You Don't Have To Be Intelligent To Wear A Mask

It’s Election2020 season, in fact it is coming down to the last couple of laps of the races. There are plenty of issues and crises but mostly there is little of significance that is presented, discussed or apparently that matters in American elections that is of consequence. Yes, yet again our politicians and political parties are engaged in the “contest of ideologies”; not ‘ideas’ but their partisan political perspectives. Yes, these ideologies are types of ideas but not of substance; rather they are mostly hypothetical wish-lists for how they want things to be, even though the concepts bear little relationship to reality or even rationality. To add to the disappointments, we have the usual election fare of fear, anger, distortion and lies being offered buffet-style. All the usual divisive behaviors are ramped up to detriment of the nation’s interests and benefit. Even something as highly critical to the nation’s and public’s interest as the COVID-19 crisis, is being played out under partisan political party campaign strategies and themes.

The observation offered above regarding our politics and political environment is to point out that our society is highly dependent upon an “informed” public; and to be ‘informed’ there needs to be a number of conditions meet within our society. A significant condition is that information must be given to the public about what is happening that affects them, that they need to know in order to make appropriate decisions, that the information can be trusted, and that our government isn’t hiding, editing or misinforming the public for reasons that are not in the public’s interests. This last condition: the government providing the public with the necessary and proper information about situations that the public has a “need” to know and a “right” to know.

Take an important public policy issue as simple and normally as apolitical as one would have thought, and the 2020 Election has transformed it into a choice between our political parties. That public policy is: Wearing A Mask. Fundamentally this is a public health issue and not a political one. However, because of a personality and cognitive deficit situation, wearing or not wearing a mask has been elevated to a political litmus test. Normally this would just be another in a long line of inane positions that corrodes and corrupts our government, political system and society which is the typical and very essence of our political parties’ rigid adherence to their self-delusional ideologies. The Corona virus unfortunately is indifferent to ideologies, it does not differentiate between political parties and the consequences of the virus’ reach beyond the scope that misguided politicians are generally able to use to harm the nation and public. So, the Wearing A Mask issue warrants extricating it from the failure of our government, our politicians, our healthcare entities, and our news media. What is needed is for the Wear A Mask issue to be handled competently. Thus those normal entities seem to have demonstrated their competency in such a matter. Now, given that all of entities have failed to put the issue into a context that would ‘inform’ the public there is a need to proceed differently. This is necessary despite the politicians’ using masks as some issue having to do with some nebulous distractions completely unconnected with the public’s welfare and their duty to serve the nation’s interests.

Our government agencies have failed to set policies which are or would be effective due to the interference of political appointees and their self-interests. Additionally, while being world-class experts in the medical and healthcare arenas, our agency professionals lack the skills and abilities to manage their political ‘superiors’ effectively and thus unfortunately fail to fulfil their own responsibilities. This upward-facing management skill is not something that the vast majority of individuals possess, or are adept at, so this causal factor should not be viewed as a professional abnormality.

As to the news media, their contribution to this civic negligence that the wearing a mask issue has become is an example of their ‘state of the art’ journalist profession. The news media is highly engaged in reporting on the dynamics surrounding the issue and in providing the ‘balanced’ views of politicians and government officials on what the public policy is or isn’t or why it varies depending on to whomever you are talking. The news does interview healthcare experts with the standard questions about whether wearing a mask would be the right policy and receive the almost unanimous consensus that wearing a mask if one of the most useful things that the public should do. But the news media doesn’t seem equipped or able to ask substantive and informative questions of the politicians, the healthcare professionals, or even of the public about wearing a mask.

Consider just the following questions, and consider if you have ever heard a politician, a healthcare professional, or a news journalist deal with them.

1.       What legal authority does a Federal, State or Local elected official have regarding public healthcare policies?

2.       What cases taken to the Supreme Court have demonstrated their authority and jurisdiction?

3.       Is there any established precedent for which governmental entity has authoritative precedence over another?  E.g., does Federal override State which overrides Local; or some other jurisdictional layering?

4.       When the Federal, State or Local government changes some public policy, regulation or requirement as the COVID-19 epidemic plays out across the nation, what was the forecasted cases or other measurement of the virus expected to be before the change and what is projected because of the change? What data / change in outcomes will constitute a success of the policy or a failure to achieve the expected results?

5.       Why haven’t government healthcare or other entities proposed policies to businesses, private and public entities for dealing with Wear-A-Mask policies? What examples are there of governmental options suggested?

6.       In declaring that “essential workers” cannot sue an employer for COVID-19 health consequences are there any Constitutional rights being violated? After all, the government telling citizens that they cannot do something isn’t the same as them not having the right to do so.

While all this illustrates why America’s public policies around COVID-19 including the Mask-Wearing policy(ies) are confusing, inconsistent and problematic; it doesn’t explain the reasoning goes into should it be a public policy or just a recommendation/guidance from officials. If COVID is a threat to the US, and both parties actually agree that it is; then there ought to be a policy that addresses it. If the nation needs to have the virus controlled and eliminated, then there should be a policy for doing so.

Leadership on guiding the nation through this crisis is a type of intelligence test. Passing the test would have some pretty simple conditions. What you do either reduces new infections (passes) or it does not (fails). Changes in policies or transitions from one phase to another produce the forecasted changes (passes) or the situation related to the change gets worse beyond what was forecast (fail). If the policy change is based upon a “we hope” decision, it’s still a failure if it doesn’t deliver what you “hoped” was going to happen.

What this comes down to is that for our political and healthcare leaders, you pass the intelligence test if you can validate your reasoning and decisions from a forecast presented before the fact and the data from the facts that actually happened.

For individuals or businesses or companies the intelligence test comes with X dimensions. First, if you violate the ‘public policy’ then you are to be held accountable. If the policy is to “Wear A Mask” then you are to be receive the appropriate penalties. If you believe your right(s) are being violated then you can sue but until a judgement is made by a court with applicable jurisdiction you are not exempt from the policy. You fail the test.

Second, exercising your choice to be ‘civilly disobedient’ and not wearing a mask doesn’t exempt your from being counter-sued for any number of possible legal violations. For example, there is no personal right to ‘not wear a mask’ and thereby create a risk to the rights of other individuals in violation of an standing public policy, nor do you have a right that overrides a business’s own policy or a private or public entity which chooses to require one. You do have the right to not engage with anyone or a business but that does means you do not engage with them. Trying to apply your ‘right’ above that of others is to fail the test.

Third, having opinions about whether the COVID-19 virus is a risk to you or not doesn’t have any weight in whether you are still required to adhere to public policy. Even if you were an expert in virology, the medical degree does not override official public policy. The requirement that a court decision to vacate/void the policy is still required. Not wearing a mask because you don’t think you are at risk is failing the test.

Fourth, where someone is permitted to not wear a mask in accordance with the established public policy or a business’ policy (which doesn’t violate governmental policy) does not confer upon an individual the right to now wear a mask unless they also meet the conditions under which the established policy defines the allowance. You can remove a mask to eat your meal at your table in a restaurant for example. This does not allow you to not wear a mask when entering or leaving. Because someone physically-distanced from others is speaking at an event doesn’t mean that anyone else in attendance is free to not wear a mask if the applicable public policy(ies) do not allow. Doing otherwise fails the test.

Fifth, it doesn’t matter what your rationale is for not wearing a mask, there is no getting around a public policy where requires it and that has not been declared illegal and upheld by the courts. Not wearing a mask fails the test.

Lastly, nothing about abiding by the established public policy regarding wearing a mask in required conditions requires any notable level of intelligence. The policy can be followed by those that may not be fully capable of understanding why it is required from a medical perspective, for a healthcare perspective or from a social perspective. It is why even very young children can be taught to wear them. Similarly, there is an expectation that our elected officials, our healthcare professionals, and our governmental agencies will create public policies that are appropriate and necessary to safeguard the public when threatened by risks like the Corona virus. The presumption is that as a collective group they are applying the best knowledge, evidence, expertise, and judgement that is available to them. In other words, they are doing what would constitute the intelligent thing to do. To do contrary would logically be unintelligent, and yes you would fail the test.

The above reasoning would seem to adequately explain why the US has not performed well with regard to its reactions and efforts around the Corona virus. It would seem that as a nation, in aggregate we may well be failing the intelligence test.