Insulting physicians doesn’t convince

In Saturday’s Reporter Herald is a guest opinion from Dar yle Klassen that heaps condescension on readers, and posits that citizens are too ignorant to understand that fighting the novel coronavirus comes at a financial cost. He says that physicians are “puritanical” for calling out the current administration for its abject failure to deal effectively with the COVID-19 pandemic, and “do not understand where the money comes from to pay for their idealistic thoughts.” This disgraceful attack on the medical community echoes that of the current administration.

His condescension of the public goes on to call citizens “often ignorant” of where financial resources come from, and then repeats the same about doctors. Really? He says the United States tried to fight World War II “with the least cost of lives … and the lowest (financial) cost.” In all the histor y of that terrible war I have read, maybe I missed the part about financial cost being a major driver of decision-making. He goes on to call a focus on saving lives “a utopian mentally (sic)”. I guess we citizens, and some of the medical community, are just a bunch of ignorant utopians because we think lives are impor tant.

Holding the current administration accountable for its abysmal record on the pandemic is not “hatred of our leadership.” It is our duty as citizens to hold our public ser vants accountable, and when they do not live up to their obligations or perform the duties they were elected to fulfill, we can and should give honest feedback. Mr. Klassen posits that the motivation for someone exercising his or her First Amendment right in holding the current administration accountable is “exclusively because one hates and abhors a (sic) leadership.” He calls this condescending ascription of motivation “objectivity.”

We are all entitled our opinions, and to share them publicly. But I question whether insulting the medical community and the citizenry is particularly convincing.