Let me translate what Lord Sumption is really saying here. He is disappointed that "human rights defenders" have not got behind his Ayn Randian criticism of the lockdown. But the reality is this... (thread)
..."human rights defenders" have been active and noisy - Not going to name the many people I'm talking about but plenty of evidence in my >175 tweet thread of links and thoughts on Covid-19 and human rights which I have been updating for 4 months but...
... whilst there have been variations in focus, generally "human rights defenders" have viewed the Covid-19 crisis as requiring a difficult balance between the right to life (and the state's duty to protect life) and other rights such as family life, free association, education..
and it was pretty obvious even before c50,000 died in the UK alone from Covid-19 that the duty to protect life would require some extraordinary (though temporary) restrictions on people's rights to go about their everyday lives. Now, it's not as if "human rights defenders"...
... have rolled over and let the government and the police get on with restricting everyday activities (there have been many interventions, legal challenges, strong work by @HumanRightsCtte etc) but ultimately the libertarian objection that Lord Sumption was hoping for...
... was not going to happen whilst there was such a real and urgent threat to health. And if it had, the "human rights community" would have lost whatever credibility it has, as I think most people (not all) realise this is a time of sacrifice and communal responsibility...
... not "everyone for themselves". And some will disagree, but I suspect that when we look back at this period people will not say "if only we were more libertarian as Lord Sumption wanted". End of rant, here's my thoughts from March if you want a bit more newstatesman.com/politics/uk/20…
