WHEN, if ever, will we be free from lockdown restrictions to our lives? Almost before the paint had dried on Boris Johnson’s proclaimed Freedom Day the panic about unmasking the public began.
As usual, the First Minister put the brakes on, pronouncing that, “Many of the baseline measures we use – things like face coverings, physical distancing, rigorous hand hygiene…are going to continue”.
In England, the right-thinking set denounced the freeing of faces as a form of selfishness. Some condemned the abandonment of masks as a “dangerous, unethical medical experiment”. Hinting at the preferred new normal, others expressed their disbelief that we had even accepted a world where we “breathed and snorted and coughed over each other”.
Increasing cases of Covid continue to hit the headlines and talk of a crisis in hospitals has accelerated. Ironically, much of this talk bypasses the reality that most of the problems faced come not from the dangerousness of the virus itself, but from the collapsing staff numbers available due to the enforced self-isolation for anyone who has come into contact with someone with the disease.
Self-isolation, however, as a recent report observes, is not simply associated with Covid, but has become a wider social problem, especially for young adults. According to the right-of-centre think-tank, Onward, young people in the UK are facing an epidemic of loneliness, something that has only been made worse by lockdown restrictions.
Identifying a wider social trend, this latest research reveals that a fifth of under 35-year-olds have only one or no close friends. This epidemic of loneliness is three times as pronounced as a decade ago. Millennials are not only more distant from one another but are also far less likely to chat to neighbours. They lack, the report notes, the community roots of previous generations, something that “if left unattended, will erode the glue that holds our society together”.
In this world where young adults have, “fewer friends, trust people less and are more alienated from their communities than ever before”, we find another report, this one for the Economist, that notes that a significant minority of people, especially young people, want to keep aspects of the lockdown forever.
Remarkably, this Ipso Mori report found that a third of those asked were happy to have social distancing in public venues become a permanent feature of life and a quarter were happy for nightclubs and casinos to be closed down, forever. And it is the young, those aged 16 to 24 who are the most keen for these restrictions, with forty percent wanting to close down clubs!
READ MORE: Health and safety obsessed politicians can't beat coronavirus. Opinion by Stuart Waiton
Today, we rightly look back at times when the “fear of the other” degraded society and led to a period of repression for certain groups in society. But we appear not to notice that a new, far more significant fear of the other has grown and is now promoted as a form of moral code by our right-thinking betters.
Tragically, over the last few decades, the new elites have become addicted to a diseased model of society, one in which fear, safety and a culture of protection has become the norm, the good, a strange moral code that elevates a consciousness of self-isolation.
Within this climate of protection, young people have learned to keep their distance from others and have equally learned that freedom is something that needs to be managed and regulated, whether that be by covering other people’s mouths for fear of what they say, or now, covering our mouths for fear of what we breathe.
Those who celebrate indefinite mask wearing attempt to elevate their moral goodness. The reality is that they express well the new isolated elitism that instinctively treats other people as a form of risk, as diseased.
This anti-mass, anti-‘other’ sentiment is not a new form of sociability, it is the opposite, an expression of our asocial elites, who, if left unattended, will further erode the glue that holds our society together.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel