Your point is that if the government did not make any mask mandates, people would wear masks because of reverse psychology. So we need to get rid of mask mandates so that people will wear masks?

My point is that they tried it without a mandate already. North Dakota, Arizona, Iowa, Arkansas, etc. States without mask mandates saw cases spike, ICUs filled up, health care workers started getting sick, things got scary, and they were forced to implement mask mandates before reaching the point where there was zero available healthcare capacity for non-COVID issues.

Why have so many states that initially refused mask mandates had to turn 180 degrees and mandate masks? Because nobody was wearing masks without the mandate.

Trump failing to encourage mask use is an active decision not to intervene. You seem to be saying that by failing to invade Canada, we have intervened in Canada.

Or maybe I missed your point? That's definitely a possibility.

“Trump failing to encourage mask use is an active decision not to intervene.”

I think the disagreement rests on this point. From my point of view Trump has done vastly more than not intervene.

The President of the United States has gactively discouraged* mask usage.

That is why states have decided they need mandates.

You know, that's a really good point. I was defining intervention as making policy, but that may be a little outdated.