Have people's opinions changed?

[MassiveOverthinker]

Just wondering really, if the last few months have changed people's opinion on how we managed covid in this country.

Anyone wondering if maybe fewer restrictions would've been better and if more draconian ones (often called for) were unnecessary. Anyone wondering if we needed to close schools, swab and isolate our kids, test and trace etc etc.

Or do people generally feel we did what was necessary at the time and are only okayish now because of weaker variants and higher vaccination levels?

Anyone feel less angry at the rule breakers, those who don't want to be vaccinated etc?

If it all happened again, do you think your response to restrictions would be the same, or would you be a bit more inclined to think "sod that for a laugh".

(Asking for a friend).

What they did was psychologically abusive. Abusive posters and advertising campaigns blaming people for not being able to control a virus.
Puts me in mind of that American twunt who reckons women can control ovulation if they are raped so they dont get pregnant.

@mmmmmmghturep It's actually quite offensive to abuse victims to call any political choice you disagree with 'abusive'.

(It's also absurd.)

I think we're in a very privileged position to even be able to ask these questions. Personally, on balance, I think the lockdowns were necessary and while I'm not glad they happened, I'm not sure we could have done anything else. I still think we could have taken/still could make better mitigations, particularly around schools, hospitals.

I say privileged, because if we hadn't developed the vaccines, we'd be absolutely fucked. And there's a lot of 'oh we're ok now, so it was all an overreaction', when we're only fine because of the vaccines.

Totally agree @mmmmmmghturep

It has in fact been acknowledged that these campaigns were psyops

@WouldBeGood ...ah, so we are in that territory now, are we? Care to tell us your thoughts on 5G? On who 'did' JFK? Princess Diana? 9/11...?

It’s not a conspiracy theory. I have no time for them. It was a deliberate concerted attempt to frighten people into obedience

And yes, I believe in covid, I’m triple jagged, etc etc 😃

I've no particular interest in a pissing contest about what constitutes abusive and what doesn't, but the way people with pre-existing health anxieties had their welfare disregarded by some of the decisions on public messaging was pretty rotten. Some of them have yet to recover from the impact.

I knew it was a Canadian report I remembered

Yeah, this isn't actually a controversial point either. It's pretty well known. Here's a government document from 22nd March 2020.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/882722/25-options-for-increasing-adherence-to-social-distancing-measures-22032020.pdf

It states that:

A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened; it could be that they are reassured by the low death rate in their demographic group (8), although levels of concern may be rising (9). Having a good understanding of the risk has been found to be positively associated with adoption of COVID-19 social distancing measures in Hong Kong (10). The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging.

That's pretty clear about what they wanted to do and why. There's obviously a discussion to be had about whether the end justified the means, but the last sentence spells it out very clearly. They wanted people who didn't feel sufficiently personally threatened to feel more personally threatened.

Never wanted lock downs and carried on as normal as I could . I don't have any parties covid or otherwise haha but still mixed with family and close friends.
The number of people that fell victim to anxiety over covid was shocking .

Having had the virus I wondered why I bothered having 3 jabs and I'm in no rush to have another or get my son vaccinated either .

I lost my job and almost my home due to well off people with 2 incomes calling for the world to stop so they could stay at home and bake sourdough bread

@WouldBeGood absolutely agree with you. I found that aspect disgraceful and personally it's left me with with alot of distrust towards the media.

I have a friend who is not vulnerable and was previously a professional, fully functioning member of society who now barely leaves the house and is a shadow of her former self. As a result her marriage and family life have been under immense strain. IMO that is the direct result of the OTT scare tactics used against us.

Government actions and messaging has been compared time and time again to abuse

It doesn't matter if you say you think it's offensive. No one has the right to not be offended. "I find that offensive" is a lazy way of trying to shut down debate

Oh hear come the smear tactics Im getting a strange sense of deja vu here.

*here not hear

@HesterShaw1 It's infinitely lazier to dub something that isn't abusive, abusive. If you have a problem with something, use a term that actually applies.

I agree.

Chris whitty said right at the start that they had to choose when to lock down very carefully, not just in order to stop covid spreading but it was unlikely the population would comply long term to restrictions.

The government needed people to stay home. They didn't know what we were dealing with, and the easiest way to get the majority to comply is fear. Necessary evil at the time, very possibly.

But the issue then is in order to keep restrictions going the fear needed to be kept up. The media did a great job of that. But the government also knew that if it didn't get under control quickly, they would end up with a population filled with mistrust. Which, if this is needed again in the short term will really work against them.

From a physiological point of view I find it interesting.

Which, if this is needed again in the short term will really work against them.

Yes. Trust in the government has really suffered. It was quite high in the early days of the pandemic, which is interesting in itself given the damage Iraq and Brexit have done in that respect.

This is why, while I don't rule out the possibility of lockdowns or other significant restrictions in future pandemics a long way into the future, it's not going to happen in the short term. The government aren't trusted and there's a lot of anger. Partygate has been huge there.

Whatever one's views on the desirability of either restrictions or of fines here, one thing it's definitely done is spelled out that the people making the restrictions weren't afraid. They were telling other people to be, but they weren't. The way the Tories are trying to respond to this, making out like little infractions aren't a big deal and talking up anything they think they might be able to pin on Labour, only heightens that.

However if you look at what psychological abuse actually is, and honestly look back at the kind of bullshit we were subjected to, surely you can understand it was abusive? It is not just some posters on Mumsnet saying so.

Moving goalposts, gaslighting, lying, promises that are retracted, more lying, blaming us for things that we had no responsibility over, threats to punish us with more restrictions if we weren't "good"....

These things happened.

Whatever one's views on the desirability of either restrictions or of fines here, one thing it's definitely done is spelled out that the people making the restrictions weren't afraid. They were telling other people to be, but they weren't.

This is absolutely major. Why isn't this talked about more? When they were telling us we should be terrified, they clearly had no worries about being in gardens and socialising, or of working in the same building as others. Remember than absolutely insane BBC piece (government mouthpiece) about how we should be one another's gardens when we were first "allowed"? Don't go through the house to get there. Set an alarm for everyone to wash their hands every thirty minutes. Bring your own cutlery and crockery. Don't share food. Stand in special sections of the garden and don't cross into other people's. Do your very best not to need the toilet.

Completely agree.

Marvellous. Another attempt to ridicule a person disagreeing with you, who's offering a perfectly acceptable and accepted viewpoint.

@HesterShaw1 I’d forgotten about the hand wash alarms for guests!! Fucking hell. Total lunacy

@HesterShaw1 It was not abusive. You are in the realm of pure fantasy, frankly.

Im afraid you are wrong @Innocenta

About Professor Lucy Easthope and her book When the Dust Settles.
thecritic.co.uk/a-successful-account-of-the-disastrous/

Nonetheless she unflinchingly accuses the government of weaponising “hefty doses of fear” and an “anti-human response” during Covid-19. She is also scathing about the use of behavioural insights, nudge and the focus on public optics rather than public resilience