The resistance of many to embracing the concept of “herd immunity” is not surprising. It isn’t just the conflict between a non-battlefield medical point of view that means everyone must be saved all the time everywhere and an executive view that choices must be made (more of a battlefield triage) and that the choice between destroying an economy and/or industry and creating misery on a large scale due to poverty and hunger outweighs the number of lives that might be saved by draconian measures.
I have been writing lately of the unpleasant tendency in our society (fostered almost entirely by the Left) to REQUIRE all people be “safe” all the time, in everything.
What you eat. You can’t eat things that are bad from you. Outlaw sugary drinks. Tax alcohol and tobacco. Mandate nutrition information.
What you see. You can’t see a statue. You can’t see a flag. You can’t watch a video someone else doesn’t agree with. You can’t view a sign that offends someone.
What you hear. Hearing hateful or stupid people is discouraged and outlawed. De-platform those whose opinions are thought to be bad. Shut down campus discourse at a lecture. People cannot have their feelings hurt, no matter if what hurts them is the truth.
What you do. Don’t drive without a seatbelt. Wear a helmet. Ban monkey bars. Make safety regulations so onerous that products become so expensive people won’t buy or use them.
It is all interrelated.
But most of all, it becomes a Manichean choice between accepting that WE as humans control EVERYTHING that happens to us, and accepting that Nature (God) has a hand it it.
This is a most difficult conflict for Leftists who believe Man is God.
You make complete sense. Unfortunately it sounds too much like “heard” immunity, and many people think that it’s just a rumor.
Interesting observations.