Thank you for the correct words.
This is exactly what divides societies: Without knowing the person, an attempt is made to discredit other opinions with imposing vocabulary (racism, fascism, cynicism and so on).
As someone with an academic background, I find that Bhakdi asks legitimate questions about the methodical-analytical approach to the crisis.
Personally speaking, I received no clear answer from the local police as to whether my wife and I could visit her 81-year-old father during Easter, who lives in another EU country and he is not in a good physical condition. It is said in the news that the government will extend the measures at least for the next three weeks and will try to limit the usual Easter traffic.
We all know the numbers and know that COVID is a serious disease. But it cannot in any way endanger the existence of any nation. And we know without any doubt that the impact on the economy is horrible. Considering the situation and the total lockdown, I would like to know whether our free habits and our economic success can now be restricted at any time by measures taken by an almost allmighty gremium of politicians, civil servants and some experts, if a vaguely defined number of victims of an infectious disease is to be expected. I would like to quote the German university professor Hans Michael Heinig, March 17th:
"Even if it is necessary to introduce vigorous measures to prevent the further spread of the viral disease: Reluctantly one would like to find himself in a few weeks back in a society that quickly transformed from a democratic constitutional state into a hysterical hygiene state (...)."