Read on Twitter
many asking why, if the govt says hotel quarantine is 'disproportionate', a prolonged 'stay at home' policy is not. My guess? The burden of 'stay at home' is underestimated by people who themselves have comfortable & spacious homes. For some, the message is implicitly cosy, jolly
a wider point: I'm not sure who needs to hear this, but the fact that some of the worst people out there are building an 'anti-lockdown' politics does not mean the rest of us have to be generically uncritical of all public health restrictions or the way they fall, so to speak.
for example it is totally legitimate, even essential to question why some measures are adopted ¬ others, why there is such fuss over say, 5km exercise but not workplaces. 'Whataboutery' here is not only permissible but essential. It's a matter of deflection & of distribution.
... by distribution, I mean where the burdens fall, who is expected to shoulder the burden of sacrifice & effort (and penalty) and who is not. It is also legitimate to question why the state has not made efforts to inform the public of new knowledge about how the virus transmits
