It started small. Several elementary school children in Jerkwater, PA came home with sniffles and coughs and sore throats, and, in some more severe cases, diarrhea and vomiting. No one gave much thought to it at first. It was just a cold. Just flu.
Reports spread slowly as the affliction seemed to spread widely and rapidly from person to person, first among classmates and then among whole families. From families, it exploded into the business community as parents and older siblings missed work, or not missing work, infected others in the workplace. It eventually reached with often deadly consequences into our most vulnerable population, the elderly, especially where concentrated, as in hospitals and nursing homes.
An intense coordinated effort was begun by local doctors. It was at first suspected that the problem was somehow related to physical contact with objects and surfaces contaminated by careless nose pickers and booger wipers and mouth breathers. It was thought, however, that this alone could not account for the scope and rapid spread of the sickness, leading to further suspicion that spread might also be airborne in nature, caused by uncovered sneezing or sneezing into hands, or not washing up after bio breaks, which then led to exposure through person to person contact.
The spread and the growing consequences drew the interest of public health services. Early measures to limit the spread suggested masks for sneezers and gloves for nose pickers. Public service messaging stressed an all-of-the-above approach to safety and personal hygiene, thorough hand washing given particular emphasis, and quarantine for the sick. If you were sick, the advice was to stay at home. Given that school served a secondary purpose of daycare for children and limited daycare options otherwise, this advice met with some resistance.
It was not long before resentment of elementary school children started to appear in newspaper articles and letters to editors, political literature and commentary, religious literature, and sermons, etc.; Resentment of ‘invasive’ messages and recommendations or mandates; Reminders and agitation about where the sickness was supposed to have started; Theories that it had been intentionally started by a cabal of nose pickers and booger wipers trained by subversive parents or political groups. Politicians started raging about young-flu, an ageist epithet.
Resentments started to boil over into heated arguments among parents feeling put upon by community measures they felt overstepped rights or agitated at the lack of hygiene on the part of ‘some peoples’ kids’. Soon agitation spread to communities outside of Jerkwater. From there things deteriorated as confrontations against elementary school-aged children and their parents led to arguments and ostracism. Agitation led to growing incidents of violence against the children and their parents. Soon, children of elementary school age had reason for some level of fear of doing normal things in public. It did not matter if they were sick. Or whether they were from Jerkwater, PA. The only thing that seemed to matter was that they were easily identified as elementary school children who should stay where they belonged.
In another interesting story, someone in a Troglodist church pew, in the middle of a sermon, had an attack of intestinal gas. This congregant managed to relieve the pressure without interrupting the sermon, at least as far as the preacher’s voice. However, other effects of the relief caused severe discomfort to those in close proximity to the afflicted person. Someone complained and several members of the congregation were taken to the hospital for inhalation and nausea.
The news services picked the story up, interviewing those in attendance. Most in the congregation accepted that ‘it happens’. Many other denominations distanced themselves from the Troglodists claiming that this was a Troglodist-specific behavior. It did not happen in other organizations. And if it did, it did not stink.
The same story reported instances of Troglodists in public being jeered, and in at least a couple of cases, attacked and told to go back to the church from which they came. There were some appeals to stop this behavior and even some ‘Samaritan’-like people who stepped in to condemn such unChristian behavior and defend those persecuted, even occasionally engaging in some interdenominational display to show solidarity. However, these were mostly exceptions as many echoed ideas promoted by some groups and news organizations.
Of course, these tales are nonsense. It just struck me because I recently read in a column, from someone whom I respect another recrimination against the country China regarding Covid. Over the course of the last couple of years, this has bubbled and percolated in the news and led to a pox of misinformation, falsehoods, half-truths, prejudices, and even violence against people of Asian appearance or descent, Chinese or otherwise. What does any of that profit anyone? It is a broad brush that splatters and smears many innocents. Will it justify the same kind of jingoism and backlash and reprisals when something originates within our borders?
Prior to Covid, one of the most devastating pandemics in history, the Swine Flu, also called the Spanish Influenza, swept the globe. The first known mention of influenza at this time was in reports of military installations. Here in the United States. In the literal MIDDLE of this country, in Kansas. Somehow, it came to be called the Spanish Influenza. I’ve never read or heard anything about America being blamed for this pestilence. History suggests though, that if blame is important for anything, the flu may have been misnamed. Common sense, at least to me, suggests that that was never the most important thing about that disease. When there is a fire, the most important thing is putting it out.
To me, a takeaway is that I must not blame a whole group of people even if the actions of some part of that people MAY BE questionable. Or bad. Such blame would be the very textbook definition of prejudice. Recently I read an article from someone I respect, and whose articles I have always enjoyed, AGAIN promoting an idea (or implying/suggesting) that a whole country, even a whole race, is to be vilified because something bad may have happened or started there. I just can’t see that that is what Jesus would do. That may not have been the author’s intent. It is the effect, though, that bothers me.