Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Progressives Remember COVID but Refuse to Learn from It
Progressives Remember COVID but Refuse to Learn from It
Apr 26, 2025 12:23 AM

A new book by NPR’s education correspondent looks at the baleful effects of the COVID lockdowns on kids and their families, yet has no one to blame but…you guessed it.

Read More…

There are three ways to look back at the first year of the COVID pandemic. The first is to learn from the whole experience. Recall the fear, pain, and misery brought on by lockdowns, mask mandates, and social distancing, as well as the deaths that could have been prevented but weren’t because of politics (think the nursing home debacles). Remember the names of the experts, organizations, and politicians who exploited the crisis, demonized dissent, and ruined lives, repeatedly mon sense. And e up with ways to deal with future crises that minimize disruption, uphold fundamental rights, and most importantly, save lives.

The second way to look at the pandemic is not to look back at all but just to move on. Take all the suffering, stupidity, and duplicity and flush it all out. Recognize that it was a weird time when nothing made sense and everyone dropped the ball. Look forward to a time when lockdowns, face masks, social distancing, and vaccine mandates are as unknown as they were before COVID. Hope and pray that the world will sort itself out and ignore all the doomsayers who want to bring back pandemic hysteria.

The third way, however, is to remember the COVID years and lament the losses but learn absolutely nothing from them. To see all of it as some unavoidable tragedy that visited the nation and revealed how fragile human beings really are. Take some solace in the fact that it drove President Trump out of office, put the “adults” back in charge, and opened up possibilities for expanding the power of government and state-driven programs for the sake of public health. And adamantly refuse to question the false narratives that deluded so many Americans for so long, and continue to delude so many of them today.

At first, NPR education correspondent Anya Kamenetz’s new book, The Stolen Year: How COVID Changed Children’s Lives, and Where We Go Now, seems to be taking the first approach, focusing on the harms children suffered during the pandemic. However, it soon es apparent that the third approach is where she is fortable: whining and ranting about the “stolen year” without really assessing its causes or developing practical solutions. As she states in her introduction: “This book is a testimony of fierce love. … Individuals did as much as they could. But it wasn’t enough.” This is meant to pull at the heart strings and inspire the reader, but even a cursory remembrance of COVID reveals the opposite: There was rather a large number of gullible adults entrusting their children to the whims of corrupt experts and politicians.

But Kamenetz needs to have her heroes, who will be the strong independent mothers (including her) who suffered during the pandemic and, to a relatively small extent, their children. She also needs to have her villains, starting with President Trump (she obnoxiously begins each of her chapters with a quote from him, followed by the COVID death count at the time) along with the former secretary of education Betsy DeVos, school-choice proponents, people who opposed the COVID vaccine, nearly all conservatives, and of course systemic racism.

For anyone not in the choir to whom Kamenetz preaches, her account of this time in our history and its impact on children is a frustrating slog, though it’s quite revealing as to how the left chooses to remember COVID. Despite relentlessly pushing the madness for two years straight, none of them will take responsibility for any of it.

Organizing her book chronologically, Kamenetz begins in the spring of 2020, the first sign of the pandemic, at least in the U.S. Ostensibly, this would mean discussing the shocking course of locking down schools. However, instead of exploring how this happened and what immediate effect it had on students and teachers, Kamenetz uses COVID mainly as an occasion to defend public education. To those who contend that public schools are ineffective and expensive, she argues that the schools’ “job has gotten plex and expensive as they’ve been required to provide more equitable services to a more diverse population with more varied and significant needs.” While true, this raises the inevitable questions, Why have schools evolved this way? And is that good or bad? She merely assumes it’s good and dismisses the criticisms that suggest otherwise.

To her credit, she does question whether it was good to shut down schools. She’s willing to say that it was a mistake and even admits that “the decision on opening schools was determined by political affiliation more than the local course of the disease.” Nevertheless, after writing this she conveniently refrains from admitting that it was largely her own political party that kept schools closed for so long.

After weighing in on public education, Kamenetz returns to discussing COVID’s impact on food distribution. However, this is merely a jumping off point for exploring the expansion of the American welfare system. She explains how school lunches were a part of LBJ’s War on Poverty in the 1960s and enjoyed wide popularity, but were opposed by various conservatives and J. Edgar Hoover. COVID didn’t exactly shut down this effort to distribute meals—no one starved—but it apparently put a strain on it.

She then transitions to the topic of childcare. Along with schools, nearly all day cares were closed as well. This put a heavy burden on parents of young children, causing many of them to quit their jobs if they weren’t allowed to work from home.

For Kamenetz, the solution to this is clear: universal day care. Even though this wouldn’t have kept day cares open during COVID, it would at least have guaranteed childcare to all parents. After taking the reader through a short history of childcare in America, she asks, “Did the pandemic cause a large enough upheaval in the social order to change how we collectively think about care?” In other words, will Americans think of childcare as a government endeavor rather than a private one? Clearly, she believes the former. True to form, she doesn’t want to let a crisis go to waste, so she presents a solution that wouldn’t work for a problem that’s not relevant.

This conversation segues to how children with special needs were deprived of key services, which launches yet another uninteresting history of a government program. She takes issue with the fact that parents must advocate for their children to receive individualized plans and services, though she hardly bothers with the great cost and bureaucracy required to provide these services nor how effective they are.

Kamenetz’s narrative picks up a little steam when she moves into the summer of 2020 and recounts the BLM and Antifa riots that followed the death of George Floyd. All of it is still very much one-sided, unconvincing, and unrelated to COVID, but it’s at least a change of pace. Like many on the left, pletely ignores the extensive damage of the so-called peaceful protests or that their gatherings directly violated COVID social distancing mandates.

Rather, she resorts to empty pandering: “If you’re a white reader of this book, let me say something to you, white person to white person: If you aspire to stand with all the mamas George Floyd summoned, it means reckoning in detail with how white supremacy is visited specifically on children.” In typical fashion, Kamenetz supports her argument by examining disparate es between racial groups and concludes that racism must be the cause, never considering that this is a logical fallacy that confuses correlation with causation.

The next peak in her es soon after as Kamenetz considers the mothers affected by the COVID response. True to form, she asserts that equal rights for women is still a far-off goal, the government is doing too little, and the patriarchy looms large. She quotes approvingly the feminist sociologist Jess Calarco: “There are deep patriarchal norms that exist in society and they tell women, oftentimes for the economic benefit and power of men, that they should be the ones who are devoting their whole to their children and to family.”

It’s clear that Kamenetz wants to use COVID to reignite the feminist movement for the 21st century. Instead of examining differences in e or different treatment under the law, this newest iteration considers the burdens of “emotional labor,” the failure of men to adequately contribute to childcare, and social welfare programs that could assist mothers. It’s telling that all the testimony she uses are exclusively from women; a man might offer a different, more challenging perspective.

The book starts winding down as Kamenetz enters the fall of 2020, when schools either stayed closed, offering only virtual instruction, or reopened with both in-person and online instruction. Even though remote learning proved to be a disaster and teachers unions were a big reason for keeping the schools closed, Kamenetz can’t bring herself to criticize or blame them: “Looking at all the factors that undermined the school reopening process in the United States, I don’t see unions as the puppet master.” This is pure deflection. Schools in red states reopened safely while those in blue states remained closed because teachers unions demanded it.

Since most students settled for virtual instruction for much of the 2020–21 school year, many of them ended up spending most of their days staring at screens and avoiding human contact. This unhealthy arrangement subsequently precipitated a mental health crisis among young people. To illustrate this, Kamenetz recounts a few examples of kids who went through deep depression during the lockdowns. Once again, so much of this could have been avoided by lifting the lockdowns, but also once again, Kamenetz instead pushes for more public funding for mental health services for children.

This brings her to the end of the stolen year, winter of 2020–21, in which she describes the January 6 protest in Washington D.C., the first COVID vaccines, and the contested presidential election. Beyond recounting recent history, she has surprisingly little to say about this, except to point out how polarized American society has e and how bad the MAGA crowd was.

Although there’s some closure in the final chapter as Kamenetz revisits some of the families she uses as case studies throughout the book, there is hardly any satisfying resolution. She supposes that COVID happened and will continue happening, despite the vaccine and vaccine mandates. And though government institutions failed the children and the American people at large during this crisis, that only means they need more money and support so that maybe they can do better next time.

Overall, The Stolen Year is a good example of how political and cultural bias, the pushing of an ideologically driven narrative, makes an objective analysis of a worldwide crisis like COVID impossible. For all the research she does into various government programs, all the interviews she conducts with families across the country, and all the professional experience she brings to her topic, Kamenetz contributes nothing new or constructive to the conversation beyond the usual leftist talking points. She casts most Americans as victims with little agency, clamors for more government largesse, and whines about conservatives.

It’s evident that her heart bleeds for the families harmed by COVID, but she carefully avoids examining the real causes of that harm. Instead, she just uses the virus as an opportunity to advance her agenda, oblivious to the fact this agenda is unworkable and not what most Americans want anyway.

Rather, what is desired is a reckoning for those who exploited COVID, justice for those who needlessly suffered (particularly young people), and a general return to normalcy. Kamenetz could have promoted some of this with The Stolen Year but squandered the opportunity. Partisan politics ultimately got the better of her and turned her book into a progressive sermon even her choir may have grown tired of hearing.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Italy’s Tax Man Takes Aim at the Vatican
Kishore Jayabalan, the Acton Institute’s Rome office director, was interviewed by the Zenit news agency in an article titled, “Is Taxing the Church a Real Solution for Italy?” In the article, Jayabalan discusses the history of the Italian state and its imposition of property taxes on the Roman Catholic Church’s land holdings, residences and non-profit businesses. Sometimes in the past, particularly under Napoleonic rule and before the Lateran Pacts, the institution of property tax was often a subject of state...
Let’s Change Hearts and Minds (and Laws, Too)
Few clichés are so widespread within the evangelical subculture, says Matthew Lee Anderson, as the notion that our witness must be one of “changing hearts and minds.” In careful hands, the idea is at best ambiguous. At worst it reinforces the sort of interior-oriented individualism that allows for and perpetuates a blissful naivete about how institutions and structures shape our dispositions and thoughts. In less than careful hands, the phrase drives a wedge between law and culture by attempting to...
Lord Acton and the Power of the Historian
Looking through my back stacks of periodicals the other day I ran across a review in Books & Culture by David Bebbington, “Macaulay in the Dock,” of a recent biography of Thomas Babington Macaulay. The essay takes its point of departure in Lord Acton’s characterization of Macaulay as “one of the greatest of all writers and masters, although I think him utterly base, contemptible and odious.” As Bebbington writes, “Acton, a towering intellectual of the later 19th century, was at...
How to Steal a Bike in New York City
Edmund Burke didn’t really say it, but it still rings true: All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. In a test of this maxim, filmmaker Casey Neistat tries to steal his own bike in several locations around New York City and finds that most people do nothing about it—even when it’s done right in front of a police station. I recently spent a couple of days conducting a bike theft experiment, which...
Is Work a Curse?
Is work a curse, a result of mankind’s fall from grace? Not according to the Book of Genesis. As Hugh Whelchel, Executive Director of the Institute for Faith, Work & Economics, explains, what Adam was called to do in the garden is what we are still called to do in our work today: Humanity was created by God to cultivate and keep God’s creation, which included developing it and protecting it. You see, we were created to be stewards of...
Reagan, Whittaker Chambers, and the Threat to Freedom
Over at the Liberty Law Blog, there is an excellent post titled “Ronald Reagan, Whittaker Chambers, and the Dialogue of Liberty” by Alan Snyder. Snyder delves into the influence Chambers had on Reagan and how their worldviews differed as well. Many conservatives and scholars felt Chambers’ prediction that the West was on the losing side of history in the battle against Marxism collapsed after the fall of the Iron Curtain and the Soviet Union. For many, the ideas of Chambers...
Obamacare’s Religious Rubes
The White House has a plan to mobilize prayer vigils in front of the Supreme Court in defense of Obamacare. It was reported that the administration met with leaders at non-profit organizations and religious officials who support the new health care law. The court takes up the constitutional test of the health care mandate in a couple of weeks. The mandate has now been challenged in 26 states. Cue the same stale big government religious prophets who confuse statism and...
Constitutional Cases and the Four Cardinal Virtues
Should virtue be a consideration in judicial decisionmaking? Indiana Law Professor R. George Wright makes an intriguing argument for why the four cardinal virtues could be useful in interpreting constitutional cases: Judges typically decide constitutional cases by referring to one or more legal precedents, rules, tests, principles, doctrines, or policies. This Article mends supplementing this standard approach with fully legitimate and appropriate attention to what many cultures have long recognized as the four basic cardinal virtues of practical wisdom or...
Integral Human Development
The Journal of Markets & Morality is planning a theme issue for the Spring of 2013: “Integral Human Development,” i.e. the synthesis of human freedom and responsibility necessary for the material and spiritual enrichment of human life. According to Pope Benedict XVI, Integral human development presupposes the responsible freedom of the individual and of peoples: no structure can guarantee this development over and above human responsibility. (Caritas in Veritate 17) There is a delicate balance between the material and the...
How to Love Liberty More Than a Libertarian Economist
I have a deep and abiding love for liberty—which is why I find myself so often in disagreement with libertarians. Libertarians love liberty too, of course, but they tend to love liberty a bit differently. I love liberty in an earthy, elemental way. I love liberty because I need it—like I need air and food—for human flourishing. In contrast, the libertarians I’ve encountered tend to love liberty primarily as an abstraction. Indeed, the most ideologically consistent libertarians I know seem...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2025 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved