frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Authoritarianism and Disease

Debate Information

Psychological research has long linked the prevalence of pathogens in a geographical area (1,2) with the prevalence of authoritarian regimes. This is no surprise to psychologists, for authoritarianism is linked to disgust sensitivity, which in turn is a natural disease avoidance reaction. It's why Hitler referred to Jews as rats and cockroaches, and why he used pesticide (Zyklon B ) to exterminate them. Hitler was driven by disgust sensitivity; the psychological mechanism for disease avoidance.

This fact explains quite nicely why people are suddenly so willing to give up their essential freedoms for the promise of safety since the advent of Covid-19. To become more authoritarian is the natural psychological reaction to the perceived threat of disease.

Please be wary of your natural inclination to give more powers to governments and corporations due to the increased risk of disease, we do not need another repeat of the horrors of the 20th century.

To quote Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Sources:
(1) https://files.osf.io/v1/resources/84qcm/providers/osfstorage/5e91c116f13535030dd53aee?direct=&mode=render
(2) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3641067/
AlofRI



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • WinstonCWinstonC 209 Pts   -   edited May 2020
    @ZeusAres42 "I am sure there are plenty of studies that contradict what you might believe, then search just to confirm what you believe. If you want to go about this scientifically then it is helpful to also search for information that counters what one already believes. So, you gather information/Data from two opposing sides, and then you can analyze what piece is greater in terms of evidential support."

    My friend, this link is a very well documented fact in the psychological literature. Am I open to evidence to the contrary? Of course. I don't particularly want to write a long essay detailing the extensive evidence for this link and how it fits perfectly with the surrounding literature on personality, political belief and so on. However, if you really feel it necessary to substantiate my claim (which is mainstream psychology) then I can do so. Edit: I've actually done a decent amount of this in my reply to Happy_Killbot.

    "I also stand by my statement that this case regards covid19 is nothing like Hitler referring to the Jews as a disease that needs to be exterminated."

    So authoritarian attitudes and policies, and the drives underlying them have nothing to do with authoritarian regimes?

    "Furthermore, during this global pandemic which began in late December, I haven't seen many countries become authoritarian at all with the exception of China who was already authoritarian to begin to with."

    I'm not sure that you understand. The political compass has four dimensions. There is left and right and there is authoritarian and libertarian. Things can be more right or left wing and things can be more authoritarian or more libertarian. Western regimes have become more authoritarian because they have taken liberties from their citizens.

    "I have to disagree. Also, global pandemics and terrorism are two different things; the anti-terror legislation is a discussion for another day."

    When, in your knowledge, has a government ever willingly given up powers that it has given itself? I guarantee you that contact tracing is here to stay and that if another pandemic occurs people will ocne again be locked down.

    "Furthermore, there is an abundance of sufficient data to suggest that more deaths would be lost without lockdown measures. This stands to reason since this is a disease that grows at an exponential rate."

    As I have previously showed, the mortality rate of this virus is far lower than previously believed (3,4,5,6,7,8). The reason for the initial rate appearing far higher is sampling bias. Most cases are relatively mild or symptom-less.

       "Coronavirus Cases:
        4,422,147
        view by country
        Deaths:
        297,552
        Recovered:
        1,654,819"

    The studies I linked suggest far higher rates of infection.

    "These are also known cases; the amount is probably far greater."

    Exactly, which means the mortality rate is lower. I've mentioned this before to you but if someone dies while they are infected with Covid-19, that is added to the numbers regardless of the cause of death.

    "Also, according to leading mathematical models without good lockdown measures, the death toll would be in the millions in just a matter of months."

    Those models were wrong. As shown above, mortality rates are lower than initially believed, due to the sampling bias of early studies. Also, the lock-downs are expected to kill millions, as previously discussed.

    "We need to balance everything out with the economy, controlling the virus, and also other matters such as starving people. And from where I am standing most countries are trying to do this anyway. As for the United States I'd say their lockdown measures are one of the most modest compared with many other countries across the globe."

    In some states they are, in others they are not. I believe I have put forth a good case for why the threat of the virus has been over-exaggerated and why the lock-downs will be disastrous for both the economy and for life. This is not to say that people should not take precautions, it is to say that in this case the solution of lock-downs causes more problems than it fixes.

    Sources:
    (3) https://www.biospace.com/article/multiple-studies-suggest-covid-19-mortality-rate-may-be-lower-than-expected-/
    (4) https://www.livescience.com/death-rate-lower-than-estimates.html
    (5) https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/los-angeles-study-suggests-virus-much-more-widespread-1.4904990
    (6) https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200418/new-model-shows-covid-more-widespread-less-severe
    (7) https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1278393/Germany-news-economy-threat-Peter-Altmaier-coronavirus-return-COVID-19-latest
    (8) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/09/many-people-may-already-have-immunity-coronavirus-german-study/
    ZeusAres42
  • WinstonCWinstonC 209 Pts   -  
    @Happy_Killbot "First off, it is important to note that the first link is a pre-print which has not yet been peer-reviewed and it is very recent, clearly in direct response to the Covid-19 outbreak."

    It's an old hypothesis (1). I sadly cannot link most of my archived studies on this issue as they are on my hard drive, not publicly available and copyrighted. You'll find a lot of studies cited in the introductions of the papers, for they go over the background of research on the issue.

    A relevant example might be found in the first paper I originally cited in the OP;
    "Firstly, at the level of individual psychology, when the perception of infection risk is elevated, individuals tend to adopt more conformist and conservative attitudes (Helzer & Pizarro, 2011; Inbar, Pizarro, Bloom, 2009; Jones & Fitness, 2008; Murray & Schaller, 2012; Wu & Chang, 2012)."

    Or perhaps, from the same introduction;
    "Higher levels of parasite stress are related to greater regional political authoritarianism and social conservatism (Murray, Schaller, & Suedfeld, 2013; Terrizzi, Shook, McDaniel, 2013; Thornhill, Fincher, & Aran, 2009; but see: Horita & Takezawa, 2018), prioritization of obedience and intolerance of nonconformity (Murray, Trudeau, & Schaller, 2011; Tybur et al., 2016), heightened collectivism and endorsement of binding moral concerns (Fincher, Thornhill, Murray, Schaller, 2008; Van Leeuwen, Park, Koenig, & Graham, 2012), moral vitalism (Bastian et al., 2019), and increased frequency of intrastate armed conflict (Letendre, Fincher, & Thornhill, 2010). Higher ecological prevalence of infectious diseases therefore appears to promote societal norms that are more conservative and authoritarian."

    "That context out of the way, we can finally start talking about where this works and where it breaks down. These theories do not have anything to do with the Nazi ideology which lead Hitler to his final solution. This is not to say that there is no connection here, but simply put this theory is misapplied in psychoanalyzing Hitler. It is likely that Hitler already had authoritarian tenancies and the independently labeled Jews as diseases thanks to his anti-Semitic ideas."

    You may find this likely, however the link between authoritarianism and disgust sensitivity is clear (2). We can further break down disgust sensitivity as a construct but for our current discussion it seems unnecessary. A lack of openness (one of the "Big Five" personality traits) is associated with disgust sensitivity (3) which in turn is associated with authoritarianism (4,5). Hitler certainly acted as if he was driven by disgust sensitivity, and at the very least he capitalized on the disgust sensitivity of others.

    "The global pandemic has lead to a preference for authoritarian policies, such as widespread respect for professional order's to stay home and bans on non-essential work. What can also be noted, is that regions that already have authoritarian tenancies, such as China, Singapore, Japan, and South Korea (North Korea maybe?) have all been very effective at combating the disease and getting the situation under control as quickly as possible."

    So we agree.

    "What the theory predicts is that the tendency of authoritarian governments to succeed where libertarian governance fails is what leads to their success across many generations. Read in this way, it could therefore be argued that authoritarianism is required to limit the spread of disease. (I'm not arguing this point, just point it out)"

    We shall see, for the upcoming financial crash is going to cause untold damage, most especially to those places that were placed in lock-down.

    "While I am completely against authoritarianism as a permanent fixture in our society, a minarchist society has a serious vulnerability to pathogens."

    I don't think there has ever been a time when a nation has forbade all it's citizens from even leaving their homes without permission. I'd also suggest that the mortality rate of this virus is too low for such a response to be proportional, as detailed with many studies in my other posts.

    "However, if we have learned anything since 911 it is that getting rid of authoritarian policies is nigh impossible."

    100% agreed. In the case of the contact tracing, for example, I see not why the governments of the world will ever cease this practice.

    "What we must do moving forward is to set our society up with the proper checks and balances to be able to ramp up authoritarian policies temporarily and in response to catastrophe in such a way that this power will expire, thus limiting it."

    I agree to some extent, but the problem is that it sets a precedent for these authoritarian policies to return, for example, when there is a new infectious disease.

    "A preemptive plan for the rapid deployment of preventative measures could allow us and our society to get the best of both worlds- limiting freedoms only to the point necessary to protect the public's health."

    What would this entail?

    Sources:
    (1) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23658718?dopt=Abstract
    (2) https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.171091
    (3) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222798873_Disgust_Sensitivity_as_a_Function_of_the_Big_Five_and_Gender
    (4) https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0042366
    (5) https://bigthink.com/stephen-johnson/the-2-main-personality-types-of-the-politically-correct
  • WinstonC said:
    @ZeusAres42

    "I also stand by my statement that this case regards covid19 is nothing like Hitler referring to the Jews as a disease that needs to be exterminated."

    So authoritarian attitudes and policies, and the drives underlying them have nothing to do with authoritarian regimes?

    Not what I said or even implied for that matter.


    "Furthermore, during this global pandemic which began in late December, I haven't seen many countries become authoritarian at all with the exception of China who was already authoritarian to begin to with."

    I'm not sure that you understand. The political compass has four dimensions. There is left and right and there is authoritarian and libertarian. Things can be more right or left wing and things can be more authoritarian or more libertarian. Western regimes have become more authoritarian because they have taken liberties from their citizens.
    Maybe you and I are thinking of something different when we think of authoritarianism. When I think of authoritarianism I am thinking in terms of totalitarianism where are government is dictatorial and centralized that demands complete subservience to the state. I don't see this going on in the US or many other countries for that matter.


    "I have to disagree. Also, global pandemics and terrorism are two different things; the anti-terror legislation is a discussion for another day."

    When, in your knowledge, has a government ever willingly given up powers that it has given itself? I guarantee you that contact tracing is here to stay and that if another pandemic occurs people will ocne again be locked down.

    "Furthermore, there is an abundance of sufficient data to suggest that more deaths would be lost without lockdown measures. This stands to reason since this is a disease that grows at an exponential rate."

    As I have previously showed, the mortality rate of this virus is far lower than previously believed (3,4,5,6,7,8). The reason for the initial rate appearing far higher is sampling bias. Most cases are relatively mild or symptom-less.

       "Coronavirus Cases:
        4,422,147
        view by country
        Deaths:
        297,552
        Recovered:
        1,654,819"

    The studies I linked suggest far higher rates of infection.

    "These are also known cases; the amount is probably far greater."

    Exactly, which means the mortality rate is lower. I've mentioned this before to you but if someone dies while they are infected with Covid-19, that is added to the numbers regardless of the cause of death.

    "Also, according to leading mathematical models without good lockdown measures, the death toll would be in the millions in just a matter of months."

    Those models were wrong. As shown above, mortality rates are lower than initially believed, due to the sampling bias of early studies. Also, the lock-downs are expected to kill millions, as previously discussed.

    "We need to balance everything out with the economy, controlling the virus, and also other matters such as starving people. And from where I am standing most countries are trying to do this anyway. As for the United States I'd say their lockdown measures are one of the most modest compared with many other countries across the globe."

    In some states they are, in others they are not. I believe I have put forth a good case for why the threat of the virus has been over-exaggerated and why the lock-downs will be disastrous for both the economy and for life. This is not to say that people should not take precautions, it is to say that in this case the solution of lock-downs causes more problems than it fixes.

    Sources:
    (3) https://www.biospace.com/article/multiple-studies-suggest-covid-19-mortality-rate-may-be-lower-than-expected-/
    (4) https://www.livescience.com/death-rate-lower-than-estimates.html
    (5) https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/los-angeles-study-suggests-virus-much-more-widespread-1.4904990
    (6) https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200418/new-model-shows-covid-more-widespread-less-severe
    (7) https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1278393/Germany-news-economy-threat-Peter-Altmaier-coronavirus-return-COVID-19-latest
    (8) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/09/many-people-may-already-have-immunity-coronavirus-german-study/

    Firstly, I am aware of sampling biases as well as other things such as minimization, exaggeration, puffery, catastrophizing, generalizing, etc. Minimizations in this respect would be to take the small percentage of the population that gets a bad outcome from this virus outbreak and then conclude it mustn't be that bad after all. What people tend to forget though that his percent is still a huge number of people that equates to the millions without any mitigation strategies. The other thing that needs to be remembered is this is something that grows exponentially. Bill Gates did a very good video on the exponential growth of pandemics that I recommend watching. Furthermore, let's also not forget the indirect deaths that occur due to hospitals becoming overwhelmed with outbreaks which also needs to be mitigated.

    Secondly, as this is unprecedented the models won't be 100 % accurate at least in the beginning phase anyway. With that being said, leading scientists have not been that far off the mark so far with their predictions. For example, at the beginning of April, the leading scientists from the University of Washington predicted that the UK would see about 60,000 deaths by August. It's now May and the UK is thought to have 40,000 deaths although the official report is just above 33, 000. This just goes to show they were not that far off.

    Moreover, as with any mathematical models the worst-case scenario is the one that will always come up, and that is the one you need to prepare for. It's not that these models are wrong; it's that they are looking at the worst-case scenarios. Now, while we may not have the worst-case scenario it is still worth preparing for it. Just like if you go out and it's expected to rain, would you decide to leave your umbrella at home because the weather forecast might have got it wrong? I don't think so. Or if the forecast predicted a deadly hurricane would you not take cover because the hurricane might not be as bad as it is predicted?

    Deaths caused by a lockdown also need to be prevented as well. However, both direct and indirect deaths seem a far bigger problem as a result of this virus than what might happen during the lockdown.
     
    Thanks for the links. I have to admit that I have not read them yet but will review them as time permits.



  • Happy_KillbotHappy_Killbot 5557 Pts   -  
    @WinstonC
    You may find this likely, however the link between authoritarianism and disgust sensitivity is clear (2). We can further break down disgust sensitivity as a construct but for our current discussion it seems unnecessary. A lack of openness (one of the "Big Five" personality traits) is associated with disgust sensitivity (3) which in turn is associated with authoritarianism (4,5). Hitler certainly acted as if he was driven by disgust sensitivity, and at the very least he capitalized on the disgust sensitivity of others.
    You are still misapplying these studies to reach the conclusions you are arriving at. Even if we assume that Hitler was low in openness and high in disgust sensitivity which made him as an individual more likely to hold his authoritarian attitudes, this is inadequate to connect parasite-stress theory to the Nazi ideology and Hitler's final solution because it fails to demonstrate a causal link between the two.

    Low openness/disgust sensitivity in Hitler --> Authoritarianism ---> ????? ---> Parasite-stress theory ---> ????? ---> Nazism ---> Hitler's final solution
    We shall see, for the upcoming financial crash is going to cause untold damage, most especially to those places that were placed in lock-down.
    China and South Korea are already back at full operational capacity. The point I am making here is that according to parasite-stress theory authoritarianism thrives in a parasitic environment, and decimates libertarian states like the US. If we take the study seriously, then it deals a major blow to libertarian ideas because of the financial damage.
    I don't think there has ever been a time when a nation has forbade all it's citizens from even leaving their homes without permission. I'd also suggest that the mortality rate of this virus is too low for such a response to be proportional, as detailed with many studies in my other posts.
    I would argue that the reason we have never seen this in the past is because the means to enact such a policy are only recently available via information technology such as the internet and advances in the understanding of pathogens.
    100% agreed. In the case of the contact tracing, for example, I see not why the governments of the world will ever cease this practice.
    The way forward is to put this power in everyone's hands.
    I agree to some extent, but the problem is that it sets a precedent for these authoritarian policies to return, for example, when there is a new infectious disease.
    That's literally the idea. You make your state fungible in such a way that it can be authoritarian when it needs to be and libertarian when it can be.
    What would this entail?
    1. A detailed plan for pandemic response, stockpiles of medical equipment, designated personnel, and equipment (Basically everything Obama had that Trump got rid of)
    2. Legislative plans in place which would allow temporary control be delegated to the designated personnel. This power would have a time limit, after which the individuals holding the designated power must be changed (to prevent them from hording power so they have motivation to actually fix the problem)
    3. Education and training materials set aside to promote safety and compliance. (viruses are bad M'kay?)
    4. Special emergency funds or loan provisions set aside to limit economic damage in the case of a large scale outbreak.

    Basically, everything would work like this: A virus outbreak gets into the country and congress turns over some control to designated experts who are chosen ahead of time based on qualifications. This person would have access to the funding and resources to coordinate action against the outbreak. They would also have limited control of policy, although any such policies would need to be ratified by congress and approved by the president. The idea is of course, to never get to this point by enabling a rapid response. After a set time limit, this person would no longer have control and the second in line will relieve the first.
    piloteerZeusAres42
    At some point in the distant past, the universe went through a phase of cosmic inflation,
    Stars formed, planets coalesced, and on at least one of them life took root.
    Through a long process of evolution this life 
    developed into the human race.
    Humans conquered fire, built complex societies and advanced technology .

    All of that so we can argue about nothing.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2023 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch