Evaluating the Lockdown

The government’s response to the coronavirus pandemic caused unprecedented economic destruction. Tens of millions lost their jobs. Countless businesses were forcibly closed, and many will never reopen. Our freedom to produce and trade the values that sustain our lives was dramatically curtailed. Was the lockdown necessary? Was it the best policy? Were there other policies that might have been medically effective and less economically destructive?

To answer these questions, we must first identify our standard of value—what is the standard by which we will determine if a particular policy is good or bad? With the standard of value in mind, we must then consider the full context—all of the relevant information. And as a part of considering the full context, we must also identify all of the alternatives, as well as their pros and cons. We must follow a rational, objective method if we want to make the best possible choices. If we do any less than this, we are likely to make bad decisions. This is true of private citizens and public officials alike.

Government has a crucial role to play in a pandemic. But if government officials adopt the wrong method in making policy decisions, then those decisions will be flawed. And if private citizens adopt the wrong method, then they will be unable to properly evaluate the decisions made by government officials. In this paper, we will examine, albeit briefly, the methods used by public officials in dealing with the pandemic.

Now you can access all of our whitepapers in one place. Enter your email below to get FREE access to this paper, as well as Life Without the FDA, The Moral Case for Housing Producers, Justice for Big Tech, The Myth of Government Planning, and more.

2 comments

  1. In the past, such as with SARS and MERS, the public was informed of the illness among us, and each person decided for themselves how to be protected (or not). Commanding people about how to protect themselves, even taking away their livelihood , church, family, etc, was a huge overreach. Also, there’s a huge concern that once masks are no longer required, people will contract much more illness simply because the extended mask-wearing essentially tells the immune system to take a vacation, and must be strengthened again.

    1. The lockdown was a power grab of unprecedented proportions in America. Many aspects of our lives are now controlled by government, and government officials won’t be eager to relinquish that control.

Comments are closed.