If Covid-19 had emerged in a liberal democracy rather than China, and the first response had not been enforced lockdowns, which *appeared* to work, enforced lockdowns would not have become the worldwide norm: discuss

I am genuinely interested in the proposition - enforced lockdowns (forcing people by law to stay at home) were a new thing. Struck me listening my podcast with @adamgopnik that it was by no means inevitable Italy, France etc would follow suit https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/better-human-podcast/id1481010283?i=1000468502475

I believe it was right to take novel and in some cases (travel quarantine, business closures, school closures) extreme measures to protect life. Covid is in many ways worse than any pandemic since Spanish flu. But enforced lockdowns should remain an open question

Not proposing as alternative the libertarian let everyone get the virus option but something more like enforced closures of businesses + large gatherings + strong stay at home guidance without police enforcement.

People replying ‘you have brought out the cranks’ but I think it’s time to take this discussion back from Sumptionista fringes and put through a human rights lens, particularly as if lockdown justified now, proportionality balance will change as most vulnerable are vaccinated.

I can understand psychological implausibility of measures being taken away as what public authority would want to be blamed for thousands of deaths even if causation difficult /impossible to prove? But we will need to at some point & have to be clear eyed about this discussion

The messages I have had from police, as well as my general concern that the leaving home (but not gatherings) restrictions may be almost unenforceable, have made me think hard about this. I think we all need to in the coming months https://twitter.com/adamwagner1/status/1348361591188811781

In my thread from March I discussed how this would be difficult and messy from a rights perspective. It has been https://twitter.com/adamwagner1/status/1239161027591385088

I am also pretty strongly of the view that It is not obvious what the answer is to any of these questions. I am not a scientist so come at this through a law/rights perspective and have tried carefully to stay clear of giving “the answer“ to any of these questions...

... but I read enough of the science and relevant expert commentary to suspect there isn’t an obvious answer as to whether *enforced* stay at home lockdowns satisfy a proportionality test, ie necessary and not using a hammer to crack a nut, or whether they will continue to be...