Conditions and Restrictions

A brief look at all that surrounds the moratorium on life that was imposed in India.

Lockdown and Common Sense

In most people’s mind lockdown and coronavirus are very nearly the same.

To them the imposition of a nationwide lockdown had felt a necessary, and almost natural step in dealing with the spread of the virus; there was not one bit of doubt in their mind as to whether that was the most effective course of action. They just knew it was.

Well, the lockdown was imposed — and lifted.

After 75 days of nationwide lockdown, with positive cases rapidly going up not down, and with the already-struggling economy coming to its knees and beginning to jolt the educated classes out of complacency, making them question if this indeed was the best option available, India reopened (June 8th, 2020) in phases.

Now consider this notion people hold that lockdowns are most crucial in containing and/or eradicating the virus. To many it is right because it sounds commonsensical, and they do not look any further into the matter. Why should we look closely, they think, when we know it is right? However, science has repeatedly shown that our commonsensical judgments about many social phenomena are incorrect and mistaken.

An example from the field of psychology would help. There is a principle that was discovered called the ‘Bystander Effect.’ It shows that a person in need of help (let’s say, an injured person) is less, not more, likely to receive that help when there are many people who see him. Our common sense might dictate that more people equals more help, but no — the injured person has the highest likelihood of getting help when there is only one person who sees him.

What this tells us, at the very least, is not to allow our common sense alone to judge such important matters as whether lockdowns are the best measure available. We should overcome the urge to jump to conclusions and look more closely and study different methods and their effectiveness in containing a virus and curbing its spread. Without enough proper data, common sense is blind, with its best guess having a high chance of being not only wrong but also dangerous.

Lockdown Question: Theory and Practice

But the one thing we can say beyond any doubt is that our rights have been violated because of the lockdown, a lockdown which prolonged for 75 long days, making it one of the longest lockdowns any country has ever imposed on its people.

Rights are the one subject unavoidable in thinking about the lockdown and in our public discourse of it. The lockdown was a violation of our rights at a scale and scope that is unprecedented.

As of today, there are more than 1 crore 90 lakh coronavirus cases, with death count crossing 2 lakhs, and recovered cases close to 1 crore 60 lakhs.

If the recovery rate is around 90% today, as it was just before the lockdown began and during those 75 long days that it lasted, isn’t it about time we ask the most important question, which is: Are lockdowns really effective?

We must not sit anymore without knowing answers to some basic questions about the lockdowns such as: What conclusive evidence prompted governments to hail lockdowns as the best measure to deal with the virus? What has been the efficacy rate of the nationwide lockdown that we suffered through? Has it really led to any significant curbing of the virus?

It is high time there are studies conducted that focus extensively on the lockdown.

Although coronavirus and the lockdown have both had immense negative effects, including a number of casualties, the losses incurred due to the lockdown are much more severe and disastrous, for the list would have to include the potential, as well as the actual victims.

Contrary to its intended effect, the lockdown inflicted financial and psychological trauma on the whole nation. There has been a nationwide increase in the number of bankrupted businesses since the lockdown, especially small and medium businesses, as well as the shutdown of numerous start-ups; increase in the number of suicides across the whole of wealth spectrum; rapidly increasing number of those recently rendered unemployed in all the thriving fields — these numbers, among many others, surging in the wake of the lockdown and continued to surge because of it, are an indictment in itself.

Thus we have more than enough reason to review the theory and practice of lockdowns, i.e., we should look again at the notion that lockdowns are effective, by comparing the data collected during the lockdown and holding it against the intended theoretical results that prompted this measure. Minus the vaccine’s effect.

It is imperative that, through scientific method, the truth about lockdowns be made known to the public.

Media and the Government

Because so far all we received from the government, through the media, are mandates.

Mandates of all sorts came our way, from restrictions on where we should and should not go, to dictating that tenants not be asked rent money, to allowing only goods government categorized as ‘essential’ to be sold and that too at the same price though the demand for them skyrocketed; to allowing some businesses to function while others are ordered to close down; and most importantly, to declaring, early on, that for days on end we are not allowed to come out of our houses.

Naturally, at first, all news portals had focused on broadcasting news about how the COVID-19 originated in China, the path it traversed, and how it entered India; and then the ‘Janatha Curfew’ was called for by the PM, and soon the nationwide lockdown was declared — but the media, instead of focusing on the issue of lockdown, were still broadcasting the same news as before, except now there were COVID statistics (active cases, recovered cases, death count) displayed on the split-screen, or printed at the top of newspaper pages.

But had there been any news portals that had on government officials or experts informing people about the nature, not of the virus, but of lockdowns, explaining how they are supposed to work, their effectiveness and disadvantages, their history and background? Had there been any detailed analyses and suggestions as to how to deal with this strange new situation the nation was thrown into? Was there even one proper discussion in any of the news channels on whether a nationwide lockdown was indeed the only way or the best way to deal with the virus? And did anyone from the government call a press meet to so much as indicate a rational justification for the lockdown?

Almost no one, neither the intellectuals nor the media, questioned this extreme measure that Indian government had taken, which ever so conveniently increased multifold the State’s (or the politicians’) power over people’s lives and severely restricted people’s liberties.

Although this increased governmental power manifested in many ways, a particularly illuminating example is how the private hospitals have been treated by the politicians in the wake of this newly acquired power.

Private Hospitals and the Government

A modest shop is harmed, not benefitted, by numerous customers suddenly thronging the storefront asking for the same product, because there is only so much quantity of the product such a shop would have that it cannot meet the demands of so many customers at once. That is the condition our private hospitals have gradually been reduced to, instead of using their immense potential to deal with the COVID situation.

As the virus first started spreading and testing began, only government hospitals had been allowed to test and treat the COVID patients; but soon, due to the lack of resources to deal with in government hospitals, some (not all) private hospitals were authorized to do the testing and treatment; they were allowed, but with a price cap.

These limited number of authorized private hospitals have since been expected to meet the medical demands and needs of an increasing number of COVID patients in all cities and states across India.

Should these private hospitals at least make more money for risking to work in an environment filled with COVID patients, and for expending hospitals’ human and other resources in meeting the patients’ needs 24 X 7?

No, the government said. There is a price cap, and charging any more than the stipulated rates is punishable by law. Which means that there is no honest way to make more money despite putting in way more time, energy, and efforts, and facing way more risk than a hospital usually does in treating patients.

When there is no legal way left to make more money despite honest efforts, it forces men to look for dishonest ways of making money, such as by taking advantage of those in need. And that is what happened. We started to hear complaints being filed by patients that a few authorized private COVID hospitals were extracting money in the following way: an advance of 2–3 lakhs was being collected (only in cash, to avoid evidence), without paying which patients were denied admission into the hospital.

The exploitation of those in need is one example of making money dishonestly, illegally.

Soon, for instance, as it may have happened elsewhere, the Telangana state had taken over 50% of private hospital beds, violating individual rights and private property rights. And it is not hard to see that this ‘measure,’ along with the price caps, among others, are impractical and illogical laws and orders.

(In this connection, ask yourself: How is it that it is considered wrong and immoral when someone extracts 2–3 lakh rupees from the patient for admittance, while it is considered good and moral when the government expropriates private hospitals’ resources (be it beds or oxygen tanks or other supplies) worth much more than 20–30 lakhs? If a man exploits others, it’s wrong, but if a government exploits private companies and hospitals, it’s not wrong?)

This, of course, is not to justify the wrongs that have been committed against those in need; but to indicate that when impractical laws are set in motion, men will be motivated to break them in order to survive and flourish. Impractical laws make a rebel out of a common man, and a martyr out of a rebel.

The Issue of the Second Wave

By exploiting the productive forces, without any scope for an incentive, these laws have led to an environment that created low efficiency in resource management, and in turn, to low standard of healthcare. In other words, these laws harmed all those involved.

These impractical laws would not work, obviously, nor would they lead to effective handling of adverse conditions such as the one we are facing now; so when the politicians see this, they do not look into these laws and change them; instead, they make new laws, ones which are more impractical and illogical, by which more control is gained over people’s lives, thereby further eroding people’s liberties.

Hence the constant mandates we received since COVID first entered India.

Putting it another way, if lockdowns were a murder mystery, the prime suspects should have to be the politicians. Because prime suspects are identified based on who benefits the most from the murder, and in this case, that’s the politicians in the ruling parties.

Didn’t we hear one mandate after another being announced as the lockdown was prolonged date after date? By prolonging the nationwide lockdown, in the name of ‘public safety and welfare,’ the State has been able to accrue massive political power for more than a year now, through the lockdown, curfews, and other ‘measures.’

Now, are we going to respond to the second wave (and the next waves after that) the same way we responded in the months following COVID’s first entry into India?

Several states have already begun to enforce night curfews again, and some have even announced a ‘mini-lockdown.’ It seems we are retracing the steps we had taken, but can our country’s economy take it? Will not another nationwide lockdown or multiple ‘mini-lockdowns’ in separate states stifle it altogether?

If these measures continue and are made stricter like in the first wave, which is very likely to happen, what will be left of our freedoms? Will our rights, such as they are, be able to take another blow, making them weaker each time? How long will it take for our country’s economy to return to normalcy, let alone thrive?

(Here, as in its actual definition, ‘economy’ refers to the marketplace exchanges and fluctuations in the affairs related to and directly affecting people’s livelihoods. Which is why any variant of such statement supporting lockdowns as “We can revive the economy if we survive,” does not make any sense.)

A country’s economy thrives when its people’s lives thrive, and for that to happen they should be free, i.e., without any unjust intervention and coercion from their government.

This is true of India, as it is of every country. India’s economy cannot thrive when a moratorium on life is being enforced here, a semi-pervading stagnation and the fear of it from which relief is unpredictable, and with a vague and sorry excuse that these ‘measures’ will help make India ‘digital.’

Lockdown and India’s Future

No sooner than COVID-19 first appeared on the world scene than the scientific community started working on it, leading shortly to the discovery of the detailed nature of the virus, as well as the identification of the methods by which it could spread.

We soon learned that coronavirus, although anyone can contract it, has a rather clear target population, namely, elderly people and people with less strong immune system.

People dying got people listening and paying attention, and our attitude towards the virus gradually became one that is characterized by fear and caution, motivating us to keep up with the developments in the COVID progression and do as much as we could to curtail its spread.

This was around May 2020.

A year passed. May 2021 is here, and this is the present condition: a large majority of people across the country have become COVID-conscious and are taking basic precautions; the recovery rate is around 90% and more hospitals are available for treatment; thanks to scientists, there is vaccine available; previously hospitals inoculated only those above 45 (due to vaccine shortage), but now they have begun administering the vaccine to people of all ages above 18. This last is happening in phases and slowly, of course, but it is happening.

We are more ready than ever before to step out of the house and begin engaging in the marketplace as we had done before COVID hit, while, of course, taking the necessary precautions. We are ready to begin our journey to progress again.

But politicians on all sides, judging from their policies and not promises, prefer power over progress. The COVID situation, as mentioned before, is an opportune time for them to accumulate that power, and they are cashing in on it.

Somehow the idea of giving more freedom, not less, as a means to solve social problems never occurs to politicians. Yet we, as a country, however, are now being more open than before, bettering ties with different nations, allowing larger share of foreign investments in Indian companies, and allowing globalization (changes brought about by an honest politician here and there since Independence). These are now immensely improving India’s chance at achieving real progress. A chance for India to get ahead on the world stage.

As a result, India is now facing a moral-political predicament:

India is at crucial moment in history where it is stuck having to choose between people becoming prosperous, through reopening the country, through policies that give more freedom to them, through more globalization and privatization — and politicians accumulating wealth, restricting people’s freedoms, gaining more political power through such policies, among many others, as demonetization, lockdowns, as well as through elaborate and twisted taxation.

Will India learn, therefore, that the only proper measure that should be taken, for the protection of the individual as well as of the society, is to prevent the rampant spread of both coronavirus and the governmental power?

You decide.