Over the past several months, we have watched the numbers of cases, hospitalizations, and deaths from Covid-19 climb to terrifying heights. As a result, all states issued Stay-at-Home orders, closing businesses and schools, and compelling people to stay at home as much as possible in order to slow—and hopefully stop—infection. Of course, in places like Michigan, Florida, and California, we have seen people openly defy these rules in the name of “freedom.”
Of course, the “freedom” of individuals to choose whether to wear a mask, attend or not to attend a mass gathering, or abide by social distancing recommendations, also comes with tremendous personal and social cost, because not following these recommendations, and choosing to attend something like Trump’s indoor Tulsa rally, puts not only the individual at risk of contracting coronavirus and possibly being hospitalized and even dying, but also their friends, family, and people in their communities that they may not even know.
It is clear that freedom must mean something other than just individual personal choice, because if freedom does not take into account the freedom of others, then every person is at the mercy of another and no one is free.
Lets say that someone walks into a grocery store, is wearing a mask, and practicing social distancing, and is extremely concerned about not contracting or spreading the virus. They want to keep themselves and those around them from getting sick. Contrast this with someone who does not have a mask, and is getting up close and personal with other shoppers, and does yet know whether or not they are carrying the virus.
Our first person goes home, puts their groceries away, takes off their mask, washes their hands, and can be reasonably certain that they and their families are safe from the virus.
Our second person has gotten too close to several people, and potential viral particles have entered their body unfiltered. They went home to their families, did not bother to wash their hands, and have visited several friends who are also not obeying recommendations. They have also potentially infected several people that they do not even know.
Two weeks later, our first example is still healthy, and their family and friends are also safe.
Now, our second person becomes seriously ill, and several people that they know and care about also report symptoms. The number of infected in their community grows by 17.
Of what value is the freedom to endanger others and get sick? What good does it do to not obey the recommendations?
Freedom in the United States, therefore, unless it is to sink as yet another bizarre experiment in self-destruction, must expand to incorporate forces that exert unseen pressure on societies and individuals; it must be expanded to incorporate the needs of the community in which people live. The needs of the individual and the needs of society must be rebalanced.
Take a moment to look at what is happening to the Black community during this crisis. Black and Latinx communities, and especially Philippine immigrants, make up the vast majority of those who have been and continue to be called upon to work during this crisis, and also make up an enormous swath of people who have been exposed to coronavirus largely through no fault of their own, as reports about shortages of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for “essential workers” are ubiquitous throughout this crisis. We have lost many, many frontline healthcare workers to the coronavirus, have not adequately protected them on the job, and many of them are nonwhite. It is difficult to argue that they can be considered “free” in the sense that they can choose whether or not to get sick the way a white woman in Florida can.
Socioeconomic forces almost entirely determine how much freedom an individual actually has, and, in the United States, the system has been deliberately constructed to oppress people of color to the benefit of white people. Much of this has been rendered invisible, built into the policies of banks and the biases of the hiring class, but as our society lurches backward at the whims of 74-year-old infant, we are watching this system fire up its old ways of violence and terror. The countless black lives who have been outright murdered by the police and their allies in recent decades could not choose whether to live or die, marked forever merely by the color of their skin. If we are to expand freedom, we must also proclaim that these lives matter, too.
Health is the entirety of the coronavirus crisis. People do not want to become infected, and they take pains to protect themselves, their families and friends, and their communities. Others, however, do not., because they are more concerned with living their lives as though coronavirus did not exist. However, it does exist, and they expect other people to put themselves at risk for their benefit. One cannot be free while also demanding that others not be free. We have been there before, and we will not return there.
Health is also influenced by socioeconomic forces, is also a major component of freedom because people who are forced to choose between financial ruin or death cannot exercise their freedom. Health is only partially influenced by individual action, and is mostly determined by where one lives. People who are forced to live next to a chemical plant, or work in mines or other risk-intense occupations experience major health problems, and often cannot afford the treatment they need. They also cannot move or change jobs because they do not have the resources to do so. They have no support system.
Resources. That is an important word. Almost all of these problems are problems of resources, and it can be said that freedom is not just individual choice, but is also tied to access to resources, whether it’s a job, or healthcare, or state officers that won’t put their knee on your neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds (George Floyd), or unload an entire magazine into your back (Walter Scott), or whether a nurse or grocery store worker has enough PPE to protect themselves from the coronavirus. This is what freedom must be.
