The coronavirus is reminding us that old wisdom retains its value in new times.
For instance, there’s the issue of copper fixtures, such as cups and pipes, which were used by ancients across the world. As Fast Company’s Mark Wilson recently pointed out, copper has distinct anti-microbial properties—the metal does, after all, have that distinct taste to it. As one expert, Bill Keevil, professor of environmental health care at the University of Southampton, told the magazine, copper could and should be used much more: “We’ve seen viruses just blow apart. They land on copper and it just degrades them.” And in fact, in 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved the use of various anti-microbial metals and alloys, including copper, bronze, and brass.
Still, in most places, copper was long ago replaced by stainless steel and plastic. These latter materials have many advantages, too, insofar as they are cheaper and don’t corrode, and yet maybe the old wisdom about the hygienic qualities of copper is more valuable than we’ve realized.
Now let’s consider some other examples of old wisdom proving its continuing worth; we’ll look at the enduring genius—much smarter than the latest politically correct fad—of borders, walls, distancing, dispersion, and self-defense.
Borders
For years, we’ve been told that open borders are a sign of modern, open-minded sophistication. And at the same time, we’ve been told that closed borders are a sign of reactionary, closed-minded thuggery—make that, Trumpery.
So what to make of this modern “sophistication” now, when virtually every country—even ultra-PC Canada—is closing its border, seeking to monitor, closely, who is coming in? Indeed, a March 22 article in The New York Times on the impact of the pandemic in Italy reads as if it were written by some hardcore right-winger. Having mocked the folly of various Italian politicians who had pledged not to change a thing—and certainly not to close the border—the Times article then adds this strong law-and-order flourish:
If Italy’s experience shows anything, it is that measures to isolate affected areas and limit the movement of the broader population need to be taken early, put in place with absolute clarity, then strictly enforced.
And where does that leave “sanctuary cities,” where the rule is that all foreigners are good, with no questions asked about where they have been?
Specifically, we should ask pointed questions of the Democrat presidential frontrunner, Joe Biden. Does he really mean it when he says “no deportations”? That even criminals with the coronavius will be safe from being expelled? And that the Trump administration’s “Remain in Mexico” policy should be abolished? Will Biden and the national Democrats be willing to quarantine anyone if the American Civil Liberties Union objects? Such PC policies would defeat the whole purpose of having a border.
So if Biden were to win this year, he’d have to think long and hard about trying to follow through with such crazy-left policies, even if AOC insists on it. Sober Democrats might wish to brush up on the wisdom of the nation-state as a sovereign body, an idea that comes to us from such key figures as the 16th century Frenchman Jean Bodin, and the 17th century Englishman Thomas Hobbes.
Yes, if Democrats were to do some studying on the history of statecraft, they would see that those old-timers knew a thing or two. (And some Republicans, as well, would benefit from some classical learning.)
Governor Plans to ‘Send a Message’ to Anti-Israel Protesters – ‘They Will Be Put in Jail’ NYPD officer accidentally fired gun while removing anti-Israel agitators from Columbia University building Which states could have abortion on the ballot in 2024? Sharpton Admits Truth on MSNBC: How Can Left Say Jan. 6 Was Wrong, But Not Anti-Semitic Campus Protests? Trump-backed Brad Knott on track to win Democratic NC House seat after opponent bows out before runoff Filibuster against $4B Missouri Medicaid bill ends Alvin Bragg’s Team Begs Judge to Pile Even More Punishment on Trump Watch: Kristi Noem Responds to Critics; Calls Outrage ‘Fake News’ Florida landlord evicted squatters one year ago, her story helped pass a bill to protect homeowners The Satanic Temple’s Push to Recruit Your Kids at School – What You Need to Know Newsom’s ‘failure’ to ‘do anything’ to stop university violence slammed by lawmakers America’s Farms Are Disappearing, the Food Goes Next Fox News Politics: Trump’s ‘beautiful’ baby blues Tenn. Passes ‘Baby Olivia Act’ Requiring Public Schools to Show Students Unborn Babies’ Development ‘The Lion King’ Prequel Director Responds to Fans Calling Disney a ‘Soulless Machine’
Walls
Walls are an obvious supplement to borders. That is, walls, and other kinds of fortifications, prove that you mean business about your border.
Cities, countries, and empires have been building walls for thousands of years—not because they wanted to, but because they had to. For instance, as pointed out by tweeter Wrath of Gnon, back in the 17th century, the city of Ferrara, Italy, insulated itself against the plague by the tough-minded expedient of not letting foreigners inside its walls without first being quarantined. (A more thoroughgoing take on Ferrara’s public-health success can be found in this medical journal.) Quarantines are always, in fact, a good idea in plague situations. And it’s from historical precedent, as well as practical necessity, that we get timeless wisdom—the question is whether or not we are willing to apply it.
In our time, President Trump has been channeling that old wisdom, as he strives to build a wall across the U.S.-Mexican border. And yet even as the old wisdom still holds true, we keep finding more reasons why we need walls of various kinds.
For instance, in July 2016, we learned of a new terror-tactic requiring a new counter-terror response. That is, terrorists were using motor vehicles to run down pedestrians, and so passive defenses along walkways, such as bollards—which are a kind of wall—were called for. As this author wrote nearly four years ago,
We all intuitively understand the value of walls and fences; even ACLU members live in dwellings, not out in the open. And throughout history, people—as nations and as individuals—have kept themselves contained. Savages may live under the trees, but civilized people live behind walls.
Indeed, this author continued, if the situation was dangerous enough, then the home itself would have to be a castle—or a fortress:
Even individual houses, not just royal castles, were built as fortresses. Outside of San Antonio, TX, is the fort-like Gallagher House, built in 1833, in conditions of near anarchy, for protection against constant Indian raids, plus the occasional Mexican marauder. The Gallagher House is still there for tourist visits; of course it is, the walls are two feet thick, and so it’s not going anywhere.
To be sure, the nature of walls has changed; oftentimes, these days, it’s not so much a single wall as an echeloned series of walls, overseen, not only by brave men and women, but also by high-tech sensors and drones.
Today, the coronavirus is inspiring the widespread use of new tools for wall-workers—including those brave health professionals staffing the public-health walls—such as the no-contact infrared thermometer. Such equipment is a vital part of the ongoing maintenance and modernization of those sturdy old walls.
Distancing
A new buzzphrase of the corona era is “social distancing,” which is pretty much self-explanatory—stay six feet apart.
We can quickly observe: If such distancing is a good idea, then maybe the dense-packed city is not a good idea.
Moreover, maybe loose-packed suburbs are a good idea. That was a point made by U.S. tech executive Farooq Butt in a March 14 tweet:
Interesting to note that American suburbia, with its large empty spaces & single family homes, perpetually got slammed for encouraging “social isolation,” lack of walkability & a lack of community. It’s precisely these qualities that make it a decent place to be in a pandemic.
In other words, maybe it simply makes good sense to keep the population a bit separate, and not piled on top of each other. That’s the venerable logic, after all, of compartmentalizing ships—and to this day, it’s a tried-and-true principle of nautical engineering.
To the PC ear, the words “social distancing” sound, well, “xenophobic,” as if the stranger is being “othered,” as opposed to merely being properly identified.
Here, Breitbart News’s John Nolte was razor-sharp, as always, in dissecting the ostentatious virtue-signaling of “Virtuous American.” In Nolte’s telling, Virtuous American follows all the PC guidelines about recycling trash, reusing cups and straws, mass-transiting—and taking credit for every supposed good deed.
Yet Virtuous America thus puts himself, herself—or theyself—at risk. That is, everyone should have learned a long time ago that it’s best to dispose of germy trash, not reuse it.
Nolte then contrasts Virtuous American with “McMansion American,” the suburbanite driving his or her own car—thus not coughing or sneezing on anyone—boasting a basement big enough “to store enough food and water for four weeks.” In other words, suburban sprawl, and the distance it affords to people, isn’t so bad.
In fact, Nolte went even further, offering up another archetype, “Hick American,” who “lives anywhere from 50 feet to 50 acres from any potential Possibly Infected American.” Right about now, Hick American starts to look pretty smart.
So now we come to the step beyond distancing, namely, outright dispersion.
Dispersion
All through history, people have understood that cities, with their concentrations of people, can be unhealthy. That is, all the crowds, all the sewage, all the contagion—epidemiologically dangerous.
Of course, this danger was doubled in times of plague. And so those who could were wise to flee to the countryside. There, they could wait out the working out of Farr’s Law of Epidemics, which predicts the parabolic rise and fall of the infection-curve.