Chapter 1: The Emergence of Covid-19

My initial encounter with Covid-19 occurred in December when it was primarily referred to as the coronavirus by the media. At that time, it garnered minimal attention since it seemed distant, originating from a remote region in China.

As the situation escalated and fatalities began to rise in my vicinity, I found myself paying closer attention. My viewpoint remained neutral, yet I was determined to gather as much information as possible.

As the saying goes, “It’s déjà vu all over again.” This reminded me of an experience from four decades ago in Chicago, where I first encountered the term "gay cancer" in the Chicago Tribune. My immediate reaction was to dismiss the label as nonsensical. After all, cancer does not discriminate based on sexual orientation, nor did it exhibit the characteristics of a conventional cancer.

As more data became available, I absorbed it eagerly and gradually began to formulate an opinion. In contrast, many others seemed to approach the situation with preconceived notions. While I was initially unaware of this discrepancy in approach, I now recognize it clearly.

With age and experience, I realize there are two distinct approaches to addressing this current crisis.

My first instinct was to seek out facts diligently. I immersed myself in research, scrutinizing hard data, and even created spreadsheets to track emerging trends. In contemplating the information, I considered the best strategies to tackle the virus.

It was disheartening to witness respected individuals navigate the situation in a drastically different manner. Instead of prioritizing factual information, they evaluated the disease through the lens of their political ideologies. Facts became secondary to their beliefs.

When they did engage with data, they selectively acknowledged only those facts that aligned with their initial beliefs, disregarding any contradictory evidence. They grasped at flimsy arguments and cited dubious "experts" who echoed their views.

This pattern felt familiar. Although I perceive it as more prevalent among conservative mindsets, it is not exclusive to them. The extreme Left exhibits similar tendencies, as seen in how Marxist "intellectuals" twist facts to fit their ideological narratives. Likewise, some religious groups reshape scientific facts to align with their doctrines. For these individuals, the goal of inquiry is not to uncover truth but to reinforce prior conclusions.

This dynamic epitomizes the clash between reason and belief systems—where belief is held as absolute truth, akin to religious conviction.

Cole Porter’s lyrics come to mind:

Birds do it, bees do it

Even educated fleas do it.

Liberals do it, conservatives do it,

Even purist libertarians do it.

Any passionately held ideology can morph into a secular belief system if we are not cautious. I know I have faltered in this regard. Faced with a new issue, I sometimes catch myself trying to devise a solution that aligns with my existing political views before thoroughly examining the facts.

My political philosophy is multifaceted, prioritizing both individual rights and personal liberty. However, maximizing liberty does not always align with the core principle of individual rights. Rights inherently impose limits on liberty; for example, your freedom to express an opinion stops at my door.

Before assessing whether there is a rights infringement that warrants restricting liberty, I must first establish the facts. Without a factual foundation, I cannot apply my deeply held principles effectively.

Everything must begin with facts. If a conflict arises between certain facts and my principles, it is the principles that must adapt. Reason must conform to reality, whereas, in the realm of belief, individuals often attempt to reshape reality to fit their views.

So, consider this: What was your first response upon encountering Covid-19? Did you prioritize your principles in seeking a solution, or did you first pursue facts and evidence before forming conclusions? If the latter was true, that represents reason; if the former, it reflects a belief system that may not be entirely sound.

Chapter 2: The Ongoing Discourse on Pandemic Responses

As the pandemic continues to unfold, discussions surrounding its implications grow increasingly complex.

In this video titled "Next Pandemic 'Deadlier Than Covid', WHO Warns, Flags Emerging Threat To World Leaders," experts discuss the potential future threats posed by emerging viruses and the importance of global preparedness.

In another significant video, "President Joe Biden: 'We are still in a pandemic of the unvaccinated'," the President emphasizes the ongoing challenges faced in combating the virus, particularly among unvaccinated populations.