[ntsplnkv2]

I've said this all along - the problem is the lack of credible, consistent leadership.

From flat out denying, to "we have to quarantine, no Thanksgiving!" from mayors who are then caught at fancy dinners and restaurants! Hard to sell the "we're in this together" narrative when you think the rules don't apply to you if you're rich...it's sad.

[throwaway5752]

"the problem is the lack of credible, consistent leadership."

The problem is a highly transmissible, deadly virus, and people reacting to it relative to how others act, regardless of wealth or political affiliation.

[ntsplnkv2]

I'm not sure what your comment is really adding/arguing for, could you clarify further?

[throwaway5752]

My point is that it is a societal sickness that we calibrate our reaction to a non-sentient virus based on what some person is doing. A sibling comment talks about the mayor of Austin being in Cabo. The choices that the president, the mayor of Austin, or a councilperson in San Fransisco has no bearing on the mortality and morbidity rates of this disease, how transmissible it is, or how many hospital beds are available to treat the very ill.

It's unproductive and distracting to focus on a few people, even if they are leaders, making poor personal decisions in a crisis. It is not about them, it's about sars-covid-19 and the thousands of people dying from it every day, and the hundreds of thousands that will die if we don't get our collective act together.

[ntsplnkv2]

If public leaders don't take it seriously enough to follow the protocols they've advised/recommended, how can anyone take it seriously? This leads to more deaths. I'm not focusing on them to vilify them - I'm calling it out as a contributing factor, which it is. And I think it's very productive.

The virus is clearly the problem but it isn't solvable until a vaccine comes which takes time - in the meantime you have to enter the realm of sociology. Messaging matters.

[throwaway5752]

But you are focusing on a few exceptions. At large numbers and over time, you will always find an exception. If 99.9% of leaders advocating social distancing, not traveling, and mask wearing are following the advice and setting a good example - as they are - a few dopes don't negate that.

One moron in Austin doing something has zero bearing on the pathology of this disease. I wish they were not hypocrites, but looking more broadly, a mayor or councilperson isn't the problem in the large scale response to this epidemic.

Message matters, and saying "why do I have to do something smart if at least one person in a person of power is doing something dumb" is itself a message, and not a productive one.

concretely: hypocrites will exist for any principle or situation imaginable, so you can take it as a given, reason about a situation independently of them, and ignore them.

[ntsplnkv2]

> Message matters, and saying "why do I have to do something smart if at least one person in a person of power is doing something dumb" is itself a message, and not a productive one.

EXACTLY. That is the message being sent - it's unproductive! That is my exact point. Our leadership sends unproductive messages all the time -and when half the country doesn't think it's a big deal, they see rich people doing whatever, their confirmation bias kicks in and says "see if it was bad they wouldn't be doing X"

> concretely: hypocrites will exist for any principle or situation imaginable, so you can take it as a given, reason about a situation independently of them, and ignore them.

You can't ignore hypocrites if they have influence. If Trump was pro-mask a good deal of this country would have been too.

[ulisesrmzroche]

Your point is valid but it’s also unrealistic. It’s like thinking shaming people for not wearing masks will make them more likely to wear a mask.

Leadership needs to lead or the message is undermined. What do we want? To stop covid or to fight a culture war?