The UK's Covid inquiry has been met with vicious attacks from a rightwing clique who are hell-bent on discrediting the evidence and downplaying the devastating consequences of their ideology.
For them, lockdowns are anathema - a draconian measure that restricts individual freedom at any cost. They see the interventions as "too little, too late" and will stop at nothing to undermine the statistics and reasoning presented by the inquiry's chair, Heather Hallett.
The facts are stark: 23,000 people died because Boris Johnson resisted locking down the country in time. The images of Italian temporary morgues filled with Covid victims remain etched in public memory as a grim reminder of what could have been avoided if only the authorities had acted sooner and more decisively.
But this is not just about one individual - it's about a broader cultural shift in which anti-science and anti-regulation ideologies have become entrenched. The rightwing media has consistently promoted a narrative that downplays the risks of Covid, and instead advocates for "freedom" above all else, including public health and safety.
This mindset is not new. We've seen it before in the likes of Andrew Neil's Sunday Times, which ran with gay plague theories during the 1980s and 1990s. The Telegraph's contesting of the inquiry's numbers, Toby Young's attacks on Hallett's reasoning, and Johnson's own smearing of the inquiry as "hopelessly incoherent" are all part of this broader tradition.
But what's most telling is the silence from those who claim to represent the public's interests. Bereaved families are vocal about their loss, but the giant cost of lockdowns - estimated at £310bn to £410bn - needs to be weighed against the number of lives saved. Was it worth it? That's a question that needs serious consideration.
The truth is that these extremist ideologues will never engage in a genuine debate about the difficult trade-offs involved. They're too busy shouting slogans and demonizing those who take precautions. Future modules of the inquiry will explore the harm caused by keeping children out of school, leaving old people to die alone, domestic violence, loneliness, and the crippling blow to the economy.
But one thing is certain: we need a serious conversation about public health and safety, not just ideological posturing. We can't afford to let "freedom" trump lifesaving measures anymore.
For them, lockdowns are anathema - a draconian measure that restricts individual freedom at any cost. They see the interventions as "too little, too late" and will stop at nothing to undermine the statistics and reasoning presented by the inquiry's chair, Heather Hallett.
The facts are stark: 23,000 people died because Boris Johnson resisted locking down the country in time. The images of Italian temporary morgues filled with Covid victims remain etched in public memory as a grim reminder of what could have been avoided if only the authorities had acted sooner and more decisively.
But this is not just about one individual - it's about a broader cultural shift in which anti-science and anti-regulation ideologies have become entrenched. The rightwing media has consistently promoted a narrative that downplays the risks of Covid, and instead advocates for "freedom" above all else, including public health and safety.
This mindset is not new. We've seen it before in the likes of Andrew Neil's Sunday Times, which ran with gay plague theories during the 1980s and 1990s. The Telegraph's contesting of the inquiry's numbers, Toby Young's attacks on Hallett's reasoning, and Johnson's own smearing of the inquiry as "hopelessly incoherent" are all part of this broader tradition.
But what's most telling is the silence from those who claim to represent the public's interests. Bereaved families are vocal about their loss, but the giant cost of lockdowns - estimated at £310bn to £410bn - needs to be weighed against the number of lives saved. Was it worth it? That's a question that needs serious consideration.
The truth is that these extremist ideologues will never engage in a genuine debate about the difficult trade-offs involved. They're too busy shouting slogans and demonizing those who take precautions. Future modules of the inquiry will explore the harm caused by keeping children out of school, leaving old people to die alone, domestic violence, loneliness, and the crippling blow to the economy.
But one thing is certain: we need a serious conversation about public health and safety, not just ideological posturing. We can't afford to let "freedom" trump lifesaving measures anymore.
the uk's covid inquiry is like the only thing that matters rn & these rightwing ppl r being super unreasonable lol @ them 23k lives lost cuz boris resisted lockdowns... like, what even is the point of arguing about it anymore? & don't even get me started on how they're trying to undermine the stats & reasoning presented by heather hallett 
gotta call out the rightwing media for promoting anti-science & anti-regulation ideologies tho. we can't let them win lol... btw, did u know that lockdowns actually saved like 10k+ lives in the us? 
The rightwing media's been playing with fire all these years and now it's catching up on us. I mean, 23k people dead? That's not just numbers, that's lives of families, friends, and loved ones 
. And it's all because some folks are more concerned about freedom than actual human lives 
. The UK Covid inquiry is trying to hold the truth up, but these attacks are getting out of hand 
. We need to have a serious conversation about public health, not just shout slogans from our megaphones 
. And btw, what happened to all the money we spent on lockdowns? £310-£410bn isn't chump change 
...
.
. One can't help but wonder what's driving this anti-science, anti-regulation ideology, and whether we're witnessing a broader cultural shift that prioritizes individual interests over collective well-being 
.
. The inquiry's exploration of the harm caused by restrictive policies is crucial, but we need more than just slogans and demonization; we require a genuine debate about the trade-offs involved 
85% agree that public health should be prioritized over individual freedom 
The UK's population aged 65+ is the group most at risk from Covid, with mortality rates 3x higher than the general population 
I mean, 23,000 people died because Boris Johnson didn't lock down the country on time... that's just crazy. I feel bad for those families who lost loved ones. 
? The problem isn't that lockdowns are draconian, it's that they're not strict enough 
we should be willing to make some sacrifices for the greater good, not just a bunch of ideologues who think they can game the system 
. The fact is, lockdowns did save lives and now it's time to figure out how to balance individual freedom with collective safety without getting too caught up in this "I'm a hero" vs "I'm a freedom-hater" nonsense 
. And it's not just about lockdowns - it's a broader cultural shift towards anti-science and anti-regulation ideologies that are putting public health at risk 
.
. It's like they're more interested in pushing their own agenda than providing accurate information or having a genuine debate about public health 
. It's time for us to prioritize human lives over ideology 
.
. The fact that some people are actively working to discredit the stats and reasoning presented by the inquiry just shows how entrenched their anti-science views are 
.
. And what really gets me is that there's silence from those who claim to represent the public's interests - where are they? We need more voices speaking out against this kind of ideology and advocating for a balanced approach that prioritizes both individual freedom and collective safety 
. We need to have real conversations about the trade-offs involved, not just ideological posturing 
. The fact that people are so vocal about their losses but aren't asking questions about the bigger picture is just crazy 
Are they just too scared to weigh in on a super divisive issue like this? 
future inquiry modules need to focus on the big picture, not just individual issues 
. I think it's time we had a serious conversation about public health and safety, rather than just ideological posturing 
.
. It's not just about "freedom" or "individuality", it's about doing the right thing for our community 
. And btw, where are all these anti-science folks when it comes to vaccines?