Plague management: The state

[sabotabby]

 I made a comment to this effect on a friend's FB, but I think it bears repeating as I watch structural failure after structural failure. I'm fascinated by institutions, governments, and economies, and despite being entirely self-taught on these matters, my predictions have a decent track record.*

So here's my take on pandemic handling. You need three things, and you can probably get away with two of the things if the other two are well-developed:

1) A strong state
2) Transparency
3) A civic-minded population

I'll give the anarchists a moment to calm down and we'll continue. Good? Okay.

By "a strong state," I don't mean an authoritarian state. I mean decisiveness at the leadership level. You need this because under the types of political structures we have right now, you need someone to track the science, demand closures, and push money at people (not corporate or bank bailouts). This is the level at which Italy failed, Canada and the US are failing, but China, Taiwan, Denmark, and South Korea have been successful. Theoretically, if you were going to be anarchist about it, you could toss all of your #1 stats into #2 and #3, but we don't have a model of this right now, so decisiveness at the top is critical. Denmark stands out for commendation by compensating workers 75% of their salaries, which kept everyone calm and allowed for social distancing to happen early.

Transparency: This is where China initially failed and one of the places where America is failing even badly. People need to know what's going on and what to do. In our current situation, transparency is limited by testing, and this needs to be a major focus if we're ever going to go back to work and see our grandparents again. South Korea's strategies have been particularly outstanding in this regard in terms of creating apps and using tracking and mapping to show what was going on in real time.

A civic-minded population: I would argue that this is America's #1 point of failure. It's understandable because "fuck you, I got mine" is baked into the national consciousness. It's Canada's point of failure to a lesser degree, hence toilet-paper hoarding in the province that makes all the toilet paper. Decisiveness and transparency are needed at the state and media level, but civic-mindedness is required to actually implement it. People must be willing to help each other, to participate in social distancing, and not to hoard. Companies must be willing to take financial hits in order to keep workers employed. Landlords must forgive rent. A wartime attitude of "we're all in this together" is what actually makes the policies happen. "Fuck you, I got mine" doesn't work when someone who didn't get mine spreads it to you.

Ideally, we'd have a sensible economy and rational leaders who listened to science. Maybe we can emerge from this with some more robust institutions?



* It's not because I think I'm special or particularly smart. I'm at the mercy of just-in-time staffing, which led me to conclude that a just-in-time supply chain also had a predictable failure rate. Smarter people than I should have noticed this.

Comments

[sacramentalist]

The problem with Capitalism, which may look good on paper, is it doesn't take into account HUMAN NATURE.

Been throwing that at everyone who has ever said the same thing about Communism and Socialism.

I don't have anything smart to add, but this is a good post.

[dewline]

This is the shared flaw of all three systems. We've been trying to build something different in Canada, I believe, even though a lot of us can't admit that to ourselves even now for reasons of pride and political tribalism. A hybrid that can and does take human nature into account, hopefully.

[sabotabby]

It's true. Economic Man being the most hilarious/sad example.

[lapinlunaire]

To be fair, a system that took into account human nature as I perceive it would be "let's all become hermits and avoid contact with each other as much as possible"

EDIT: I'm in no way defending capitalism, but "not taking human nature into account" is the least of its failing since it's shared by other systems too. My main issue with it is that it's a dumb system that only works for some when the going's good.

[sabotabby]

Human nature is highly mutable, though. It can't be the primary consideration compared to something like resilience and flexibility.

[lapinlunaire]

I don't know. I like to think that under the right conditions it could be shaped into something good, but by default I think humans are selfish and will look out for themselves (and their loves ones... maybe) first and foremost unless they're given the incentive to do otherwise.

[dewline]

Smarter people than you - and me - did notice this and spoke up in various places. I don't yet know how successful they've been in getting heard and heeded.

[sabotabby]

Let's hope they're successful. Because all our lives depend on it.

[lapinlunaire]

I WILL NEVER CALM DOWN YOU CALM DOWN

As someone who is technically an anarchist, I'd definitely throw in my lot with #2 and #3. Without those #1 does nothing.

Also, I don't think 75% of salaries is really enough. Maybe it is in Denmark, but over here that's a cut many people wouldn't be able to take. I'm also not sure what a strong state is worth if the people at the top make dumb decisions. I don't trust people with these things and so far I've often been proven right.

But overall, yeah, I agree with you.

[sabotabby]

As someone who is technically an anarchist, I'd definitely throw in my lot with #2 and #3. Without those #1 does nothing.

Hence China's failure point; they have #1 and #3 but not #2. But here, where we have a state giving mixed messages and underfunding of science, lack of leadership on workers' protection, etc., our failure point appears to be #1.

Denmark makes higher wages than most places. Plus expenses are reduced (travel, gas, dinners out, hopefully electric companies reducing bills and internet companies eliminating caps, etc.) so it's probably liveable. It wouldn't be enough here where average rent tends to exceed income.

[lapinlunaire]

Yeah, I think Denmark is probably doing fine, but it's not really something that would work elsewhere. :(

[sabotabby]

No. It should be full salary elsewhere.

[rdi]

Also, a functional state healthcare system. We sort of have that here but the US definitely doesn't.

[sabotabby]

I consider that as part of a strong state.

[gingicat]

In an alternate timeline, we have a Republican Party that continued an upward humanist climb from Eisenhower rather than ossifying into "every White abled man for himself, damn everyone else." It's the virus crumbling our infrastructure. And while Democrats started becoming more humanist bit by bit, starting before you and I were born, they've never had the ability to make lasting fortifications.

(And I am aware that I'm not expressing this well.)

[sabotabby]

Nah, you're expressing it perfectly.

[ironed_orchid]

That's a useful definition of a strong but not authoritarian state.

[sabotabby]

Admittedly, as an ex-anarchist turned reluctant unaffiliated veering between socialism and communism, my definition of a strong state is slightly unconventional. I would argue, for example, that the US despite its authoritarian tendencies has shown itself to be a very weak state. It's decentralized, defunded, and lacks the institutional continuity to cope with a crisis like this—the result of years of shrinking government until it's small enough to drown in a bathtub. It's the insecure and ineffectual man who can only feel like a man when he's beating his wife.