradeoff pitting Individual vs society. Whereby there is no such thing as society but the aggregated decisions by individuals. Now how do these individuals make their decisions? Where do they get their information from and how can they rely on it? This was the basis of neo-liberal economics where you free the individual - yet they never talk about how people still operate within a structure - both legal and moral - so who or what defines that?

How do you deal with free riders and public goods? - it might be in my best interest not to contribute towards a street light as I think someone else will, if everyone makes these choices we end up with no street lights.

Fast forward to Boris comment "“there is such a thing as society”.

It has always been the conflict at the heart of conservatism - the state vs the individual - it's a false tradeoff, its leads to poor policies but great politics.

 

[Brigadier]

Thatchers reference to society was the state or Government.

No it wasn't; it was to what almost all of us would consider "society to mean".
From the horse's mouth:

“they never quoted the rest. I went on to say: There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then to look after our neighbour. My meaning, clear at the time but subsequently distorted beyond recognition, was that society was not an abstraction, separate from the men and women who composed it, but a living structure of individuals, families, neighbours and voluntary associations.“

Individuals, families, neighbours, and voluntary associations.

 

[SirGalahad]

No it wasn't; it was to what almost all of us would consider "society to mean".
From the horse's mouth:

“they never quoted the rest. I went on to say: There are individual men and women, and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It’s our duty to look after ourselves and then to look after our neighbour. My meaning, clear at the time but subsequently distorted beyond recognition, was that society was not an abstraction, separate from the men and women who composed it, but a living structure of individuals, families, neighbours and voluntary associations.“

Individuals, families, neighbours, and voluntary associations.

This is the quote.

"I think we have been through a period when too many people have been given to understand that when they have a problem it is government’s job to cope with it. ‘I have a problem, I’ll get a grant. I’m homeless, the government must house me.’ They are casting their problems on society. And, you know, there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no governments can do anything except through people, and people must look to themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours. People have got their entitlements too much in mind, without the obligations. There is no such thing as an entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation.”

But lets go on her clarification -

My meaning, clear at the time but subsequently distorted beyond recognition, was that society was not an abstraction, separate from the men and women who composed it, but a living structure of individuals, families, neighbours and voluntary associations.“

What is that morality based on? Her strong Christian beliefs - love thy neighbour? How does that belief then contrast with the policies enacted.

 

[Brigadier]

Interesting exchange between JVT and Bozza, in the BoJo Show the other evening (I posted about JVT's statement at the time).
It has just been reviewed and critiqued on the Adrian Chiles Show on R5L (1042 onwards).

(None of the below is verbatim, as I am not going to keep rewinding the app!)

Harry Someone from the Sun - "Can you see a time when we can get back to "normal"?"
JVT - "Will we be free of the virus? No; it's with humankind for ever. Will we throw our masks into the air, like an end-of-the-war celebration? I don't think so. I think we'll be wearing masks and hand-sanitising for many years to come, which is a good thing".

Cue Bozza the libertarian shoite himself, at the prospect of any popularity plummeting, but unable to chastise JVT, whose popularity is high.
Cue JVT shoite himself, for shafting the PM.



Both danced around each other awkwardly, before JVT sought to clarify his previous statement, with

"I meant to say that, for some, their personal choice may be to retain the mask and hand-sanitising".

Bozza followed up with "I have high hopes that this vaccine will enable us to return to normal."




The above raises an interesting point; wearing of face coverings being no longer mandatory, but being an acceptable personal choice.
Before this, covering one's face in public was likely to attract the attentions of Dibble.
Currently, not covering one's face is liable to do the same.

What about in JVT's view-of-the-future?
"Show your face!"
"No!"

We're currently required to wear a face covering in a shop.
Will we required to not wear one, next year say?

 

[EFLImpudence]

That has been the main problem all along - whatever your personal views.

Inconsistency and contradiction in the rules which unavoidably means some of them - the rules and the people - are wrong.


Just today; look at what Fauci has said - both times - so which was right?

Was his apology made because he now thinks he was wrong or, like P.C. apologies, because he has been told to do it?


Perhaps his only fault at the time was not having a scotch egg. Who knows?

 

[ReganAndCarter]

Anyone else find this unsettling?

Hopefully students and young people in general will wake up and stop doing the state's bidding by welcoming asylum seekers, fighting for BLM, trans rights, slavery, eco brainwashing, recycling, feminazi rights, large foreign aid, etc, etc and actually realise the freedoms they want to remove from others have come full circle. THEIR freedoms are now under threat. All of our freedoms are under threat. By encouraging the state to fight every 'ism' they have now unleashed a totalitarian monster that is now coming back to bite them.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Not only Covid. The thought police exist: "I need to check your thinking".

Twelve months ago -

Don't worry, though. Durhamplumber says everything is alright.

 

[EFLImpudence]

He won a court case:

 

[pete50]

Surely the head teacher could remind them all to wear masks in the school assembly rather than shrug shoulders and ignore the problem. Some schools are trying really hard to deal with Covid. My youngest has been sent home to isolate for 14 days because one of his class mates has tested positive. By all accounts he’s had no contact with the infected child, so it’s a bit over the top particularly as the teachers affected aren’t isolating. We will give it a few days and get him a test. But the school won’t let him back this side of Xmas.

kids don’t transmit the virus at the rate adults do. Nobody knows why

That's BS and you know it. Kids transmit the virus the same as everyone else. You are just saying that because you have kids. Kids should be made to wear masks at all times the same way that we, as adults, are forced to do. If they don't like it or their snowflake parents get all uppity then they should be made to stay at home.

Similary we should have completely closed our borders when this pandemic started. The EU, apparently, are going to close their borders to all Brits. This is in retaliation for BREXIT but that's good. We wont be wasting our hard earned in foreign countries and we can spend it here where it is much more needed. GO FOR IT BOJO WALK AWAY although don't expect me to vote for you at the next election. That's nothing to do with BREXIT it's just that I'm no damned tory.

 

[SirGalahad]

The EU, apparently, are going to close their borders to all Brits.

Alternatively, individual member state countries could decide to override the EU rules and create a corridor with the UK.

A spokesperson for the airline Easyjet said: "There is no EU blanket law which requires individual states to limit entry from those arriving from outside the EU and so just as they do today, we expect individual European countries to continue to apply their own rules."

A spokesman for ABTA, the travel industry trade body, said: "The EU has sought to adopt a common approach to travel restrictions, but this is only a recommendation and individual countries are able to implement their own measures, including options like travel corridors and testing."