It is time to stop irresponsible finger-pointing.
All over the world, as this essay is being written, well over 17 million COVID-19 cases have been reported, and 676,000 people died. And instead of concentrating on serious research, trying to save human lives and attempting to stop the global calamity, ‘residents’ of the White House are spending all the energy on their own political survival, as well as on the survival of the regime.
In the U.S., both the establishment and opposition are buzzing with phantasmagoric conspiracy theories. Everyone is shouting, and no one is listening.
COVID-19 has been dangerously politicized. In order to ‘save its skin,’ the White House has been relentlessly blaming China for the origin and handling of the pandemic. Various U.S. government officials have been pointing fingers, irresponsibly, at Beijing. Some have been going as far as claiming that the pandemic was manufactured in one of the laboratories in the city of Wuhan. A bit like a ‘Frankenstein theory,’ fit for a comic book or a horror movie, but not for any serious analysis.
Serious analyses are, however, often neglected by mainstream media. Although they do get picked up for those who are interested and unbiased.
The Telegraph reported on 5 July 2020:
“Senior CEBM tutor Dr. Tom Jefferson believes many viruses lie dormant throughout the globe and emerge when conditions are favourable.
Coronavirus may have lain dormant across the world and emerged when the environmental conditions were right for it to thrive rather than starting in China, an Oxford University expert believes.
Dr. Tom Jefferson, senior associate tutor at the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (CEBM), at Oxford and a visiting professor at Newcastle University, argues there is growing evidence that the virus was elsewhere before it emerged in Asia.
Last week, Spanish virologists announced that they had found traces of the disease in samples of waste water collected in March 2019, nine months before coronavirus was seen in China.
Italian scientists have also found evidence of coronavirus in sewage samples in Milan and Turin in mid-December, many weeks before the first case was detected, while experts have found evidence of traces in Brazil in November 2019.”
It appears that several countries in Europe had actually been suffering from the novel coronavirus cases long before they emerged in China. Europeans just did not know that they were dealing with ‘the new and deadly type of flu.’ Or they did not have the capacity or willingness to detect and define the new pandemic as fast as the Chinese doctors and scientists did.
On 20 June 2020, Independent addressed precisely this issue:
“The novel coronavirus – Sars-Cov-2 – may have been in Europe for longer than previously thought. Recent studies have suggested that it was circulating in Italy as early as December 2019. More surprisingly, researchers at the University of Barcelona found traces of the virus when testing untreated wastewater samples dated 12 March 2019.
The study was recently published on a preprint server, medRxiv. The paper is currently being subject to critical review by outside experts in preparation for publication in a scientific journal. Until this process of peer review has been completed, though, the evidence needs to be treated with caution.”
“So, how was the experiment conducted and what exactly did the scientists find?
One of the early findings about Sars-Cov-2 is that it is found in the faeces of infected people. As the virus makes its way through the gut – where it can cause gastrointestinal symptoms – it loses its outer protein layer, but bits of genetic material called RNA survive the journey intact and are “shed” in faeces. At this point, it is no longer infectious – as far as current evidence tells us.”
In May 2020, the BBC simply reported, without drawing any ‘political conclusions’:
“A patient treated in a hospital near Paris on 27 December for suspected pneumonia actually had the coronavirus, his doctor has said.
This means the virus may have arrived in Europe almost a month earlier than previously thought.
Dr. Yves Cohen said a swab taken at the time was recently tested, and came back positive for Covid-19.
The patient, who has since recovered, said he had no idea where he caught the virus as he had not travelled abroad.
Knowing who was the first case is key to understanding how the virus spread.
The World Health Organization (WHO) says it is possible more early cases will come to light, and spokesman Christian Lindmeier urged countries to check records for similar cases in order to gain a clearer picture of the outbreak.
France is not the only country where subsequent testing points to earlier cases. Two weeks ago, a post-mortem examination carried out in California revealed that the first coronavirus-related death in the U.S. was almost a month earlier than previously thought.”
These are only three examples, carried by three separate reports.
There is more and more evidence suggesting that China was actually not the country where the COVID-19 originated, but the country where novel coronavirus was first and decisively identified, confronted, and to a great extent, defeated. Quite amazing, considering that China, at least for some time, stood totally alone against this dangerous pandemic, which since then managed to, fundamentally, change the world!
But the more all this appears to be the case, the louder is cacophony coming from Washington; more vitriolic becomes the anti-Chinese propaganda.
It is clearly done in order to cover up the ineptness of the U.S. government’s response to the calamity. If the system in the grotesquely turbo-capitalist country like the United States collapses, just blame it hypocritically on the Communists, or go racist and start insulting Asians. Or if you run out of earthly enemies, just blame it on extra-terrestrials.
*
Predictably, President Trump does not enjoy much support from the ranks of the scientific community. Some even poke fun, openly, at him and his deputies. Others are trying to argue with him, presenting facts.
After Washington’s COVID-19-related anti-Chinese attacks intensified in April 2020, Professor Edward Holmes, an Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow, a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science and a Fellow of the Royal Society in London, decided to speak up, disputing with scientific arguments the propaganda theories:
“There is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 in humans, originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, China.
“Coronaviruses like SARS-CoV-2 are commonly found in wildlife species and frequently jump to new hosts. This is also the most likely explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2.”
But Washington is brutal and vindictive. When it is caught lying, when the simple, even primitive plans and designs get confronted, it retaliates disproportionally and swiftly. That is precisely what happened to the World Health Organization (WHO) and its Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. WHO was seen by Trump and his hawkish lieutenants as being “too close to China,” and that is arch ‘crime’ in this time and age! On top of it, Mr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus was pressing for global cooperation instead of confrontation. But the United States is simply unable to cooperate anymore. It only knows how to dictate.
Rapidly and wickedly, the U.S. ejected itself from the WHO, right in the middle of the global pandemic, leaving huge unpaid bills. This, most likely, cost tens of thousands of human lives, particularly in the poorest parts of the world. Not that Washington cares!
*
Attacks against China by Trump, Rubio, Bannon, Pompeo, Navarro, and others in the U.S. government and establishment, are thoroughly ludicrous and get regularly strongly rebutted in the United States itself, but also its satellites.
White House accusations regularly degenerate to extremely low levels of discourse.
As mentioned above, U.S. officials, including President himself, frequently insinuate that pandemic originated, or was even manufactured, in one of Wuhan’s labs.
Such insults get confronted by counter-insults, like those shot by Peter Davidson, who recently declared that: “Covid19 originated in CIA Fort Detrick lab, brought to Wuhan to blame it on China!”
*
Once again, the United States refused to cooperate with the rest of the world. Instead, it is spoiling all efforts to create a united front against the pandemic, which is frightening the Planet, killing tens of thousands of human beings, and destroying the lives of the billions.
Since the beginning of this unpredictable and still largely unresearched virus, I have been monitoring, first hand, all fears and frustration of the people: in Asia, North and South Americas, as well as Europe. I have been observing how COVID-19 brought Planet to a standstill. This fear is real. The consequences of the pandemic are awful, and they include misery, unemployment, even hunger, and homelessness.
This terrible attack of new illness was an opportunity for our civilization to unite, to show that we, as human beings, are able to cooperate, fight for the survival of all, and smash this dreadful enemy. Together, all of us, side by side, regardless of race, nationality, or culture.
The opportunity was missed. And the result is not only bitterness. The result is counted in hundreds of millions of newly poor.
China actually tried to forge a global alliance against COVID-19, and so did Russia. Also, Cuba, as always. Hundreds of heavy lift aircrafts were heading from Moscow, Beijing, and Havana, to help people who were in dire need, in all corners of the world. Hands were extended.
We all know how these efforts ended: with insults, and unprecedented propaganda coming from Washington. Not one heartfelt “Thank you!”. Not one. And then, even foreign aid directed towards dozens of countries, coming from China, got literally stolen from the tarmacs, by the United States government.
The countries which were suffering the most, from embargos and sanctions and needed resources to manage the COVID-19, countries such as Iran and Venezuela, got brutalized even further, sadistically and shamelessly.
This does not look like a good world. And the ‘mightiest country on earth’ does not look like a good leader, either. In fact, it does not look like a leader at all. And with this attitude towards the Planet, it should never again be allowed to lead.
COVID-19 ruined countless lives. But at least now it is clear, who is who, what is the gangrenous essence of corporatism and imperialism.
While China, Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela, Iran, and others are fighting for human lives, Washington is struggling to preserve the global status quo for its own unsavory purposes. It does not want to save or improve the world. It wants to control it. And it wants to own it. Nothing else. Full stop.
*
Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He has covered wars and conflicts in dozens of countries. Six of his latest books are “New Capital of Indonesia”, “China Belt and Road Initiative”, “China and Ecological Civilization” with John B. Cobb, Jr., “Revolutionary Optimism, Western Nihilism”, a revolutionary novel “Aurora” and a bestselling work of political non-fiction: “Exposing Lies Of The Empire”. View his other books here. Watch Rwanda Gambit, his groundbreaking documentary about Rwanda and DRCongo and his film/dialogue with Noam Chomsky “On Western Terrorism”. Vltchek presently resides in East Asia and Latin America, and continues to work around the world. He can be reached through his website, his Twitter and his Patreon.
The on-going Black Lives Matter protests are beyond incredible. Pandemic rages. And yet week after week people courageously persist. Duration unprecedented. Intensity amazing. The protests are inspiring. But what is the underlying logic? Where are the protests headed?
Indeed, stepping back just a bit, what is the purpose of any activist protest? Set aside that tiny numbers engage for fun or to meet people – not that there is anything wrong with such desires in a world like ours. The overwhelming desire of protests is of course to win change. But how?
Put differently, why do activists think their actions about racism, about wars, about inequality, about global warming, about – whatever – can win change?
Some might say it can occur due to activism raising new issues, causing new thoughts, engendering new views. And all that is certainly profoundly important. And all that can and does happen. It is certainly part of protest logic. But change the issues, thoughts, and views of whom?
Social change in our ridiculously top down society is regrettably, ultimately, a matter of those in power behaving other than they have in the past. But the dissent of people in the streets doesn’t rationally convince those in power that their past thoughts, views, and choices should not be their future thoughts, views, and choices. It does that for some participants. It does that for some bystanders. And that matters, hugely. But for elites who have to pull levers for change to ensue, more often people in the street tend to cause those in the suites, if they feel anything at all, to feel more strongly opposed to sought changes, and, in the rare instances when someone with the power required to impose a new policy does get woke – he or she then almost always gets removed or, to avoid being removed, remains silent.
But if activism doesn’t rationally change power brokers’ minds, how does activism get power brokers to pull levers that ensure changes?
Answer: Activism wins change by “raising social costs” such that those who enact policies feel it is in their interest to make sought changes because if they don’t the cost to them of ever increasing activism will be greater than the cost to them of succumbing to the demand for change.
That is a clumsy bunch of words, but also trivially simple. Even so, it has many important implications and it raises, as well, some questions. What “social costs” matter? What “social costs” pressure elites? And how do we conduct our activism to best raise relevant “social costs” high enough to win change?
And so we come to the heart of this discussion. How are the current widespread demonstrations and activism winning various changes? Why are elites giving in, more than anyone would have predicted some weeks back. Hells bells, why are sports talk shows spending more time discussing policing, even systemic racism, even tactics and solutions, then sports scores?
Answer: Demonstrations are raising social costs.
How might demonstrations win still more change?
Answer: They can raise costs still higher, or raise new costs.
But what are the costs that rallies, marches, and civil disobedience, and for that matter organizing outreach, webinars, and all manner of educationals raise?
We can be sure it is not the financial cost of cleaning up after protests. That cost is marginal, manageable, and thus of zero social change consequence to the powers that be. It is not even the continuation of our activities, without their growing. That too is marginal and manageable and thus of little consequence. Imagine a recurring rally, for example, every week, even every other day. If the action never grows it will at most be annoying. Stable, static opposition portends going nowhere. The cost of opposition is precisely the danger of its continued growth. The cost of opposition is precisely the danger of a steady diversification and enlargement of focus. It is the future threat that matters, not recurring activity that doesn’t grow.
When elites are asked to do X – whatever X may be, they will do it at whatever cost doing it entails, only when they fear that not doing it will ultimately cost them more. And the fact that cost to their beloved business as usual is the only reason they will do what is sought is why they have the power. It is the job of power to persist in business as usual unless business as usual is at risk. It is the job of power to defend business as usual including when the best defense, because of the growing threat, the growing social cost, is concessions. And we are not talking dollar costs. They are typically minor. Easily affordable. We are talking threatened loss of means of accruing wealth and threatened loss of power as evidenced by a trajectory of growing opposition that is threatening to grow still more.
Elites give in to strikes when they fear not giving in will lead workers to demand and win even more. They give in on affirmative action, or on anything at all, when they fear the consequences of not giving in more than they fear the consequences of giving in. The cost of cleaning up after demonstrators barely registers enough to win anything at all. In fact, even large demonstrations, if they recur but don’t grow, are no big deal.
What matters, what constitutes social cost – growing social costs – to the eyes of the elites who have their hands in position to pull levers to meet demands, is steadily increasing numbers, steadily growing commitment, steadily growing incursions on their own overall operations, and especially a steadily enlarging focus and steadily diversifying demands that augur still more to come.
It follows that breaking lots of windows is not raising social costs unless it grows the movement, grows resistance, grows commitment, and diversifies demands. The truth is, however, breaking windows rarely if ever has any such effects. It often, despite the hopes of practitioners, even does the reverse – and that’s without even taking into account its providing an excuse and justification for repression. Increasing the number of participants in actions, increasing their commitment as evidenced by their engaging in civil disobedience, and perhaps most critical, simultaneously deepening and enlarging stated aims all convey increasing threats that in turn warrant meeting demands.
The job of the rebel, resister, radical, and revolutionary is to consider circumstances and undertake activities best suited to winning desired gains and to simultaneously paving the way toward winning still more gains on the way to attaining transformed social relations.
Enlarging support and awareness. Nurturing commitment and visibly demonstrating a threat of more to come. These are our tasks. It can include face to face discussion and organizing, collective educationals, rallies, marches, boycotts, and occupations. It can include creating organization and means of outreach. It can include and indeed should include engineering shifts in political power. Protests should not always remain at the level of asking elites to change. Our efforts should also create the conditions of a political shift by which the traditionally dispossessed, oppressed, and marginalized win greater and greater levels of power.
We seek radical social transformation. But short of that, our actions should not only force elites to respond to our demands they should also expand democracy and plant the seeds of a new future in the present. It is rare that trashing or violently engaging with police (other than for necessary self defense) enlarges support, grows awareness, nurtures commitment, and visibly demonstrates a threat of more of all that to come. Raise social costs. Don’t stabilize them. Don’t reduce them. Raise them.
[Collective 20 is a group of writers located in different places throughout the globe. Some young, some older; some long-time organizers and writers, others just getting started, but all equally dedicated to offering analysis, vision, and strategy useful for winning a vastly better society than we currently endure. The members of Collective 20 hope their contributions concerning social, political, economic, and environmental issues will generate more useful content and better outreach through a collective publication effort as opposed to individuals doing so on their own. Collective 20’s cumulative work can be found at collective20.org, where you can learn more about the group, see an archive of its publications, and comment on its work.]
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.