Earlier this week, the Atlantic published an op-ed by Emily Olster titled, Let's Declare a Pandemic Amnesty. The piece essentially argues that any mistakes made during COVID were done so out of sheer ignorance; all should be forgiven, even though there's nothing to forgive, of course.
The article struck out as a pretentious, prideful attempt at a cop-out, and didn't sit well with the public. The last line read, “Let’s acknowledge that we made complicated choices in the face of deep uncertainty, and then try to work together to build back and move forward.” Olster could not bring herself to admit she made bad choices, wrong choices. They're just “complicated.”
But it's impossible to “move on” without admitting what bad choices were made and at what cost.
Joy Pullman of The Federalist articulated this perfectly in her rebuttal today, titled There Can Be No ‘Amnesty’ On Lockdowns Without A Reckoning.
From the article:
…
Amnesty requires a specific admission of guilt and a commitment to repairing the wrongs done. Instead, Oster is pretending to advocate for reconciliation in a way that insists no reconciliation is actually needed.
