Personal lockdown.
We have again a new Anglicism that has started to appear in the media in abundance, moreover, in the appeal of Czech scientists flash enriched with a clarifying adjective. The English term lockdown can be translated as isolation or complete closure of a certain space. Personal means personal. If we disregard the witty folk creativity that suggests explaining the term lockdown in relation to the head of state by saying that if the president takes a sip of liquor, he is down, we have a fresh term that unfortunately allows us to be less concerned with content and more with form. An illustration of lockdown (the inflection really bothers me) may be Tuesday's performance by Mr. Prymula, supported by eight extras, presumably coffin bearers, a scriptwriter and a director embedded in a backdrop reminiscent of a crematorium. The impression of the funeral was enhanced by the serious looks of the eyes above the veils hiding the faces, the sombre lighting and the tone of the funeral speaker's voice. The overall tone of the speech was rather depressing and gloomy, when it should have been rousing, motivating and activating. The result of the effort should undoubtedly have been an enlightened public applying all the regulations, measures and recommendations with understanding. A civil society complying with prohibitions, restrictions and limitations. A greater effect could surely have been achieved with a combination of an encouraging smile and a furrowed brow. At least a hint that if we sacrifice a piece of our comfort now, the reward may be a well-deserved return to normality. Just a little hope. But it would be necessary, at least for a moment, to remove the veil, to show a human face and to abandon the military approach. Give way to natural empathy. In the very next few hours, the Minister confirmed his insensitivity by responding to an innocent question about his military rank by saying that 'the war was good for him and the young men would also benefit'. This anachronism only confirms the confusion inherent in former officers of the People's Democratic Army. The claim that full-time military life, coupled with hazing, bullying and self-driving as we know it from the Communist era, is beneficial is untenable.
It is unfortunate that the botched arrangement of Mr. Prymula's speech ruined the opportunity to address important details to those who should have been listening in the first place. But equally, the multidisciplinary panel of scientists' call for a personal lockdown, championed by CTU rector Vojtech Petráček, somewhat misses its intended mission. It is just a manifesto of fear, gloom and dread that is not accompanied by a shred of hope for a better future . The declaration's conclusion, punctuated by the use of the inappropriate phrase 'Russian roulette', makes an apparently well-intentioned attempt to summarise information, statistics and common knowledge recommendations into an empty academic cliché. Scared people do scared things. And a reasonable version of "personal lockdown" is not one of them.
"