"Social distancing" much?
Six weeks ago, when thousands around the nation took to state capitols to protest the human rights abuses inflicted by coerced "stay-at-home orders," lockdown supporters reacted with sanctimonious outrage.
Declaring the protestors to be "covidiots" who failed to appreciate the virtue and necessity of police-enforced lockdowns, news outlets and lockdown advocates on social media
declared that the protests would cause outbreaks of disease, and
nurses declared that the protests were "a slap in the face" to those trying to treat the disease.
One political cartoon featured an image of an emergency room nurse saying "see you soon" to antilockdown protestors.
Now, with far larger numbers of protestors amassing in larger groups, we hear none of the lofty moralism coming from the media or lockdown enthusiasts on social media. Yes, there are still some token attempts to express worry over how the riots and protests of recent days might spread the disease. But the tone is quite different. Concerns over COVID-19 are now phrased along the blueprint of "
if you protest — and we would never dream of telling you not to protest — please take these measures to minimize risk."
It's all very polite and deferential to the protestors. Politicians like Kamala Harris have even joined the protestors in the streets, doing what
she demanded others avoid just a few weeks earlier. Where are the nurses denouncing these protests as a "slap in the face"? Where are the social media COVID warriors telling us that standing next to a person without a mask is tantamount to homicide? They're very hard to find, nowadays.
Of course, those who support the current protests, but oppose
last month's protests, claim that there is no equivalence. Many would likely say, "We're now protesting against people being killed in the streets!" followed by "Those other protestors just wanted [a] haircut.
Comment: See also: