Opening churches

Opening churches amidst the covid-19 pandemic can provoke an increase in the number of cases, and in fact that has been the case already in countries, states and regions that have decided to open their churches. It would be the same in any country opening them: in Spain, in the US, wherever. Now let's imagine there was somewhere a president who, despite plenty of evidence proving otherwise, would present himself as a defender of Christian values. However, this imaginary person would insist in opening the churches because his voters, maybe, want it. At first sight, this would look as a backfiring statement: wouldn't his voters and those more likely to listen to him be the main affected ones by the disease and die at a higher rate? Wouldn't that lead him to lose the elections?
That is only one possibility, as there are other maquiavelic ways of thinking. Let's review some facts.

1. As we know, the disease has a higher mortality rate among the elderly and those with pre-condictions, i.e. those that are being paid by the Government or by insurance companies. Spreading the disease as much as possible means that there are higher probabilities of getting rid of a big number of rentiers. In other words, less money spent on them, more money for those in charge and for our imaginary president.
2. Apparently, the disease is affecting ratial minorities at a higher rate. If our imaginary president was a racist (no matter how much he would deny it, we would probably find plenty of tweets and statements on video proving he is), this would lead to a reduction in the proportion of members of other races than his own. In this "imaginary" environment, the whites have better access to medical services, among other useful measures to survive.
3. The poor are also more affected, which means that the wealthy close friends of our imaginary president would not be affected, because they would be able to pay for medical care. And if they couldn't afford it, there is their friend, making sure he would get the medical attention for them with a word only (he wouldn't pay for it even if it were for his closest relatives).
4. In the country of our imagination, the unemployment rate would have rocketed, with tens of millions newly unemployed people. However, those dying because of being unemployed and therefore being unable to pay for health care would not apply for a job afterwards. They wouldn't get any unemployment aid, they wouldn't make unemployment figures bigger, someone may get a job and our imaginary president would be able to sell that as his big success.
5. If our imaginary president would go against the recommendations of anybody else (doctors, scientists, European teenagers and other well-informed people) regarding the opening of places of worship, that would create disunity between those reasonable and those swallowing every BS coming from our imaginary idiot's mug. Together with the fear in the country, in the end that would make the population much more manipulable.
6. God is omnipresent and therefore you don't need to go to a place of worship. Even though there are reasonable people that know this and would stay home, having a number of non-sensical ones getting infected and spreading the disease would ensure that both sides of the political spectrum would get infected at the same rate, which would eventually balance the "casualties" on our imaginary president's side while boosting the other "advantages".
7. Our imaginary president has the Napoleonic syndrom of willing to see his subjects dying because of loyalty to him, especially when that proves that they have bigger faith in him than they have in God.
8. It is said that Nero, the Roman emperor, burnt down Rome, his own capital city, pretty much out of fancy. Whether a true story or just a necessary myth that our civilization created over the real Great Fire of Rome, this our imaginary president would share a lot with the mythical Nero: he would be a destroyer out of fancy. On top of that, having destruction around would always help him find somebody else to blame for both his actions and insufficiencies—and people would be willing to act on those blamed by their "leader"!

There are many other reasons for opening places of worship amidst a pandemic if you are a hedonistic psycho in power of any country. Let's hope there is no such in the world nowadays. Right?

Power has us

We don't have power. It is power the one that controls us, that transforms us, that guides us to do whatever low instincts dwell in us. Unless you are an exceptional being.

One of the marvels of reading good books is that they help you realising things. It doesn't prevent you from making mistakes (we wish), but sometimes it can reduce the probability of us making them. If we know that doing our free will hides the possibility of us becoming spoiled children regardless of our age, we may want to put some control measures on ourselves and exercise some self-discipline. This can be useful, for example, when it comes to not spending all our money on payday on our favourite fancies.

Of course, we don't need to read any of the best novels in the world to know that, but it is also because we will be faced with reality, sooner or later, and reality will tame what our free will would not. We are lucky: we don't have such a huge power that would get out of control and devour us. Otherwise, we would benefit from the example of Bastian in Ende's The Neverending Story, whose wishes, no matter how big or small or likely to happen, would become true. Bastian is like most of us: he had some traumas, some lack of self-confidence, some inferiority complex; he felt powerless for too long, and suddenly he is given the power of making his wishes, every single one, come true. And so he does. I don't want to be a spoiler, so allow me to be a bit cryptical: with every single wish that became true, he lost something—until, towards the end of the book, he seems to be about to lose everything without noticing... What is he losing with every wish? Does it have a happy ending? Read the book. Is it realistic? It is a beautiful image of what happens in real life, IMHO.

At least in literature, there are examples of individuals that are immune to the temptation of infinite power. In Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, when Samfast takes the Ring from Frodo and puts it on his hand, the Ring offers him a vision of Power, of Control on everything on Earth, on wills, on entire nations. Sam is not affected by it and the Ring, the Offer of Absolute Power, goes silent for many pages, and will not tempt Sam again. Sam had the Power and carried Power in his pocket for many pages because he had to, he humbly accepted his role. There are politicians like that, even if we don't see them often; but they do exist, and you, dear reader, probably have two or three in your mind from recent history.

We are not Samfast (well, maybe you are, but allow me to continue as if you weren't). If we could, we would be more like Bastian, most of us. And if we cannot be Samfast, being Bastian is the best option of those we have left—as weird as it may sound.

We could also be Warlords.

Power wants to grow and it uses us as its tool. It used Napoleon, it used many others, it keeps using and always will use anyone available.

There is a certain admiration for Napoleon. I always heard my history teachers talk about him as a great strategist. Today, I see him with less praising eyes: I just see a man who sent tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of his own people to death, just because he wanted more power. He had enemies to defeat, you know. With enemies to defeat, territories to conquer and a lust for power that could never get satisfied, the lives of those devoted to him were as worth as the potential of lentils to become plants one day: zero when you want a plate of stew.

Put a spoiled child with some hidden inferiority complex at the top of society and you will see what happens. It could be that, in order to destroy his enemies, the spoiled child infects his devoted ones with a lethal disease in the hope they will get in contact with his (probably imaginary) enemies and bring them to death. That's the role of his devoted ones. The role of lentils in my stew is to keep me on my feet, and the role of the King's subjects is to keep him on his throne. Being destroyed for their King is an honour, after all. Their King calls them out, politely suggesting how wonderful it would be if His Lands were packed with people getting infected from each other, ready to spread His Majesty's Justice among His foes.

Yes, I believe we are in a global war right now. Yet I don't think it is a war of Humanity against a virus. The virus, and part of Humanity, os just a tool, fulfilling the conquering and defeating plans of some Kings who are nothing but spoiled children with a lust for power that will never be satisfied. They believe they are in charge, that they are in power; but it is Power who owns them.

Today, we are losing our beloved ones, we lose our health, we lose our hope, many lose their lives. We feel powerless. Yet the paradox is that, to a certain extent, the most powerful can be the most powerless.

Because they can't feel loved and their loss is Bastian's.