The Great Silence of 2020
Examining the Suppression of Debate during the Pandemic and How Fear and Compliance Shaped Public Discourse
Photo by engin akyurt on Unsplash
In the spring of 2020, governments at all levels in the United States suspended the rights we had always taken for granted. In many jurisdictions, these restrictions continued for another two years. Those who could afford to stay in their homes hid from the "invisible enemy" outside because mainstream media advised them to, while "essential" workers delivered groceries to the germophobic upper class. The press echoed every statement made by public health officials, who were later revealed to be representing the national security state. If there was an ultimate goal, no one knew what it was.
The goal was a vaccine, which was meant to end the pandemic. It didn't. It even prolonged it. Panic alone claimed many lives, and the "mitigation measures" damaged public health. However, some influential people profited significantly from it. These were strange times that left bitter memories. The most shocking aspect was the suppression of debate. Even more troubling was that very few voices dared to speak up. This was the most astonishing feature of these three years.
We found ourselves amid an unprecedented wave of anti-science nonsense in our lives, when rationality was replaced by ideological fervor and incredible stupidity was spouted from positions of power. Yet, intellectuals either participated in the madness or remained silent.
Why didn't more people speak up?
Some were afraid of the virus, others of contradicting a strong consensus. However, many individuals were not in a position to challenge elite opinions. They were either confused or trapped in professional environments where free thought and speech were prohibited.
Safety and compliance became the order of the day—not only protection from disease but also from all public, private, and media authorities. Obedience was demanded with government mandates and new cultural norms that deemed any exercise of choice as deadly.
Labeling these people as cowards might be too harsh. Many just wanted to avoid personal and professional disapproval. They carefully assessed the situation and chose to remain silent. This decision proved to be wise.
Eventually, numerous professionals, journalists, scientists, lawyers, medical doctors, and economists did speak up. Their voices made a significant impact in gradually dismantling the restrictions. However, they faced tremendous professional and personal disruptions, confirming their worst fears.
Many people like me believed we were free and that institutions safeguarding free speech surrounded us. We had newspapers, the internet, universities, courts, and think tanks—hundreds of thousands of individuals tasked with correcting mass hysteria and government overreach. They failed. Worse still, the silence that began in March 2020 largely persists.
A new order emerged from the disaster; the biosecurity state and the rule by techno-primitivism overlords. This new way of life in this country shares little resemblance to our previous experiences but has much in common with ancient despotisms. What started as a panic over disease transformed into a new way of life that dismissed the values of the Enlightenment.
Clayton is the founder and publisher of the social and political commentary newsletter Think Things Through and the host of the Think Things Through Podcast.