Covid-19: The Racists Were Right
An ironic side effect of the Coronavirus (Covid-19 hereafter) outbreak is its exposure of so-called Liberal Democracy's utter impotence in the face of crises. The regnant worldview of the West is incapable of rising to serious challenges of a national character, in a way that less liberal societies simply are not. China, for instance, whilst being an obviously unpleasant place to reside under normal conditions, has nevertheless stemmed the spread of Covid-19 through measures that make many in the West recoil – but the challenge has been accepted, and met, on a national scale with a national response. Finally, China is showing signs of being able to beat their epidemic.
Similarly, countries such as Russia, Mongolia and others, though not authoritarian, have used their capacity to regulate border flow very effectively so that their populations are exposed to a significantly lesser risk of infection than those of other countries. For perspective, note that Russia has 8 cases nationwide, despite sharing a land border with China, whilst far-flung Italy grapples with tens of thousands of cases because the Will to act in the appropriate manner was not realised anywhere near soon enough. Even now, Italy's measures show all the symptoms of rash reaction devoid of forethought.
It is not necessary, however, to become despotic and unpleasant to deal with crises. There are a group of people in the West who, for time immemorial, have possessed the answers to such global catastrophes. Some call them Racists, but as the liberals suggest, we shouldn't get too caught up on labels. The Racists – or far-right, fascists, bigots, whatever you prefer – have always argued two central points, namely; globalisation benefits only the wealthy and exposes ordinary working people to unnecessary risks, and; that the nation-state should have the tools at its disposal to adequately control border flow.
These aren't revolutionary ideas, yet they've been stigmatised by the mainstream for decades.
As a result of this steadfast refusal to accept these demands as legitimate, we have entered a situation in which China, considered a third-world basketcase for so much of recent history, is sending medical equipment and physicians to Italy, a pinnacle of first-world development.
However, the correct diagnosis of this problem lies not in the reaction to present circumstances, but rather in a nation's long-term planning and first response activity. World leaders aren't stupid, they were acutely aware that in our globalised world, it was only a matter of time before this highly infectious disease left China and arrived on their shores. But this was not an inevitability. Viruses, as powerful as they may be, must travel in a parasitic manner via a human (or other animal) carrier. Thus, the virus may spread only in so far as humans may spread. It is perhaps obvious to many, but an immediate cessation of inbound flights, boats, trains and other vehicles from infected areas would clearly ensure a territory was not susceptible.
What we have seen, in place of this common sense, is a combination of poor planning, incorrect prioritisation and a blind, ideological commitment to liberal policies whatever the cost. It is clear that most western democracies were 'caught with their draws down', as the British expression goes, meaning they had not devoted adequate brainpower to this potentiality. Crucially, their reaction to the pandemic when it did occur demonstrated that the West still considers short-term GDP, growth and economic dominance to be more important than the lives of those who will inevitably succumb to Covid-19. Moreover, the Western establishment's commitment to a world without borders trumps even their economic sensibilities, evidenced by their stubborn refusal to implement border controls to prevent the spread of the virus.
At the time of writing (12/03/20), no Western government has implemented a policy of refusing entry to foreigners, even from China, Iran & Italy. Contrast this with Israeli government policy which demands a 14-day quarantine for all foreigners, which effectively acts as a total ban. Similarly, gulf states of the Muslim world have acted swiftly to ban foreigners from infected countries, considerably slowing the outbreak and, in some cases, halting it altogether. There is no conversation to be had about this; strict border control and "draconian" measures work.
The other dimension to this debate, of course, is that of the market. Western governments appear to be motivated by their desire to minimise the economic impact of Covid-19, even if this trade-off does result in an increased mortality rate. Here we see, once more, the myopia endemic in the West today. Surely, the greater logic lies with taking extreme measures and, therefore, an extreme economic hit now, which will ensure a healthy population 6 months down the line and, therefore, a healthy economy. Instead, this stumbling management of infections will ensure the presence of the disease in our national life for far longer, and there is no evidence that refraining from taking harshly restrictive measures will provide any relief to the economy.
Governments must wake up and smell the coffee. Just take a look at the various stock indices around the world; every noteworthy exchange has tanked, regardless of how stringent or otherwise their government's disease control provisions have been. Italy, with its almost total lockdown of the nation, has seen its stock market, Borsa Italiana, lose around a quarter of its pre-outbreak value. But then, so has the Dow Jones, and the contrast between measures taken by the two countries couldn't be more stark.
The conclusions here are fairly straightforward. Society, in its desire to cling to the West's liberal "virtues", has demonstrated its utter incompetence in times of crisis. The only people within liberal democracies whose ideas would actually work to arrest the spread of this virus are the Racists. Once again, the much maligned contingent of dissidents are being, quietly and unfortunately, vindicated.
You should have listened. And now, a lot of people are going to die.
Similarly, countries such as Russia, Mongolia and others, though not authoritarian, have used their capacity to regulate border flow very effectively so that their populations are exposed to a significantly lesser risk of infection than those of other countries. For perspective, note that Russia has 8 cases nationwide, despite sharing a land border with China, whilst far-flung Italy grapples with tens of thousands of cases because the Will to act in the appropriate manner was not realised anywhere near soon enough. Even now, Italy's measures show all the symptoms of rash reaction devoid of forethought.
It is not necessary, however, to become despotic and unpleasant to deal with crises. There are a group of people in the West who, for time immemorial, have possessed the answers to such global catastrophes. Some call them Racists, but as the liberals suggest, we shouldn't get too caught up on labels. The Racists – or far-right, fascists, bigots, whatever you prefer – have always argued two central points, namely; globalisation benefits only the wealthy and exposes ordinary working people to unnecessary risks, and; that the nation-state should have the tools at its disposal to adequately control border flow.
These aren't revolutionary ideas, yet they've been stigmatised by the mainstream for decades.
As a result of this steadfast refusal to accept these demands as legitimate, we have entered a situation in which China, considered a third-world basketcase for so much of recent history, is sending medical equipment and physicians to Italy, a pinnacle of first-world development.
However, the correct diagnosis of this problem lies not in the reaction to present circumstances, but rather in a nation's long-term planning and first response activity. World leaders aren't stupid, they were acutely aware that in our globalised world, it was only a matter of time before this highly infectious disease left China and arrived on their shores. But this was not an inevitability. Viruses, as powerful as they may be, must travel in a parasitic manner via a human (or other animal) carrier. Thus, the virus may spread only in so far as humans may spread. It is perhaps obvious to many, but an immediate cessation of inbound flights, boats, trains and other vehicles from infected areas would clearly ensure a territory was not susceptible.
What we have seen, in place of this common sense, is a combination of poor planning, incorrect prioritisation and a blind, ideological commitment to liberal policies whatever the cost. It is clear that most western democracies were 'caught with their draws down', as the British expression goes, meaning they had not devoted adequate brainpower to this potentiality. Crucially, their reaction to the pandemic when it did occur demonstrated that the West still considers short-term GDP, growth and economic dominance to be more important than the lives of those who will inevitably succumb to Covid-19. Moreover, the Western establishment's commitment to a world without borders trumps even their economic sensibilities, evidenced by their stubborn refusal to implement border controls to prevent the spread of the virus.
At the time of writing (12/03/20), no Western government has implemented a policy of refusing entry to foreigners, even from China, Iran & Italy. Contrast this with Israeli government policy which demands a 14-day quarantine for all foreigners, which effectively acts as a total ban. Similarly, gulf states of the Muslim world have acted swiftly to ban foreigners from infected countries, considerably slowing the outbreak and, in some cases, halting it altogether. There is no conversation to be had about this; strict border control and "draconian" measures work.
The other dimension to this debate, of course, is that of the market. Western governments appear to be motivated by their desire to minimise the economic impact of Covid-19, even if this trade-off does result in an increased mortality rate. Here we see, once more, the myopia endemic in the West today. Surely, the greater logic lies with taking extreme measures and, therefore, an extreme economic hit now, which will ensure a healthy population 6 months down the line and, therefore, a healthy economy. Instead, this stumbling management of infections will ensure the presence of the disease in our national life for far longer, and there is no evidence that refraining from taking harshly restrictive measures will provide any relief to the economy.
Governments must wake up and smell the coffee. Just take a look at the various stock indices around the world; every noteworthy exchange has tanked, regardless of how stringent or otherwise their government's disease control provisions have been. Italy, with its almost total lockdown of the nation, has seen its stock market, Borsa Italiana, lose around a quarter of its pre-outbreak value. But then, so has the Dow Jones, and the contrast between measures taken by the two countries couldn't be more stark.
The conclusions here are fairly straightforward. Society, in its desire to cling to the West's liberal "virtues", has demonstrated its utter incompetence in times of crisis. The only people within liberal democracies whose ideas would actually work to arrest the spread of this virus are the Racists. Once again, the much maligned contingent of dissidents are being, quietly and unfortunately, vindicated.
You should have listened. And now, a lot of people are going to die.
Comments
Post a Comment