The COVID-19 outbreak has, like no other recent event, exposed the fractures among the American right. From the beginning, there were a few voices who viewed the virus as a serious threat to public health. However, for the most part, Republicans followed the president’s lead and insisted that COVID-19 was no worse than the seasonal flu, and just the latest attempt by the media to politically damage the Trump Administration. The libertarian fringe, on the other hand, immediately descended into a paranoid meltdown that the virus a plot by the New World Order to establish global tyranny and mandatory vaccinations.
COVID-19 is a new virus – at least, that is what every expert has told us. What is the main characteristic of a virus, or anything else, that is brand-new? New means unknown, a complete absence of data. To instantly dismiss COVID-19 as no more lethal than the seasonal flu is reckless, and it certainly not in keeping with the conservative approach, by which I mean: exercising prudence. When faced with the unknown, the conservative approach is to be cautious, buy time to learn all you can as quickly as possible, avoid unnecessary risks, plan for the worst, and hope for the best.
Implementing lockdowns or stay-in-place orders are the only means public officials have to buy time when facing a highly infectious virus. Time that can be used to increase healthcare capacity, so as to avoid overwhelming the healthcare system as it happened in Lombardy, Italy. Perhaps the “it’s just the flu” crowd would have preferred to roll the dice and cross their fingers that hospitals would not be overrun by patients. However, that is not a prudent or conservative approach.
Buying time has allowed medical personnel to learn more about the virus, how it affects the body, and which treatments and therapies are most effective in dealing with COVID-19. They have learned that traditional treatments for respiratory diseases are largely ineffective, if not counterproductive. In New York City, “More than 85 percent of those placed on ventilators in New York’s largest hospital system due to coronavirus symptoms later died from the disease, a study has found. “ Initially, it was thought that “Smoking also seems to be a factor associated with poor survival – in Italy, 24% smoke, 28% men. In the UK, for instance, 15% are current smokers.” A month later, a “study at a major Paris hospital suggests a substance in tobacco – possibly nicotine – may be stopping patients who smoke from catching Covid-19.”
Equally reckless is promoting unproven treatments as ‘game changers’. Determining whether a medication is effective requires time and following strict experimental protocols. A reporter appearing on Tucker Carlson’s show claiming that a French doctor successfully treated COVID-19 patients using anti-malaria drugs is not science, it’s not following proper protocols, it’s not prudent, and it’s not conservative. It only adds confusion and angst to an already difficult situation.
When not dismissing the virus altogether or pushing unproven medications, right-wingers reached for their favorite comparison: car accidents. Thousands of Americans die in automobile accidents, and we don’t ban cars or shut down the economy. The comparison ignores that driving cars is a highly regulated activity. We have myriad traffic laws designed to prevent loss of life. Drivers are required to pass licensing requirements and to have liability insurance in case they injure anyone else. Bringing up automobile accidents is a very odd choice for those who oppose lockdown measures in the name of liberty and opposing government overreach.
This comparison also ignores the many safety measures in place to reduce automobile fatalities. Safety features such as airbags, rear cameras and sensors have become standard. Laws requiring the use of seat belts are part of an effort to save lives. What the “Let’s-Get-Back-To-Work” contingent is essentially proposing is: here is the car, we haven’t taken the time to inspect it and make sure the brakes work properly, it has no airbags, seat belts, or sensors –but go ahead and take it for a drive downhill. Moreover, those who insist on having the brakes, seat belts, and airbags inspected are cowards, unpatriotic, and lovers of tyranny. This is not conservatism. It is sheer lunacy.
In arguing against the lockdowns, comparisons are often made to other diseases. Thousands of Americans die of heart attacks, cancer, and the list goes on, yet the economy is not shut down. The difference is that one cannot catch a heart attack in a crowded bar — but you can catch an infectious disease. You can’t catch a stroke, cancer, or hypertension in a crowded plane, but you can catch COVID-19. The comparisons simply fall flat.
Finally, there is the cost-benefit analysis argument. Even if 100,00 people were to die, that is not enough to justify destroying millions of jobs, we hear. This approach assumes that 100,000 people can die of an infectious disease and the rest of the population will just carry on as if they died of old age, without altering their behavior or consumption patterns. Recent history and current events don’t back up such an assumption.
In 2014, Thomas Eric Duncan was diagnosed with Ebola at Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital in Dallas, Texas. Unlike COVID-19, Ebola is an extremely difficult disease to transmit. Moreover, Ebola is not contagious until symptoms develop. That is a critical difference from COVID-19, where asymptomatic individuals can spread the disease. There were no lockdowns or shelter-in-place orders issued by the local officials due to the Ebola case. Yet despite assurances from the medical experts, the public chose to be prudent:
“Two-thirds of the beds sit empty in the Dallas hospital where a patient died recently from Ebola.Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital has 900 beds, but is down to only 300 patients, a CDC official who was at the hospital told CNN. Hospital officials would not comment on that report.
Patients have shunned the facility after Thomas Eric Duncan died there last week, and two nurses who treated him also became infected with the deadly disease.”
The initial response by Trump, the political class, the media, and even the CDC was to downplay the risk posed by COVID-19 to Americans. Only after Italy went into lockdown and the infection rapidly spread to other European countries did the politicians, media, and the CDC change their approach. As always, our leaders were behind the curve and only imposed restrictions after external events forced their hand.
As with Ebola, the public exercised caution on their own. Love Field Airport in Dallas, TX experienced a drop in passengers beginning in late January as the news of the lockdown in China was hitting social media. Notice the steep drop before any lockdown was announced in the United States:
The first COVID-19 death in the United States was announced in Washington state on February 29, 2020, and immediately restaurants showed a drop of 25% in reservations according to Open Table:
One death, and immediately restaurants in Washington experienced a 25% drop in reservations. Imagine what having 100,000 people die of COVID-19 would do to the hospitality business. Anyone who suggests that 100,000 people dying of a highly infectious disease will not impact economic activity is divorced from reality. When faced with a new virus, the public has shown that it won’t wait for stay-in-place orders. Most Americans are unwilling to sacrifice their health or life, or the life and health of their loved ones, for The Economy. When it comes to the unknown, Americans have shown that they prefer the conservative approach and exercise prudence.
