PS: MBlanc, on the current "crisis", this is really not something like the Black Plague, killing someone in every other household, which I know you will agree on. I think it's no more than a nasty virus that's worse than the average flu but will "blow over", as they say, and mutate to become just another one of those that do kill people each winter (just not publicized en masse).

Knowing the state of our Government-sack-hanging-media and the state of our "leaders", I don't think their response is at all appropriate. It's worth it for people who are susceptible to real damage or death from the Kung Flu to be wary and take their own precautions. It does not warrant implementation of a Police State mentality.

As for the next military crisis, yes we are screwed for various reasons. (Were it China, a couple for reasons would involve our dependence on China for most manufactured goods AND a fairly large continent of Chinamen in our country. Not good!) It'd be best to stand down right now - not surrendering to the Chinese, just staying out of their part of the world and, come to think of it, most of the rest, being broke and all to boot.

Anyway, thanks for the comment. We don't always have to agree.

PS It seems to me that most reasonable people accept serious restrictions on their liberties in times of a public health crisis (as this seems to have been). Also in wartime. But that acceptance presupposes certain conditions. There has to be sufficient uniformity of thought and perception (yes, it really is a public health crisis; yes we really have to fight those bad guys). And we have to have confidence that those in charge, who are imposing those restrictions, are doing so in our interest. At present, with regard to the epidemic, it appears that those conditions are largely being met. How much longer that situation will endure as we de-homogenize the population remains to be seen. Regarding war, I doubt that those conditions will ever be met again. As soon as the Chinese decide to seriously contest US hegemony in the Pacific (or elsewhere), I believe we shall see that there will not be sufficient will in the US to resist.

PS: Haha, Robert, I was writing my comment as you were submitting yours. I understand people's nostalgia, if you will, for a Monarchy. There's too much reliance on the whim of one man or woman. I think the Founding Fathers of our country had the best idea for government ever seen.

And it'd have worked too, if it hadn't been for those meddling "Progressives"!

PS: Thank you for the comments, Robert and Federalist (oh, and for clarifying who wrote comment #2) No, living under George III would be a walk in "Freedom Park" compared to in America today.

Mr. Hail, I notice your nice information on the use of that word on the internet (n-grams or something? I know Steve Sailer likes that stuff too) in a previous comment here. (Good luck with our non-existent search function)

It'll be "Let's see, we've got Boy Scouts on Tuesday night, your piano lesson Thursday afternoon, Friday's a LOCKDOWN, and let's see, maybe they'll let us out by Saturday afternoon for the BBQ."

PS: Federalist:

This is why I have long advocated Monarchy.

If you have a unified country, with good people, Democracy works very well; but almost any system will work reasonably well then.

When things break down, Democracy leads people to believe that they have some kind of choice/influence that is completely illusory. It makes them think that the government is legitimate and their 'friend'.

IF the original American Revolution was justifiable, surely one is now.

But with a Monarchy, you know that there are opposed interests at work; and the job is how to balance things out. Plus, you can hope that there is some more long-term planning on the part of a King for life who hopes to pass things on to his son.

As the truly deluded bastards in the Revolutionary Communist Party (and I did know a couple) said: If voting could change anything, they would make it illegal.

PS -- Celebrate the word of the year, the newest addition to the English language, LOCKDOWN (in non-prison sense).

It was making some progress through the 2000s and 2010s (after murky origins in the prison world, ca. early 1970s), but I imagine its breakthrough into world-English is in 2020.

PS-

"Saturday - April 18th 2020 9:30AM MST
Not only is our "freedom" a sham..."

Forgot to put my name on the comment.

PS- Not only is our "freedom" a sham, but so is democratic/representative government. Governors and in some cases mayors simply declare a state of emergency or something along those lines and thereby grant themselves arbitrary power to shut down businesses and limit the movement of their subjects, I mean the citizens. Our so-called representatives aren't consulted. What about checks and balances, separation of powers, and all of that good Constitutional stuff?

In my state, we are supposed to anxiously wait for the governor to issue his occasional pronouncements of what we are allowed to do and what we are prohibited from doing. And his loyal scribes, the news media, dutifully report the decrees and cajole us to obey. They sure as hell don't ask tough questions or investigate what they are told.

Was George III any worse? No taxation without representation? Taxation is a lighter burden than completely closing businesses by government decree and forcing people to stay home. What about the freedom to assemble?

PS: That is a truly excellent comment and post.

At several points in my life I have managed to be the worst of the group. Not that I was bad, but that the others were so good. I have learned a lot by being surrounded by such. It is an honour to be allowed to comment here.