Feds aim to tackle loneliness by controlling towns and friends.
The Dangers of Government-Directed Social Connection
“Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation” is the title of the recent advisory released by U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy. It warns that social isolation is a major public health problem. The 81-page document presents six government-directed “pillars” of action to address the health hazards of social isolation.
While these six directives may seem harmless, they pose a clear and present danger to our private lives and relationships. The project is so massive in scope that it threatens to regulate our freedom of association in ways we never could have imagined. Let’s take a closer look at these pillars and the risks they pose.
‘Building a Social Infrastructure’
The first goal is to “strengthen social infrastructure in local communities.” This means that the federal government should fund and direct local organizations, including their locations. This could lead to federal bureaucracy controlling all local communities in the quest to strengthen social connections among people. The report expresses concern that some people have better access to physical parts of a community, such as housing, libraries, parks, and recreation spaces, than others. The report recommends federal interventions, which could promote densified housing and the eventual dismantling of single-family housing. The goal of replacing private vehicles with public transportation fits easily into this scheme too.
‘Enact Pro-Connection Public Policies Everywhere’
The second pillar states that “Government has a responsibility to use its authority to monitor and mitigate the public health harm caused by policies, products, and services that drive social disconnection.” This means that the government will track and mitigate policies, products, and services that it deems to cause social disconnection. Diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility are critical components of any such strategy. This could lead to the government intervening in our personal relationships and social interactions, which could further divide and alienate us.
‘Mobilize the Health Sector’
The directive to “mobilize the health sector” involves expanding “public health surveillance and interventions.” This could lead to the government tracking our social connections and intervening when it deems it necessary. Health care workers will be trained to track cases of what the government views as social connection and disconnection. This could lead to medicine becoming more federalized and less private than ever when answering to these mandates.
‘Reform Digital Environments’
The advisory recognizes that overuse of the internet and social media can drive people deeper into social isolation. However, it also promotes centralized government control over technology development, especially in human interactions. The government would decide how to design and use such technologies and could compel technology companies to provide data to the government on Americans’ social connections.
The proposed infrastructure to solve the problem of social isolation seems designed to lock everybody into compliance with and dependence upon federal mandates. Local control is then lost, and we end up with a massive federal infrastructure that can monitor the levels of social connection and disconnection in every nook and cranny of society. This could lead to the government intervening in our personal relationships and social interactions, which could further divide and alienate us.
The government’s latest proposal to combat loneliness, the “Ministry of Loneliness,” may seem like a well-intentioned plan to address a recognized health issue. However, upon closer inspection, it becomes clear that this initiative is just another attempt by the federal bureaucracy to invade our private lives and control our social connections.
The advisory’s six pillars, which include promoting government-approved relationships and a research agenda that enlists every level of society, are eerily reminiscent of government control in Communist China, the Soviet Union, and Nazi Germany. The government’s natural inclination to bloat and its history of invading the private sphere of life should make us all very skeptical of this proposal.
The government’s relentless push for woke policies tells us that we cannot expect to understand traditional virtues like kindness, respect, and commitment to one another in their true sense. Instead, these terms will likely be used in a woke Orwellian fashion to direct our social interactions and behaviors.
We should be very wary of the federal government’s role in deciding which groups it deems acceptable, given its growing politicization of law enforcement and its attempts to silence concerned parents at school board meetings by labeling them “domestic terrorists.” The government’s heavy-handed political censorship, which Murthy has already proven to be a fan of during Covid, will only heighten the fear of speaking openly and build more walls between people.
The private sphere of life, where intact families raise their children with a sense of virtue, institutions of faith give people a sense of order and purpose in life, and friends can confide in one another without meddlers eavesdropping on their conversations, is the fount of freedom, love, and trust that nurtures social connections. It can only thrive in privacy.
In conclusion, the government’s latest proposal to combat loneliness is just another attempt to invade our private lives and control our social connections. We must remain vigilant and protect our private sphere of life, which is the most decentralized area of life and the one in which individuals are most able to think and speak freely. Let us not allow the government to create the malady and then offer its authority as the only cure as it rushes into the vacuum.
Why We Should Reject Government Control of Our Social Connections
Let’s talk about the government’s recent advisory on building and maintaining social connections. While the goals of this advisory may seem unobjectionable, the real concern is about who gets to decide how we connect socially.
The Danger of State-Induced Loyalty
When the “who” is the federal government, we should remember that the pattern of the mass state is always to induce loyalty to the mass state. That pattern always comes with a push to surrender our loyalty to one another as individual human beings capable of real kindness and real love. That amounts to something I call the weaponization of loneliness.
We must insist on making our own decisions to live as free individuals. That means pushing back in any way possible against potential intrusions in the private sphere of life. It means rejecting the pseudo-intimacy and pseudo-connection that our federal government seems intent on foisting upon us in exchange for control of our private lives and relationships. Otherwise, we end up in much worse isolation that renders us powerless and unfree.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
