This epidemic due to COVID-19 is, in fact, an event that is leading the so-called state of exception worldwide (Ausnahmezustand, Carl Schmitt).
We find ourselves, in practice, both in the so-called democratic countries and, even more so, in the dictatorships or semi-dictatorships, in a situation of compression of civil rights and limitation of personal freedom and movement at the same time as overcoming the limitations, where c 'were, due to the so-called privacy laws.
In many countries there are:
- gathering bans, obligation not to leave the house, more stringent than house arrest;
- confinement within limited areas, for example in Italy in the municipality where you are located, even if different from your residence or domicile;
- use of drones and tracking of movements by tracking the mobile phone and so on.
Patrol patrols, criminal complaints, fines, fines, bans, checks.
This is the largest and most widespread lack of freedom that has ever occurred on planet Earth since civilization exists.
During the countless wars of the past and present, personal freedom has never been limited on such a large scale and in such a compelling way.
Today the Italian government assesses the extension of these measures and the tightening of penalties, fines and fines until 31 July, so we are talking about an exceptional state of duration, provided that at the end of July it really ends, five months, something truly unprecedented.
Given that the disease is serious, it spreads very quickly and the number of deaths, at least in Italy, is truly impressive, the question I ask myself is:
Is it worth it?
Let's do some accounts.
The province of Lodi, in Lombardy, Italy, was the first outbreak of the epidemic, to date there are about 220 deaths where at least the contributing cause was COVID-19.
The total population of the province is around 220,000 people.
If all the inhabitants had contracted the disease, the mortality rate is 0.1%.
But even if only a tenth of the population had contracted the virus, the rate would be 1%.
It is not my reasoning, the head of the Italian civil protection Borrelli, estimate that the real cases could be indicatively 10 times more than those accounted for based on the positivity to the swab, that is, more precisely, for each positive symptomatic there would be 10 asymptomatic that have done the disease without any consequence and without, therefore, ever having taken the test.
Returning to the province of Lodi, there are about 2,000 cases recorded, giving the estimate of the head of the civil protection for good, it means that the real infected should be around 22,000, so the percentage of real deaths would be around 1%
A very high figure, certainly, because it would mean, at the level of the whole of Italy:
Globally it would mean around 8 million deaths.
But let's not forget that more than 8 million people die of hunger every year.
Have we taken any equally effective action to stop this epidemic?
Are we willing to shut ourselves in the house for months, not to meet anyone, to give up all our personal freedoms and to be controlled by drones and tracked in our displacements to stop starvation?
Are we more willing to simply change our standard of living slightly to allow others to survive hunger?
I do not think so.
Always, not for my personal ideas, all experts evaluate that all the actions taken by the various governments are not and will never be able to stop the spread of the disease.
These quarantines, this isolation and social distancing, would serve and seem to actually serve to flatten the curve of the infections, diluting them over time and thus allowing the health system to "absorb the blow", in a nutshell to cure all the seriously ill patients considering that the places read and, above all, the places in intensive care are not and cannot be infinite.
A correct assessment of the relationship between social, economic, etc. of these limitations must be assessed on the basis of the delta among people who, through intensive care, can be saved and who would instead die in the absence of the necessary beds.
This is an assessment that does not apply to all the nations of the world in the same way.
It should be made case by case taking into account how many beds already exist, how many can be created in a given time, the age profiles of the population, etc.
The data on the mortality of people who tested positive and with symptoms that in Italy, up to now, have all been treated to the best, that is, with intensive therapy where necessary, do not seem to support the hypothesis of the need for all this hospitalization and social distancing .
This speech may seem cynical, but the substance is that the actions carried out so far have:
- greatly increased the risks for healthcare professionals
- completely blocked the country
- decreased the number of deaths thanks to therapies in a rather limited number of cases.
The reality is that this discourse is too cynical to be made to the population of a democratic country because, especially we Westerners, we are unable to take death into account as an acceptable risk in order to have a life that is worth living.