> [...] a sizable portion of the population is ready and willing to trample human rights in the name of public safety.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 25:

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family (...)

Your right ends when the rights of others begin. Rights don't exist in an absolute vacuum.

regardless of whether or not you are correct in your assertion (i didn't think the declaration of human rights had such a Chinese interpretation to it..), i guess if OP wants to move to the countryside - in somewhat isolation - the pair of you would be satisfied.

In a democracy the government can't do whatever it likes, it does whatever the electorate are willing to allow or tolerate. The fact is the electorate are willing to allow government to do a lot more than many at the libertarian end of the spectrum like. However blaming "the government" rather than the collective democratic will of the people and their elected representatives sounds better.

I feel like the lack of recognition that "the government" means "the people's expressed will" (albeit there's a gap there in representative democracy) is a major problem in society.

Simultaneously said gap between the government and the people is also a massive problem.

It's a tough nut to crack (ie a hard problem) as those in power are generally loathed to close the gap, as that relinquishes power.

Meanwhile the average person send to be something of a political ignoramus prone to manipulation, whither the power and expression of democracy now?!?

What made/makes the U.S. unique is that it is/was founded not on allowing the will of the majority to dictate but rather on protecting and preserving the rights (freedoms and liberties) of the minority. The greatest minority is the individual. Just because >50% of the people will or want something does not mean that they and their government are not tyrannical. The majority can be wrong.

Cough Magna Carta Cough.

You speak like governments care about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Plot twist: they don't.

In Soviet times, the totalitarian rule of Stalin had a lot of trouble with regulating the lives of rural farmers. In the end they gave up and the farmers just kept observing their seasonal work schedules, banned holidays, and days of worship.

Honestly I can see the merit of keeping medical records for public health reasons, but no one can deny that governments and corporations are corrupt. Rural Americans enjoy a lot of freedoms, but they also cannot access many of the higher paying jobs. The internet has changed this.

Cities are definitely ground zero for totalitarian measures. Is this totalitarian? It's invasive, but it's under the pretense of public health. Where do we draw the line?

I appreciate that the users on this forum approach the crisis with a critical lens rather than blindly following liberal/conservative party lines. I don't think there are many people who are against the idea of preventing disease.

There should be synthesis between those who are concerned for public health and those who are concerned with losing their previously held rights as human beings. Instead we have blind political partisanship over a public health issue that should not be partisan.

EDIT:

Alright it seems this opinion is really unpopular. I can't even downvote other users, but I'd prefer to hear a critical response rather than a knee-jerk reaction. I support public health and vaccines. I support the right to worship, work, and travel freely. I am not religious, out of work, nor do I plan on traveling anytime soon. Why can't we have both?

I would sincerely like to hear a good argument for closing and actively policing houses of worship yet allowing the patronage of major retailers. This is the situation in the USA, and it worked similarly in the USSR.

I'll break the rule of not complaining about dowvoting once and say that HN has been guily of downvoting opinions which are unpopular, not just those that are factually wrong or detrimental to discussion.

Please all, adopt the policy of commenting after downvoting! Sheesh.

Disappointing that this comment is so downvoted. I agree and I hope remote work evens out some of this geographical inequality.

Bye, have fun!