Virus or Second Person is a killer? Analysis by Valeriu Vasilică

“The Second Person poses a real threat to the life of many people and many people even died because of it. It is a definition close to the one that is given by the law to terrorism and terrorists. Or to killers in general… Is it harsh? Very Harsh! Is it real?…”

I admit that it is a harsh title and a harsh, possibly disproportionately harsh approach to the theme, but how else can we reach the mind and conscience of those who do not obey simple rules of conduct in times of a pandemic, when tens of people die daily in Moldova and thousands and tens of thousands more in the world due to the novel coronavirus? Personally, I’m daily stunned by the news of the death of one or two or more real persons whom I knew in virtue of my age and of the profession I have practiced for many years. Many of them were very valuable as professionals and as decent people too. I’m astounded and every time wonder why did it happen so, who is responsible for this and what else can we do to stop this ... genocide, perhaps?

The evident response that the novel coronavirus and the government that badly manages the pandemic are to blame does not seem the most relevant to me also because such an approach does not produce results or produces the opposite results. I convince myself more that the Person is to blame more than the Virus, including the ordinary people who are not burdened by posts, but who are obliged to behave appropriately, given that they live in society, so as not to pose a threat of death to those around, not only to the close ones.   

Harsh approach I propose is the following:

The novel coronavirus kills millions of people already, but not directly. The Virus initially killed directly several individuals probably, if not any individual. The idea is that to kill a Person, the Virus needs a carrier that is another Person in about 99.999999% of the cases. In the initial period, the Second Person didn’t know very well the role and the measures that should be undertaken so as not to become the source of transmission of the Virus. But very swiftly everyone learned that: the minimum or even essential thing that should be done by the Second Person is to wear correctly a mask, to maintain distancing and to disinfect particular things around, especially the own hands. But it wasn’t meant to be...

Very quickly, at the speed at which the Virus itself spread, the Second Person found reasons, or this was advised by someone for unknown reasons, not to do those simple things mentioned above because they “don’t believe in the existence of the Virus”; because “the pandemic is an international conspiracy” of someone who is at the top; because “I’m not afraid of the Virus, because I’m perfectly healthy, cannot become infected and cannot pose a danger to others”; because “I’m a free man in a democratic, free country and have the right to behave freely”; because “everything is decided by God and He takes care of me” etc. etc. etc.

There is yet one thought that does not come to the mind and conscience of the Second Person or this does not allow this thought to come himself – the thought that this way they become a potential... “Killer” or even a real, authentic killer. As each of the tens, thousands and millions of people who died until now had someone of those many Second Persons as a carrier either directly or through many intermediaries.  

Considering a part of the “arguments” of the Second Person

Arguments: “I don’t believe because the Virus does not exist”, says the Second Person. If we ask him: “Is there death caused by the Virus?”, the answer can lead to another “argument” – that the dead were invented within the presumed “international conspiracy” or “they die because they wear masks”. And then I’m afraid to even think about what should happen to this and his close relatives or at least to many of the people whom he knows for him to start to “believe”.  But most probably he will not believe then too as he considers himself free and entitled to believe or not, to be afraid or not. And then he would rather play the  role of the “killer” till the end or till his end.

Counterarguments: But I and many persons like me believe that the Virus exists and we are afraid of it and fear for us and for our family, also because of the difficult state of the own health or the health of dear people. I and many like me are free and entitled to believe and to be afraid. We also live in a free country and have the right to this freedom and also the right to have our freedom to believe and to be afraid/protect ourselves guaranteed and ensured. In fact, it is no longer a freedom only. It is guaranteeing and securing of our lives, of each of us and of our close people, of the whole mankind. Many of those infected by the Second Person do not lose “only” the freedom as they find themselves not in imaginary cells, but in real coffins.

“Lyrical” deviations concerning faith, restrictions and democracy

A wise saying runs: “If we wager that God exists and we are wrong, we lose nothing. But if God exists and we are wrong, we lose everything...”. In our case, with belief or non-belief in the Virus, it happens the opposite: the one who believes and protects oneself loses everything because of the one who does not believe. This is not in good faith, is not humane, is not just and should not be conspired legal too.

Another wise saying runs: “Democracy is a bad thing, but mankind didn’t invent something better yet”. In our case, mankind hasn’t yet invented something more accessible, safer and less costly in case of viruses and pandemics than the correct wearing of masks, maintaining of distancing and disinfection for interrupting the transmission of the virus by the Second Person. By the way, doctors wear masks and disinfect their hands since they take up their duties so as to protect themselves and those around from viruses, bacteria and disease, respectively from death. The ignoring of these simple rules is not in good faith, is not humane, is not just and should not be conspired legal too if you do not suggest something safer instead.

Between right to position and right to life

I do not intend to name “Killers” all those who do not wear a mask or wear it incorrectly. There are many poor, wretched people who have more objective reasons to behave so, for example, extreme poverty, old age, lack of access to correct information, etc. But these are very isolated, timid and do not boast of their state and thus pose a danger to a lesser extent. The Second Person, on the contrary, is active, visible, violent, most of the times well-dressed and physically fit. We daily see examples of potential or real killers (without inverted commas) on TV, in parks, in public transport, in supermarkets, who laugh at you when you ask them to put on a mask or to maintain distancing, who respond “because I do not want” when they are asked by journalists why they don’t wear a mask in public, who even attack journalists when they are asked, who mock at the police officers even if they just left the Church or are even priests. The case that happened recently in the Chisinau Park “La izvor” is exactly about the Second Person or many other Second Persons.

The Second Person has a behavior and a position. He considers himself superior to others. I recently saw the words “My life… my rules” on a new, expensive car. This is probably the car owner’s position and this does not accept something else or someone else in this life, not even my life and the life of many like me who believe, are afraid and protect ourselves not from the Virus, but rather from the Second Person. This is a position that erodes the foundations of the rule of law and democracy with which one protects oneself and which are used in the own interests. This is definitely super-egoism on the part of the Second Person. It is interesting to know how real are the rumors about the political and financial components in this super-egoism? Is there egoism or super-egoism in a pure state?

The Second Person poses a real danger to the life of many people and many people even died because of it. It is a definition close to the one that is given by the law to terrorism and terrorists. Or to killers in general… Is it harsh? Very Harsh! Is it real?

P.S.: “I did some calculations and determined that death accelerates. In March, we will have over 1,000 deaths due to COVID-19 alone. For comparison, on September 1, 2020, we had the first 1,000 casualties in this pandemic. 1,000 during six months. Now we have 1,000 during one month…” (Ala Tocarciuc).

P.P.S. Surely, the authorities, the political class bear a part of the blame of the situation in which we are, also because they encourage the behavior of the Second Person. But this aspect will be developed on another occasion so as not to diminish the responsibility of each of us, those many who are not burdened by posts, but who are obliged to behave appropriately...”.

Вы используете модуль ADS Blocker .
IPN поддерживается от рекламы.
Поддержи свободную прессу!
Некоторые функции могут быть заблокированы, отключите модуль ADS Blocker .
Спасибо за понимание!
Команда IPN.