- Question
How do we think about the UK lockdown debate?
The coronavirus pandemic has led to unprecedented isolation measures throughout the world. One effect has been the creation of ideological blocs across traditional party lines, lobbying for different approaches to containing the virus. UK lockdown came into effect on March 23, shutting down non-essential business and movement outside the home, bar a single daily outing for exercise. Critics variously describe this decision as too late, too little, too much and overblown. So, who are these groups, what do they stand for, and why?
The libertarian position, or 'End lockdown now!'
At the heart of this approach is the belief that lockdown is a violation of fundamental human rights. Its proponents range from the UK alt right, to high court judges, to commentators seeing the closure of British drinking holes as a bleak symbol of authoritarian rule.
- Death rate predictions are rooted in lies
- The state should not control the individual
- The greater good must come first
- The UK lockdown model is false
- Lockdown puts us on the path to totalitarian rule
- Most people have already had the virus
- The pandemic will kill, lockdown or no lockdown
- The government cannot be trusted
The nanny state position, or 'Let the state look after us'
This approach believes that the role of the state is to look after its citizens. It considers alternatives to lockdown, which give the state control to monitor the movements of its people for their own good.
The authoritarian position, or 'Do not lift lockdown!'
This approach is rooted in a belief that during crises, the state should centralise control of social and economic affairs. Proponents range from UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock, to an estimated 75% of the British public.
The collective coordination state
This framing presents the UK lockdown through the lens of the 'collective coordination state.' It argues the state exists to help citizens coordinate when each has legitimate claims on the other, and that lockdown resolves a gap between private behaviour and social cost.
Test, trace, isolate, protect
This position frames the UK lockdown debate around a 'test, trace, isolate, protect' strategy. It argues that building the capacity to test, trace and isolate cases — and protect an expanding share of the population — has worked elsewhere, aided by contact-tracing apps and proper infrastructure.