newyorker--2020-04-17--Seoul’s Radical Experiment in Digital Contact Tracing

On the morning of March 23rd , I arrived at the Mapo District Office , a staid government building in northwestern Seoul , where I was greeted by Song In-su , the fifty-three-year-old deputy of the public-relations department .
Instead of shaking hands , we awkwardly bumped elbows .
Over the weekend , I had received my seventh local-government emergency alert—a text message with a red loudspeaker icon labelled “ Mapo District Office ” —informing me of new COVID-19 cases in the area where I live .
Song had sent them all .
“ Our biggest fear right now is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This had been apparent in the anti-COVID-19 fortifications I had noticed on my way up to his office , which is on the ninth floor .
Bottles of hand sanitizer , now present in every imaginable public space in Mapo , from bus stops to bike racks , had been installed throughout the building .
A heat sensor had scrutinized me as I ’ d walked through the lobby .
The elevator buttons were covered with antiviral tape .
On one wall of the conference room where I met with Song , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Meeting ” projected a mood of emergency .
Before the pandemic , Song and his colleagues had been preparing voting booths for the local parliamentary elections , which are held every four years , in April .
But in mid-February , the coronavirus spread throughout the southeastern city of Daegu , and the priorities of Mapo officials changed .
“ All our administrative power is concentrated on COVID-19 , ” Song said .
“ You don ’ t even see any mention of ‘ Parasite ’ in the news anymore.
” Although new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country ’ s roughly eleven thousand confirmed cases have originated—had slowed dramatically , inspiring hope that the worst was over for South Koreans , smaller but not insignificant clusters had been surfacing at call centers , churches , hospitals , and gaming cafés in and around Seoul , and also at the airport .
On March 16th , President Moon Jae-in declared greater Seoul as the new battlefront .
Experts had been warning that , as with any dense metropolis , things could quickly turn ugly .
“ Think Italy or New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In Seoul , local governments like the Mapo District Office have been at the front line of containment efforts : testing , monitoring , and tracking patients and disclosing critical information to the public .
Like most municipal public-relations officials , Song used to spend his days compiling media coverage of the district office ’ s activities and publishing them in an office bulletin .
Now , when a positive case is identified in Mapo , Song springs into action .
He strips the information of any identifying markers before posting it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ site , blog , and social-media accounts ; he also sends out the emergency text alerts .
The disclosure of anonymized patient routes , a central feature in South Korea ’ s containment strategy , has set it apart from the United States , which has so far erred on the side of individual privacy , and from neighboring Japan , where testing has been deliberately limited .
South Korea ’ s COVID-19 policies reflect a larger regime of transparency .
In daily press briefings , Jung Eun-kyeong , the head of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Prevention ( K.C.D.C . )
, has been delivering detailed reports in measured tones .
In addition to sharing the routes of confirmed patients , the agency has been distributing infection and testing data to journalists with remarkable frequency .
Emergency text alerts about significant developments are sent to every smartphone in the nation .
Such openness has been rewarded by an abiding trust in the government ’ s containment protocols .
Panic has been minimal ; toilet paper is in abundant supply .
Jung has also been candid about the trade-off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ terms of South Korea ’ s Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act—passed after the 2015 MERS outbreak , during which the government ’ s withholding of critical information contributed to further transmissions and deaths—it is now required to publish information that can include infected people ’ s travel routes , the public transport they took , and the medical institutions that are treating them .
As long as districts do not reveal the identities of confirmed patients , they have been free to decide levels of disclosure on their own .
In a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to make people with COVID-19 publicly identifiable , leading to cases of doxxing and online harassment .
“ Please don ’ t spread information about my identity , ” one patient wrote on social media .
“ I ’ m so sorry to my friends and family that I ’ ve hurt , but more than the physical pain , it ’ s been very difficult mentally.
” In February , a survey of a thousand people by researchers at Seoul National University found that respondents ’ greatest fear about the disease was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commission of Korea issued a statement calling for stronger measures to protect individuals from being outed .
Experts have also cautioned that over-disclosing can be counterproductive , as patients fearful of public censure may choose to hide instead of seeking treatment .
Following the National Human Rights Commission ’ s statement , the K.C.D.C .
had distributed new guidelines on disclosure to local governments , a copy of which Song held in his hand .
Mapo , as far as I could tell , had not committed any such blunders , but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Song , who repeatedly noted to me that his reports were carefully written .
Still , he said , somewhat cautiously , “ I think we should try to disclose as much information as we can , rather than holding back.
” For Song , this has meant including patients ’ age and gender , their neighborhood of residence , and the names of businesses and apartment complexes they had visited , which he sees as a way of assuaging other residents ’ anxieties .
“ What most people ultimately want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patient routes , ” he explained .
In Mapo , this has also boosted testing .
“ A lot of people come in after seeing the published patient routes , concerned that they might have been in the same place , ” one of the doctors at the local testing center , just outside Song ’ s building , said .
In the conference room , Song showed me the Mapo District Office Web site , where the dozen or so cases that had been confirmed in the area had been organized by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ entries , each appended with a detailed list of the stops the patient had made , in sparse , sterile language , read like a ship ’ s logbook .
“ 08:00 left home ( on foot ) / mask worn , ” began one entry for Mapo ’ s fourth patient , dated from March 6th to 10th .
The post went on to note each bus and subway transfer ( “ Bus transfer to no .
7730 in front of Sangam High School → disembarked at Susaeggyo / mask worn ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stop at a local supermarket , before ending with “ 15:00 tested positive → 19:00 transferred to Seoul Medical Center.
” Emergency text alerts , because of their character limit , linked recipients to these entries rather than relaying them in full .
“ For the text alerts , we use something called a ‘ remote broadcasting apparatus , ’ ” Song said .
“ Then it ’ s sent to every phone in a five-kilometre radius through a nearby base station.
” Public appetite for this information is voracious .
“ Most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for more information , for us to be even more revealing , ” Song said .
Indeed , a beleaguered epidemiological investigator told me , “ Sometimes when we go to an apartment complex office to collect C.C.T.V .
footage , residents run up demanding we tell them the block and unit number .
But then other people ask us not to disclose a certain location , especially if it ’ s where they live.
” The naming of local businesses in particular , which some local governments have avoided , hasn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proprietors .
“ Because disclosure affects public perception of the place , there ’ s a bit of a financial blow , ” Song said , apologetically .

Public appetite for this information is voracious. “Most of the residents’ feedback is asking for more information, for us to be even more revealing,” Song said. Indeed, a beleaguered epidemiological investigator told me, “Sometimes when we go to an apartment complex office to collect C.C.T.V. footage, residents run up demanding we tell them the block and unit number. But then other people ask us not to disclose a certain location, especially if it’s where they live.” The naming of local businesses in particular, which some local governments have avoided, hasn’t always gone over well with their proprietors. “Because disclosure affects public perception of the place, there’s a bit of a financial blow,” Song said, apologetically.
“It’s a double-edged sword,” Seong Han-bit, the thirty-six-year-old owner of Stance Coffee, a small, independent coffee shop in Seoul, told me. His café has nice lighting and copies of Kinfolk, the chic Danish magazine, at every table. On the morning of March 28th, Mapo’s Patient 15, a woman in her twenties, had briefly stopped by to order a drink. Song’s writeup for her, posted two days later, was unusually long. The woman had arrived at the airport—where she initially tested negative at a screening checkpoint—after visiting the United States. In Seoul, she had visited a cosmetics store, a fried-chicken joint, a hair salon, a post office, and multiple convenience stores and restaurants, before testing positive on March 29th. According to the report, she was believed to have caught the virus in America.
On a popular local Facebook group, someone had written a post denouncing her for being so irresponsible. “Just die alone, why would you cause other people harm,” one member said. Another remarked that the patient should have been hit with a giant hospital bill in the United States. The original poster, perhaps sensing that this conversation was bringing out people’s worst impulses, locked the comments.
On Monday, March 30th, after district officials fumigated Stance Coffee, and a major broadcaster mentioned the shop by name in a report about “re-imported” COVID-19 cases, Seong opened up his café. “Because I personally don’t keep up with patient routes, I assumed that other people wouldn’t either,” he said. “But, after the post went up yesterday, I felt it in my bones. From 5 P.M. to 11 P.M. that day, not a single customer showed up. I thought, ‘Ah, this really does have a big impact after all.’ ”
Sitting in his now empty café, Seong had also received a string of interrogatory phone calls from customers, demanding to know things like whether the barista working on the day in question had since been self-isolating. In reality, Seong told me, Patient 15 had been in the store for only a minute or two while she waited for her order. The barista, who had been wearing a mask during his shift, had interacted with her for just a moment. “It would be nice if the detailed circumstances of the encounter were listed alongside the other information,” Seong said.
“I’m worried about the future, but I still have to stay open to pay the rent,” he continued. “Who knows whether people will come or not? I’m approaching it with the mind-set that I should try to make any sale that I can, even if it’s only ten thousand won”—about eight dollars. Business had already slowed once, after the outbreak in Daegu first began. Still, Seong seemed to be maintaining an admirable sense of social-mindedness. “If I selfishly consider only my café and nothing else, of course I’d think, Why would they publish this and ruin my business?” he said. “But thinking from the perspective of other people—a parent with a child, for example—I still think it’s right to publish it.”
In late March, the government’s pleas for social distancing grew more vigorous. In a national address, Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun announced that the government would enforce a ban on large rallies and gatherings in Seoul, which hadn’t abated. Local governments like Mapo were ordered to take strong administrative action against businesses violating the city’s outbreak-prevention guidelines. “With the understanding that the next two weeks are a decisive time that offers us the chance to win the war against COVID-19, I ask that the South Korean public coöperate with several strong measures being taken,” Chung said. “For the next two weeks, we will calmly prepare for new everyday lives. We must change how we work, how our children learn, and we must practice everyday containment measures in every moment of our lives.”
In Mapo, I had been perceiving, by subtle degrees, the sort of change that Chung was talking about. The outbreak, now a global pandemic, had recast small daily routines. Like many others in South Korea, I obsessively combed through the trackers and maps created with disclosed-patient data. (This replaced checking the weather, which became meaningless once I stopped leaving the house.) For a while, as pins and lines indicating confirmed cases sprang up in neighborhoods outside of Mapo, we seemed to be avoiding the worst. But, in early March, after more than fifty patients emerged at an insurance call center in Guro, just two districts over, the emergency text alerts became more localized and frequent. One patient from this cluster, as I had learned with a stab of alarm two weeks earlier, had passed through Mangwon Market—a long promenade, lined with street-food venders and open-air produce stalls, where I did much of my grocery shopping. District officials had shut down the shops for two days in order to sanitize the market, but I had avoided going back for a week. Song, upon hearing this, waved a hand dismissively. “Places where patients recently passed through are much safer, because we send out a sanitization team with our contact tracers,” he said.
After this incident, a fresh sense of crisis seemed to have been awakened in the neighborhood. During smoke breaks outside my apartment, I spoke with my landlady about local developments while she wiped down the entrance keypad with alcohol wipes. As the magnolias on my street bloomed into white, scalloped buds, masks appeared on faces everywhere. Outside of pharmacies, people lined up at the same time every day to buy their weekly allotment of masks, which the government had rationed to two per person. Businesses put up no-mask-no-entry posters. Delivery drivers began to plant their feet far back and crane forward to gingerly hand you your food.
In spite of such heightened awareness, social distancing in Mapo hadn’t been entirely successful. Most businesses escaped an outright ban, and cafés and restaurants remained open, albeit to fewer customers. “The biggest problems are gaming cafés, churches, and Hongdae clubs,” Song said. The neighborhood of Hongdae, several blocks east of Mangwon Market, is a night-life destination for tourists and for students from the nearby Hongik University. There, crowds of young people had been partying at clubs and bars that took your temperature before letting you in. A friend of mine, who recently shut down his bar in Hongdae, told me, “I was starting to get annoyed by the people even showing up.” This would amount to significant losses, he conceded—but he didn’t want to be stuck in a bar full of customers cavalier enough to show up in the midst of a pandemic.
Businesses and religious institutions that violate the outbreak-prevention guidelines—which mandate proprietors to enforce mask-wearing and the maintenance of a two-metre safety buffer between people on the premises, among other measures—are subject to a fine of up to twenty-five hundred dollars. On a recent Sunday, three hundred or so district officials visited several of the more stubborn local churches, in a final attempt to dissuade them from holding services. A few remain undeterred, but the vast majority have switched to online worship. And though some of Hongdae’s clubs had recently re-opened, looking to draw in social-distancing apostates, most shut down again after a round of inspections on April 1st. “It’s deserted out there,” Song told me.
The patient information that Song discloses comes from Kim Mi-ra, the head of infectious-disease management at Mapo’s community health center, which is next door to Song’s building. In front of the health center, a banner announced that all regular services had been halted. By the entrance, where two workers stood waiting to spritz any visitors with hand sanitizer, a plastic canopy had been erected to serve as a makeshift reception area. Inside an adjacent tent, doctors in full protective gear test thirty to forty people each day. The process takes just a few minutes, and results are usually delivered within twenty-four hours, by text message.
When a patient tests positive here, Kim’s team retraces their movements based on their oral testimony, and then combs through relevant C.C.T.V. footage in order to locate others who might have been exposed. Restaurants, where people must take their masks off to eat, are the most common sites of exposure. “Say there’s someone who was within two metres of the patient at a restaurant, but we don’t know who that person is, except what they look like in the C.C.T.V. footage,” Kim said. “Then we ask the credit-card company to pull up that customer’s information and ask them to tell them to contact us.” That person is then put under monitored self-isolation for two weeks, using an app that tracks his phone to insure that he isn’t breaking quarantine.
Behind this model of contact tracing is a vast surveillance apparatus expressly designed for such outbreak scenarios. Under South Korea’s Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act, health authorities, with the approval of the police and other supervising agencies, can make use of cell-phone G.P.S. data, credit-card payment information, and travel and medical records. As of March 26th, the government has also officially launched the Epidemic Investigation Support System, a data-analysis platform that automates the process, allowing investigators to get clearance and pull up patient trajectories in under a minute. (Previously, the process took about a day.)
Although some had anticipated a backlash to such sweeping electronic surveillance, public outrage has been nearly nonexistent. According to Kim Min-ho, a law professor and one of the country’s human-rights commissioners, this is because these measures can be used only in the context of disease outbreaks, making it impossible for them to be co-opted for, say, anti-terrorism campaigns.
“I think there’s a difference in reasoning and perception at play here,” Kim told me, by phone. “The United States was quick to ban businesses, while countries like France instituted lockdowns. But South Korea hasn’t been able to do the same because we’re very cautious about these kinds of measures, in the same way that other countries are cautious about privacy.” Mere weeks after the initial flurry of articles pondering whether or not democracies were better equipped to deal with pandemics, few countries were getting away with not sacrificing some kinds of freedom. As Kim pointed out, the true question was which freedoms to prioritize. The chaos of the MERS outbreak had left the public with a grim conviction: sacrificing some individual privacy was simply the upfront cost of avoiding more debilitating consequences down the line.
South Koreans have decided that, during an infectious-disease outbreak, there is a strong, pragmatic case to be made in favor of what might be called virtuous surveillance—a radically transparent version of people-tracking that is subject to public scrutiny and paired with stringent legal safeguards against abuse. Despite its imperfections, South Korea’s policy is striking for the fact that it brings the mechanisms and outcomes of surveillance into the public forum. In doing so, it appeals to a deeper sense of civic trust—the belief that, in a crisis, the citizenry can be relied upon to play its part.
Late last month, I experienced the outbreak-surveillance system for myself. Upon walking through the front door of Gachon University Gil Medical Center in Incheon, I was surrounded by a contingent of hospital workers wearing goggles, masks, face shields, and plastic gowns. After taking my temperature, a nurse asked me if I’d recently travelled to any high-risk areas. I said no. At the next checkpoint, another nurse took my driver’s license and entered my personal identification number into her computer, where a modified version of the Drug Utilization Review—a drug-prescription cross-referencing system widely used in South Korea—pulled up my travel history to check whether I was lying. I wasn’t, so I received a yellow sticker. Eom Joong-sik, an infectious-disease physician who is advising the government on COVID-19, was waiting at the end of the checkpoint.
“This is one of the benefits of having a universal health-care system,” Eom told me, gesturing behind us. “When they enter your personal identification number, they can review your travel history.”
In the empty consultation room where we sat, Eom spoke bluntly about the current state of affairs. “We really don’t know whether the South Korean system has succeeded or not yet,” he said. “There has been a constant stream of new cases in the capital area.” With community-based cases steadily waning, re-imported cases seeping in through the airport have become the latest threat. A breach here could undo much of the painstakingly made progress so far. “It’s not enough that we alone are successful in containment efforts,” Kim Mi-ra had told me. “There’s a high likelihood that the disease can be brought back in from other countries at any time.”
Eom said, “If there’s a major outbreak here, what happened in Daegu may not even compare,” adding that more than half of South Korea’s population of roughly fifty million lives in the capital area. Moreover, Seoul is nearly twice as dense as New York City. If infections proliferated, he warned, “This sort of patient-movement disclosure or contact tracing will become meaningless.” Far more drastic measures, such as military-enforced lockdowns, might well occur.
Seoul poses a far more vexing set of challenges than Daegu did. The vastness of the greater capital area makes potential infection routes difficult to pin down or predict. There are too many blind spots, such as crowded subways and buses, where C.C.T.V. footage provides few usable leads. When I asked Eom what the likelihood of a major outbreak in Seoul is, he let out a loud, unsettled laugh. “I’m just praying it doesn’t happen,” he said.
Resisting complacency, Eom said, would be critical. But in recent days, public life in Seoul has begun filling out again. Despite the closure of high-risk businesses like clubs and churches, lines at popular eateries and cafés have reappeared. In the parks and on the esplanades along the Han, the river winding through Seoul, crowds of picnickers have begun to materialize among the cherry blossoms, with the dazed, sleepy air of animals emerging from their dens after a long winter. If another crisis loomed, it was hard to tell. “All of the control and containment procedures essentially rely on the same thing,” Eom told me. “And that is the coöperation and responsible conduct of the citizenry.”
A Guide to the Coronavirus


newyorker--2020-04-17--Studying Fascist Propaganda by Day, Watching Trump’s Coronavirus Updates by Night

In 2018 , Jason Stanley , a philosophy professor at Yale , published “ How Fascism Works.
” Although it was a slim volume , it ranged broadly , citing experimental psychology , legal theory , and neo-Nazi blogs ; although it was by an academic philosopher , it was a popular book that prioritized current events over syllogisms .
Viktor Orbán is mentioned more times in the book than Hannah Arendt .
Donald Trump shows up dozens of times , and he is portrayed not as a distractible bozo but as a concerted aspiring strongman .
“ Fascist politics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ explicitly fascist state does not arise , ” Stanley writes .
Elsewhere , in a chapter called “ Sodom and Gomorrah , ” he argues that Trump ’ s habit of extolling the heartland while decrying urban squalor “ makes sense in the context of a more general fascist politics , in which cities are seen as centers of disease and pestilence.
” Stanley couldn ’ t have known that many American cities were , in fact , about to become centers of disease , but he could have predicted that Trump would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advantage .
“ Some people would like to see New York quarantined because it ’ s a hot spot , ” Trump said , late last month .
“ Heavily infected.
” Stanley isn ’ t , or isn ’ t mainly , a scholar of public policy ; he is a philosopher of language .
When he insinuates that Trump is a fascist—and you don ’ t have to be a philosopher of language to catch the insinuation—he means that Trump talks like a fascist , not necessarily that he governs like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stanley ’ s book begin with a discussion of Germany in the nineteen-thirties , or Rwanda in the nineteen-nineties , before pivoting to a depiction of the contemporary United States .
“ Ever since my book came out , I ’ ve been fighting with critics who go , ‘ You ’ re overreacting , you ’ re exaggerating , it ’ s irresponsible to call this fascism or that fascism , ’ ” Stanley said .
“ I ’ ll point to a step Trump has taken—he ’ s using ICE to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surrounding himself with loyalists and generals , he ’ s using the apparatus of government to dig up dirt on a political rival—and the response is always ‘ Sure , that ’ s bad , but it ’ s not a big enough step to justify the F-word.
’ I ’ m starting to feel like the it ’ s-not-a-big-enough-step people won ’ t be happy until they ’ re in concentration camps.
” Stanley , a descendant of Holocaust survivors , acknowledges that he is unusually prone to worst-case thinking .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ It is no fun to be the only hysterical person in the room.
” ) Stanley has written that , during his childhood , his father ’ s “ Holocaust induced anxiety was all encompassing ” ; his mother taught him that “ the moment where one must accept that a situation is genuinely dangerous is usually well past the time when one can exit it.
” He also acknowledges , of course , that there are plenty of big steps that Trump hasn ’ t taken , and may never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the borders , indefinitely postponing the 2020 Presidential election .
Still , if Trump were ever going to be tempted to try something like this , wouldn ’ t now be the time ?
“ A lot of us who were deeply worried about Trump from the beginning were specifically worried about what would happen when he got his Reichstag-fire moment , ” Stanley said .
( The Reichstag , a government building in Berlin , was set ablaze in an arson attack , in 1933 ; Hitler ’ s government blamed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and used it as a pretext to suspend civil liberties . )
“ Trump is lucky , in a way , because the coronavirus is a real crisis , ” Stanley continued .
“ He didn ’ t have to manufacture one .
And now he ’ s acting the way strongmen always act in a time of crisis—grandstanding , hogging the media spotlight , demanding obedience .
So far , at least , his approval rating seems to have held fairly steady.
” On March 6th , Yale closed for spring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like so many other institutions around the world , Yale has become a very expensive and prestigious series of Webinars .
Stanley is still teaching his big spring lecture course , “ Propaganda , Ideology , & Democracy , ” now via live stream , from a red wingback chair in his living room .
“ The fascist leader is a tough guy who acts from his gut , who just knows what ’ s right by instinct and doesn ’ t need to rely on pointy-headed intellectuals , ” Stanley said earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students on Zoom .
“ All those people who reason and say , ‘ On the one hand , on the other hand ’ —that ’ s weakness and cowardice and decadence.
” A few moments later , a preposterously cute child wandered into the frame .
“ Sorry , it ’ s my son ’ s fifth birthday , ” Stanley said .
“ Where ’ s all the people ?
” his son said , looking at the screen .
“ The people are hiding behind their cameras , ” Stanley @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unmuted themselves and wished the child a happy birthday .
Stanley thanked them , then kissed his son on the forehead and ushered him out of the room .
“ We need to get back to ‘ The Protocols of the Elders of Zion , ’ ” he said .
On March 27th , Congress passed a two-trillion-dollar coronavirus-relief package , the largest stimulus bill in U.S. history .
It included what Democrats pejoratively called a “ corporate slush fund ” —half a trillion dollars that could be doled out to various large @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discretion of the executive branch , which is run by a hotel magnate .
But the bill also required oversight : a special inspector general , Glenn Fine , would monitor the spending , reporting to Congress anything that seemed amiss .
President Trump signed the bill , then immediately issued a signing statement making clear that he would not obey the law ’ s oversight provision .
( Asked about this by reporters , Trump responded , “ I ’ ll be the oversight.
” ) A few days later , Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a White House lawyer , would oversee the pandemic-relief spending .
On Wednesday , the Treasury announced that , in an unprecedented move , stimulus checks would bear the President ’ s name , and Trump threatened to force Congress into adjournment , which no President has ever done .
“ When somebody ’ s the President of the United States , the authority is total , ” Trump said at a recent press conference .
“ It ’ s total.
” Stanley has not rewritten his syllabus in light of COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t help drawing connections between what they see on the news and what they read in class— “ The Origins of Totalitarianism , ” by Hannah Arendt ; “ Conspiracy Theories , ” a recent book by the philosopher Quassim Cassam ; and , naturally , Stanley ’ s own “ How Fascism Works.
” On a recent Thursday afternoon , Stanley and a few of his students gathered ( virtually , of course ) to discuss overtly what they ’ d all been weighing privately : How does what we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ present , and on our near future ?
Lulu Chang , a graduate student at Yale ’ s School of Management , said that one of the course ’ s main themes was the authoritarian leader ’ s desire to control the truth : “ Something that Professor Stanley says all the time is ‘ If you take away truth , and you can ’ t speak truth to power , all that ’ s left is power.
’ ” In the early days of the coronavirus crisis , she continued , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was not going to be that big of a deal .
And then , as it became clearer and clearer that that was not going to be the case , that narrative continued to shift , as though everyone knew all along.
” ( Trump , on February 27th : “ One day—it ’ s like a miracle—it will disappear.
” Trump , on March 17th : “ I ’ ve always viewed it as very serious .
” )

In 2018, Jason Stanley, a philosophy professor at Yale, published “How Fascism Works.” Although it was a slim volume, it ranged broadly, citing experimental psychology, legal theory, and neo-Nazi blogs; although it was by an academic philosopher, it was a popular book that prioritized current events over syllogisms. Viktor Orbán is mentioned more times in the book than Hannah Arendt. Donald Trump shows up dozens of times, and he is portrayed not as a distractible bozo but as a concerted aspiring strongman. “Fascist politics can dehumanize minority groups even when an explicitly fascist state does not arise,” Stanley writes. Elsewhere, in a chapter called “Sodom and Gomorrah,” he argues that Trump’s habit of extolling the heartland while decrying urban squalor “makes sense in the context of a more general fascist politics, in which cities are seen as centers of disease and pestilence.” Stanley couldn’t have known that many American cities were, in fact, about to become centers of disease, but he could have predicted that Trump would use such a development to his rhetorical advantage. “Some people would like to see New York quarantined because it’s a hot spot,” Trump said, late last month. “Heavily infected.”
Stanley isn’t, or isn’t mainly, a scholar of public policy; he is a philosopher of language. When he insinuates that Trump is a fascist—and you don’t have to be a philosopher of language to catch the insinuation—he means that Trump talks like a fascist, not necessarily that he governs like one. Still, many passages in Stanley’s book begin with a discussion of Germany in the nineteen-thirties, or Rwanda in the nineteen-nineties, before pivoting to a depiction of the contemporary United States. “Ever since my book came out, I’ve been fighting with critics who go, ‘You’re overreacting, you’re exaggerating, it’s irresponsible to call this fascism or that fascism,’ ” Stanley said. “I’ll point to a step Trump has taken—he’s using ICE to round up children, he’s surrounding himself with loyalists and generals, he’s using the apparatus of government to dig up dirt on a political rival—and the response is always ‘Sure, that’s bad, but it’s not a big enough step to justify the F-word.’ I’m starting to feel like the it’s-not-a-big-enough-step people won’t be happy until they’re in concentration camps.”
Stanley, a descendant of Holocaust survivors, acknowledges that he is unusually prone to worst-case thinking. (As my colleague Masha Gessen once observed, “It is no fun to be the only hysterical person in the room.”) Stanley has written that, during his childhood, his father’s “Holocaust induced anxiety was all encompassing”; his mother taught him that “the moment where one must accept that a situation is genuinely dangerous is usually well past the time when one can exit it.” He also acknowledges, of course, that there are plenty of big steps that Trump hasn’t taken, and may never take: imposing martial law, closing the borders, indefinitely postponing the 2020 Presidential election. Still, if Trump were ever going to be tempted to try something like this, wouldn’t now be the time? “A lot of us who were deeply worried about Trump from the beginning were specifically worried about what would happen when he got his Reichstag-fire moment,” Stanley said. (The Reichstag, a government building in Berlin, was set ablaze in an arson attack, in 1933; Hitler’s government blamed the arson, falsely, on Communist agitators, and used it as a pretext to suspend civil liberties.) “Trump is lucky, in a way, because the coronavirus is a real crisis,” Stanley continued. “He didn’t have to manufacture one. And now he’s acting the way strongmen always act in a time of crisis—grandstanding, hogging the media spotlight, demanding obedience. So far, at least, his approval rating seems to have held fairly steady.”
On March 6th, Yale closed for spring break and never reopened. Instead, like so many other institutions around the world, Yale has become a very expensive and prestigious series of Webinars. Stanley is still teaching his big spring lecture course, “Propaganda, Ideology, & Democracy,” now via live stream, from a red wingback chair in his living room. “The fascist leader is a tough guy who acts from his gut, who just knows what’s right by instinct and doesn’t need to rely on pointy-headed intellectuals,” Stanley said earlier this month, addressing a few dozen students on Zoom. “All those people who reason and say, ‘On the one hand, on the other hand’—that’s weakness and cowardice and decadence.”
A few moments later, a preposterously cute child wandered into the frame. “Sorry, it’s my son’s fifth birthday,” Stanley said.
“Where’s all the people?” his son said, looking at the screen.
“The people are hiding behind their cameras,” Stanley said.
A few of the students unmuted themselves and wished the child a happy birthday. Stanley thanked them, then kissed his son on the forehead and ushered him out of the room. “We need to get back to ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,’ ” he said.
On March 27th, Congress passed a two-trillion-dollar coronavirus-relief package, the largest stimulus bill in U.S. history. It included what Democrats pejoratively called a “corporate slush fund”—half a trillion dollars that could be doled out to various large companies, including hotels, at the discretion of the executive branch, which is run by a hotel magnate. But the bill also required oversight: a special inspector general, Glenn Fine, would monitor the spending, reporting to Congress anything that seemed amiss. President Trump signed the bill, then immediately issued a signing statement making clear that he would not obey the law’s oversight provision. (Asked about this by reporters, Trump responded, “I’ll be the oversight.”) A few days later, Trump fired Fine and announced that Brian Miller, a White House lawyer, would oversee the pandemic-relief spending. On Wednesday, the Treasury announced that, in an unprecedented move, stimulus checks would bear the President’s name, and Trump threatened to force Congress into adjournment, which no President has ever done. “When somebody’s the President of the United States, the authority is total,” Trump said at a recent press conference. “It’s total.”
Stanley has not rewritten his syllabus in light of COVID-19. Even so, his students can’t help drawing connections between what they see on the news and what they read in class—“The Origins of Totalitarianism,” by Hannah Arendt; “Conspiracy Theories,” a recent book by the philosopher Quassim Cassam; and, naturally, Stanley’s own “How Fascism Works.” On a recent Thursday afternoon, Stanley and a few of his students gathered (virtually, of course) to discuss overtly what they’d all been weighing privately: How does what we’re discussing in class bear on our present, and on our near future?
Lulu Chang, a graduate student at Yale’s School of Management, said that one of the course’s main themes was the authoritarian leader’s desire to control the truth: “Something that Professor Stanley says all the time is ‘If you take away truth, and you can’t speak truth to power, all that’s left is power.’ ” In the early days of the coronavirus crisis, she continued, “there was initially a sense that this was not going to be that big of a deal. And then, as it became clearer and clearer that that was not going to be the case, that narrative continued to shift, as though everyone knew all along.” (Trump, on February 27th: “One day—it’s like a miracle—it will disappear.” Trump, on March 17th: “I’ve always viewed it as very serious.”)
Later in the video chat, Stanley picked up on this line of thought: “With the technology we have now, we can see Trump saying the opposite of what he just said. And yet it seems to have no effect.” To explain this phenomenon, he reached for his copy of Arendt’s “Origins of Totalitarianism,” flipping through a few pages until he found the phrase he was looking for: “the perpetual-motion mania of totalitarian movements.” I thought that he was going to point to another sentence from the same book: “The totalitarian mass leaders based their propaganda on the correct psychological assumption that . . . one could make people believe the most fantastic statements one day, and trust that if the next day they were given irrefutable proof of their falsehood, they would take refuge in cynicism.”
Noah Kopf, a junior at Yale College, spoke from his childhood bedroom, in Newton, Massachusetts. “Arendt talks about how fascist movements create their own shadow organizations that mimic the structure and function of the state bureaucracy, but they’re incompetent at it,” he said. Even as Trump belittled public servants and starved their agencies of resources, he continued to benefit from their competence; at the same time, “he’s assembling another bureaucracy on top of it that’s totally inept, that’s run by loyalists. Ultimately, that’s going to be a source of long-term damage.”
Sophie Ascheim, a sophomore in Los Angeles, also worried about what happens when core governmental institutions are no longer credible. “My mom is a doctor,” she said. “Once she stopped trusting what the C.D.C. was telling her, about a month ago, I was, like, Oh, we’re in for it.”
Stanley listed a few of Trump’s more outrageous recent decisions—each of which seemed to be quickly forgotten, buried under an even fresher outrage. Doga Unlu, a first-year undergraduate speaking from her home in Istanbul, said, “Something like firing the inspector generals—I would expect something like that to happen in Turkey, if I’m being honest, not in the U.S.” Under normal circumstances, Ascheim noted, you could vote, or take to the streets in protest. “In a democracy, one of the only things you can always do is show up,” she said. “Right now, you literally cannot do that, because you’re not supposed to leave your house.”
The video chat ended. In the ensuing days, the outrages continued to pile up. Stanley e-mailed me about a few of them (“Crazy press conference”), but, given the perpetual-motion mania of the current moment, it was impossible to keep track of them all. On Tuesday, Trump announced that he would cut off funding to the World Health Organization, which he blamed for his mistakes. Stanley wrote me another e-mail. “In fascist ideology, international organizations are mere masks for a duplicitous enemy,” he wrote. “Trump seems to be basing his reelection campaign on a nationalist propaganda war against China. . . . Because of his worldview, he is unable to see the WHO as anything but a mask to conceal his chosen national foe.” In a previous conversation, Stanley had quoted Orwell’s “1984”: “Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.” I asked him whether he thought that a hypernationalist reëlection strategy would work. “If you look at history,” Stanley said, “it tends to be quite effective.”
A Guide to the Coronavirus


newyorker--2020-04-17--Trump’s Pandemic Plan: “Absolute Authority,” No Responsibility

A week ago , President Trump foreshadowed his growing anxiety over when and how to end the Great Shutdown , a decision he is well aware will have existential consequences—for his own political future .
He called the question of reopening the country amid the coronavirus pandemic “ the biggest decision I ’ ll ever make ” and “ by far the biggest decision of my life.
” Yet by the time Trump advertised a “ Major News Conference ” for Thursday evening , there was little suspense from a man who has been tweeting about a “ LIGHT AT @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who declared , on March 24th , that he wanted church pews “ packed ” by Easter .
Trump backed off the Easter deadline within days of promoting it , and he repeated the act this week , with a May 1st date and a new plan for “ OPENING UP AMERICA AGAIN , ” which started out on Monday as an imperial diktat from an almighty President and ended up on Thursday as a mere recommendation to individual states , without a fixed date .
Many governors have already announced that they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You ’ re going to call your own shots , ” Trump reassured them on a conference call on Thursday afternoon , according to an audio recording , which promptly leaked .
“ You ’ re going to be calling the shots.
” This might seem a head-spinning reversal .
But it is classic Trump .
His two most memorable lines of the COVID-19 pandemic , proclaiming “ absolute authority ” and “ no responsibility at all , ” are wildly contradictory , and yet also completely consistent with his approach to governing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new type of American crisis , but it has been met by the same old , same old from America ’ s President : unhinged press conferences and unfounded conspiracy theories ; lies , attacks , and bizarre non sequiturs ; and abrupt , seemingly incomprehensible policy shifts from a leader who has no problem changing course at the expense of his own credibility .
A few weeks ago , Trump declared war on an “ invisible enemy.
” Now he says that he is beginning “ the next front in our war @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been made .
This grandiose proclamation came on a day when more than two thousand Americans died .
On Wednesday , a record twenty-five hundred people died .
As of Thursday , more than twenty-two million Americans have filed for unemployment since the pandemic began , a shattering statistic that came out the same morning that the Small Business Administration acknowledged that its three-hundred-and-fifty-million-dollar bailout program was already out of money .
The I.M.F .
now forecasts a severe recession for advanced economies like that of the United States , lasting into next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bodies stashed in an empty room at a Michigan hospital ; seventeen corpses hidden in a New Jersey nursing home .
Yet Wall Street has had a good week .
That , and signs of incipient conservative backlash against government restrictions , symbolized by a handful of protests in several Midwestern states by Trump-sign-toting crowds , are the data points the President seems to prefer .
A few weeks ago , during Trump ’ s reopen-by-Easter flirtation , he admitted that he based the new deadline on nothing more than his gut and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Now he offers a “ science-based reopening ” plan , which includes a vague and uncertain three-stage path for states to resume everyday life .
Yet the main precondition for doing so—widespread testing—is not only not in place but , according to Trump , not his problem .
“ The federal government shouldn ’ t be forced to go and do everything , ” he said on Thursday evening .
This might as well be his slogan for the crisis , and for his entire Presidency : ultimate power and no responsibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at his Monday press conference , “ The President of the United States calls the shots.
” In a rambling , outrage-filled performance that began with what appeared to be a Trump campaign ad featuring his Fox News confidant Sean Hannity and ended with his sweeping assertion of executive power , Trump claimed that he had the total authority to override governors and singlehandedly determine whether , when , and how each state would reopen its economy .
Reactions to that press conference , which , at two hours and twenty-three minutes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s COVID-19 briefings so far , were swift and harsh .
The governor of New York , Andrew Cuomo , called him a wannabe “ king.
” The USA Today Washington bureau chief , Susan Page , tweeted , “ I ’ ve covered six Presidents , but I ’ ve never covered any White House briefing quite like the one tonight.
” Robby Soave , an editor at the conservative Reason magazine , called it “ an utterly unhinged , childish temper tantrum.
” Jim Acosta , the CNN reporter who often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it was “ the biggest meltdown I have ever seen from a President of the United States in my career.
” Trump provokes superlatives—his public persona seems to require them—but it ’ s clear we ’ ve lost the vocabulary for what to call these incidents , which are not in fact outliers but recurring features of his Presidency .
Search “ unhinged Trump press conference ” online and numerous examples pop up , from the February 6th White House “ celebration , ” after the end of his Senate impeachment trial , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ performance at which he insulted the Danish Prime Minister because she would not sell him Greenland .
The spectacle of an infuriated Trump ranting at the press corps has become a sort of totemic ritual of this bizarre era , going back to the very first official press conference of his Presidency .
Held on February 16 , 2017 , it was an impromptu affair in which Trump rebutted reports of chaos in his White House ( “ The Administration is running like a fine-tuned machine , ” he said ) , called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” bragged about his television ratings , and denied that his attacks on the press showed he was out of control .
“ I am not ranting and raving , ” he said .
“ I ’ m just telling you know you ’ re dishonest people.
” When it was over , CNN ’ s Jake Tapper tried to sum it up .
“ It was unhinged .
It was wild , ” he told viewers .
More than three years later , the coronavirus shutting down virtually the entire planet is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unhinged press conference , alas , is not .
Given how extraordinary the events of the past six weeks have been , you might think Trump would put aside his previous preoccupations or rewrite his own playbook to accommodate the deaths of thirty thousand Americans .
But you would be wrong .
He has continued to attack “ Crazy Nancy ” Pelosi , the Speaker of the House , with whom he has not spoken since the end of his Senate impeachment trial , and even did so just hours before Thursday ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solemnly intoned about the need for Democrats and Republicans to work together .
At his daily coronavirus press conferences , Trump has complained about being taken advantage of by European allies and touted his wall with Mexico , themes that he has stressed since he first took office .
Even in making the most sweeping claim of his Presidency , to have “ absolute power ” over the states in the pandemic , Trump on Monday was not so much making a novel assertion as reverting to one of his favorite rhetorical devices @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Trump has claimed the “ absolute right ” to do an astonishing array of things .
Indeed , the list of those previously undeclared and previously unknown Presidential rights and authorities is so long and disparate that the only thing they seem to have in common is the fact that Trump has claimed to have them .
In just the past few months , the President has asserted the “ absolute right ” to fire the intelligence-community inspector general , whose handing of a whistle-blower complaint eventually triggered Trump ’ s impeachment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right ” to interfere in the federal sentencing process of his friend Roger Stone .
Last winter , he asserted the “ absolute right ” to ask “ Other Countries ” to investigate corruption , which is the President ’ s description of his interactions with Ukraine that led to his impeachment .

A week ago, President Trump foreshadowed his growing anxiety over when and how to end the Great Shutdown, a decision he is well aware will have existential consequences—for his own political future. He called the question of reopening the country amid the coronavirus pandemic “the biggest decision I’ll ever make” and “by far the biggest decision of my life.” Yet by the time Trump advertised a “Major News Conference” for Thursday evening, there was little suspense from a man who has been tweeting about a “LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL” and who declared, on March 24th, that he wanted church pews “packed” by Easter. Trump backed off the Easter deadline within days of promoting it, and he repeated the act this week, with a May 1st date and a new plan for “OPENING UP AMERICA AGAIN,” which started out on Monday as an imperial diktat from an almighty President and ended up on Thursday as a mere recommendation to individual states, without a fixed date. Many governors have already announced that they will not follow his guidance. “You’re going to call your own shots,” Trump reassured them on a conference call on Thursday afternoon, according to an audio recording, which promptly leaked. “You’re going to be calling the shots.”
This might seem a head-spinning reversal. But it is classic Trump. His two most memorable lines of the COVID-19 pandemic, proclaiming “absolute authority” and “no responsibility at all,” are wildly contradictory, and yet also completely consistent with his approach to governing. The novel coronavirus is truly a new type of American crisis, but it has been met by the same old, same old from America’s President: unhinged press conferences and unfounded conspiracy theories; lies, attacks, and bizarre non sequiturs; and abrupt, seemingly incomprehensible policy shifts from a leader who has no problem changing course at the expense of his own credibility.
A few weeks ago, Trump declared war on an “invisible enemy.” Now he says that he is beginning “the next front in our war” after “incredible progress” has been made. This grandiose proclamation came on a day when more than two thousand Americans died. On Wednesday, a record twenty-five hundred people died. As of Thursday, more than twenty-two million Americans have filed for unemployment since the pandemic began, a shattering statistic that came out the same morning that the Small Business Administration acknowledged that its three-hundred-and-fifty-billion-dollar bailout program was already out of money. The I.M.F. now forecasts a severe recession for advanced economies like that of the United States, lasting into next year. Horror stories abound: dead bodies stashed in an empty room at a Michigan hospital; seventeen corpses hidden in a New Jersey nursing home. Yet Wall Street has had a good week. That, and signs of incipient conservative backlash against government restrictions, symbolized by a handful of protests in several Midwestern states by Trump-sign-toting crowds, are the data points the President seems to prefer.
A few weeks ago, during Trump’s reopen-by-Easter flirtation, he admitted that he based the new deadline on nothing more than his gut and how “beautiful” it would be. Now he offers a “science-based reopening” plan, which includes a vague and uncertain three-stage path for states to resume everyday life. Yet the main precondition for doing so—widespread testing—is not only not in place but, according to Trump, not his problem. “The federal government shouldn’t be forced to go and do everything,” he said on Thursday evening. This might as well be his slogan for the crisis, and for his entire Presidency: ultimate power and no responsibility.
Trump started the week by declaring, at his Monday press conference, “The President of the United States calls the shots.” In a rambling, outrage-filled performance that began with what appeared to be a Trump campaign ad featuring his Fox News confidant Sean Hannity and ended with his sweeping assertion of executive power, Trump claimed that he had the total authority to override governors and singlehandedly determine whether, when, and how each state would reopen its economy.
Reactions to that press conference, which, at two hours and twenty-three minutes, was the longest of Trump’s COVID-19 briefings so far, were swift and harsh. The governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, called him a wannabe “king.” The USA Today Washington bureau chief, Susan Page, tweeted, “I’ve covered six Presidents, but I’ve never covered any White House briefing quite like the one tonight.” Robby Soave, an editor at the conservative Reason magazine, called it “an utterly unhinged, childish temper tantrum.” Jim Acosta, the CNN reporter who often spars with White House officials, said it was “the biggest meltdown I have ever seen from a President of the United States in my career.”
Trump provokes superlatives—his public persona seems to require them—but it’s clear we’ve lost the vocabulary for what to call these incidents, which are not in fact outliers but recurring features of his Presidency. Search “unhinged Trump press conference” online and numerous examples pop up, from the February 6th White House “celebration,” after the end of his Senate impeachment trial, to an August 21, 2019, performance at which he insulted the Danish Prime Minister because she would not sell him Greenland. The spectacle of an infuriated Trump ranting at the press corps has become a sort of totemic ritual of this bizarre era, going back to the very first official press conference of his Presidency. Held on February 16, 2017, it was an impromptu affair in which Trump rebutted reports of chaos in his White House (“The Administration is running like a fine-tuned machine,” he said), called the Trump-Russia probe “fake news,” bragged about his television ratings, and denied that his attacks on the press showed he was out of control. “I am not ranting and raving,” he said. “I’m just telling you know you’re dishonest people.” When it was over, CNN’s Jake Tapper tried to sum it up. “It was unhinged. It was wild,” he told viewers. More than three years later, the coronavirus shutting down virtually the entire planet is a novelty, but Trump holding an unhinged press conference, alas, is not.
Given how extraordinary the events of the past six weeks have been, you might think Trump would put aside his previous preoccupations or rewrite his own playbook to accommodate the deaths of thirty thousand Americans. But you would be wrong. He has continued to attack “Crazy Nancy” Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, with whom he has not spoken since the end of his Senate impeachment trial, and even did so just hours before Thursday’s press conference, at which he solemnly intoned about the need for Democrats and Republicans to work together. At his daily coronavirus press conferences, Trump has complained about being taken advantage of by European allies and touted his wall with Mexico, themes that he has stressed since he first took office. Even in making the most sweeping claim of his Presidency, to have “absolute power” over the states in the pandemic, Trump on Monday was not so much making a novel assertion as reverting to one of his favorite rhetorical devices.
From the start of his Presidency, Trump has claimed the “absolute right” to do an astonishing array of things. Indeed, the list of those previously undeclared and previously unknown Presidential rights and authorities is so long and disparate that the only thing they seem to have in common is the fact that Trump has claimed to have them. In just the past few months, the President has asserted the “absolute right” to fire the intelligence-community inspector general, whose handing of a whistle-blower complaint eventually triggered Trump’s impeachment, as well as the “absolute right” to interfere in the federal sentencing process of his friend Roger Stone. Last winter, he asserted the “absolute right” to ask “Other Countries” to investigate corruption, which is the President’s description of his interactions with Ukraine that led to his impeachment.
Many of Trump’s claims to “absolute” power, however, have proved to be exactly the sort of bluster that accompanied his overblown rhetoric this week: he wants to be seen as all-powerful in the fight against the pandemic, but without actually exercising the powers he purports to have. This, also, is vintage Trump. He has, after all, previously asserted the “absolute right” to order American businesses out of China, to eliminate the Constitution’s guarantee of birthright citizenship, and to shut down the U.S.’s entire southern border without ever actually doing any of those things. Trump repeatedly said he had the “absolute right” to fire the special counsel Robert Mueller, who was investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 election on Trump’s behalf, although he never did so. He also said that, had the Mueller investigation worked out differently, “I have the absolute right to PARDON myself.” He has not done that yet, either. Just this week, Trump asserted his power to unilaterally adjourn Congress, a power which has never before been exercised by any President. Has there ever been another President to articulate a view of the Constitution as sweeping as the one that Trump asserts? “I have an Article II, where I have the right to do whatever I want as President,” Trump famously said last summer.
President I Can Do Whatever I Want may not have reckoned on a virus as his enemy, but these past few weeks of national emergency have displayed a Trump who has never been more Trumpian. He is the same flawed President he has been for the past three years and eighty-nine days. His political playbook is the same. He has no new moves. He has not grown, or even changed much, in the office. Nor will he.
A Guide to the Coronavirus


newyorker--2020-04-17--Daily Cartoon: Friday, April 17th

Daily Cartoon: Friday, April 17th

© 2020 Condé Nast .
All rights reserved .
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement ( @ @ @ @ @ Policy and Cookie Statement ( updated 1/1/20 ) and Your California Privacy Rights .
Do @ @ @ @ @ may earn a portion of sales from products that are purchased through our site as @ @ @ @ @ with retailers .
The material on this site may not be reproduced , distributed , @ @ @ @ @ used , except with the prior written permission of Condé Nast .
Ad Choices

“If you don’t have weights at home, try using canned food or the psychological burden of simply existing in this world!”


newyorker--2020-04-17--Tuning In to Instagram D.J.s

Tuning In to Instagram D.J.s

In my quest for distraction , I ’ ve been spending a lot of my free time watching people d.j .
on Instagram .
Partly , it ’ s a reminder of a different time .
Many years ago , I would spend my Thursday nights d.j.ing at a small lounge in Cambridge .
This was before d.j.s could simply bring a laptop full of music to gigs , meaning there was a lot of moderately heavy lifting .
But in those days I would lug my records anywhere , and play them for anyone—at house parties very early or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opening of a shoe store , an empty rooftop while everyone disappeared in search of cigarettes .
I was not a very good d.j.
, and , beyond a little money and the shots from the bartender ’ s secret stash , it rarely seemed worth the trouble .
But I loved playing out .
It didn ’ t matter that , more often than not , someone would sidle up to the d.j .
booth not to commend the excellent vibes but to ask for “ the birthday song ” by 50 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favorite songs played as loudly as possible .
I had been attracted to the seeming glamour of it all , the all-powerful selector finely calibrating a room ’ s ambience .
But what I realized in those hundreds of hours sequestered behind the decks was that d.j.ing is actually a fairly lonely pursuit .
You ’ re among people , trying to move a roomful of strangers , but you ’ re also apart from them—the dynamic isn ’ t dissimilar from that of writing .
You ’ re helping people loosen up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tempo might relieve them of the day ’ s troubles .
Perhaps a head nod or tapped toe will metastasize into something more bodily .
You ’ re providing the soundtrack to botched come-ons , shouted confessions , measured walks to the bathroom .
You see it all from afar , and then you offer something in exchange .
Are you playing for the crowd , or for yourself ?
In the best moments , a d.j .
is able to do both at once .
But , nostalgia aside , I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ glimpses of d.j.s working on their craft .
Sometimes they ’ re seasoned professionals , essentially throwing the kinds of effervescent , feel-good parties they would be commanding in more peaceable times .
In the future society that emerges from the pandemic ’ s wake , the rapper , photographer , and celebrity d.j .
D-Nice will deserve special commendation for hosting Club Quarantine , a party of hip-hop and R. & B. classics , from his Los Angeles apartment .
Tens of thousands joined around the globe , including seemingly every famous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who otherwise seemed to be in hiding .
I watched Mannie Fresh d.j .
from inside the otherwise empty New Orleans club Maison .
Fresh , who seems congenitally upbeat , kept an eye on the stream of comments , cheering his followers on , encouraging and teasing them .
Through it all , he remained most amused by his own wondrous blends , which retrofitted Tears for Fears or Adele with his city ’ s famed bounce rhythm .
But I ’ ve been just as charmed watching more intimate rooms and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for others .
Most d.j.s I know hate requests .
But seeing one tapped into the comments of a live Instagram feed—this now felt like a sign of life , a connection bridging our social distances .
DJ Ayres began hosting noontime “ Homeschool ” sessions , scribbling song titles and shout-outs on a dry-erase board resting on his turntables .
I spent dinner tuned into Prince Klassen spinning seven-inch singles under bluish-green lights .
He was workmanlike and serious , save for moments when a particular song , like Carly Simon ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ head nod .
I tuned into the feed of the guy who ran Soul Strut , a message board about record collecting that I used to frequent , and it was filled with handles and lingo that I hadn ’ t thought about for a decade .
It was strange to see his face , hear his voice , see the inside of his house .
One night , I fell asleep watching the writer Noah Yoo sipping a drink and playing a wicked set of dance tunes .
A few hours later @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my friend Makoto ’ s feed .
He runs a record bar in Tokyo , where a d.j .
was playing spacious reggae tunes to nobody in particular , in the middle of the night .
It ’ s been cool to see musicians take requests from their living rooms , orchestras play to empty concert halls , and producers like DJ Premier and RZA battle one another beat-for-beat on Instagram Live .
One wonders how long artists will be able to play for free—or for app-based tips—online .
As we dig out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to feel more normal—we can ’ t forget that this is work , too .
A d.j .
is often just a mood conjurer , and there ’ s something ultimately solitary about the trip they ’ re taking ; we ’ re just lucky to catch a ride .
I miss going out to shows , though I have a toddler rather than a virus to blame for why that doesn ’ t happen as much as it once did .
And what I miss most is the strange , magical language @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make out thoughts that come to you in a stream of tunes .
The d.j .
finds sense in randomness .
You listen , and you recognize the next track ’ s slow incursion ; you hold onto a fragment that blossoms into a whole new vibe .
Instagram often works according to the principle of FOMO , which no longer applies .
As well , its tendency toward brevity—the perfectly composed shot , the clever visual joke—no longer matters either .
Instead , it ’ s a place to hang out and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the added benefit that you can ’ t use your phone for anything else while you ’ re there .
As opposed to watching someone spin records in a bar , these are just scenes of people living with music—the emphasis on living .
A couple weeks ago , it was my friend Chris ’ s birthday .
He runs one of the planet ’ s best record stores , Groove Merchant , in San Francisco .
The sun had set in New York , but it was still afternoon in the Bay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , with the leaf of a house plant obscuring his face .
The leaf swayed in the breeze , or maybe it was his phone tipping to the beat .
He was playing a stack of sixties soul ballads , each carried by a kind of epic anguish .
But these songs took on a new feel—plaintive , yearning cries filling up a bright room somewhere unreachable across the country .
Each song ended , giving way to a low , fuzzy hum of the needle tracing the record ’ s runout groove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from beyond the frame to replace each single with a new one .
The pleasant plink of the record falling into place , a click to begin the next tale of someone surviving a wretched heartbreak , and the hand disappeared .
• How to practice social distancing , from responding to a sick housemate to the pros and cons of ordering food .
• How the coronavirus behaves inside of a patient .
• Can survivors help cure the disease and rescue the economy ?
• The long crusade of Dr. Anthony @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump and the American people .
• The success of Hong Kong and Singapore in stemming the spread holds lessons for how to contain it in the United States .
• The coronavirus is likely to spread for more than a year before a vaccine is widely available .
• With each new virus , we have scrambled for a new treatment .
Can we prepare antivirals to combat the next global crisis ?
• How pandemics have propelled public-health innovations , prefigured revolutions , and redrawn maps .
• What to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listen to under coronavirus quarantine .

In my quest for distraction, I’ve been spending a lot of my free time watching people d.j. on Instagram. Partly, it’s a reminder of a different time. Many years ago, I would spend my Thursday nights d.j.ing at a small lounge in Cambridge. This was before d.j.s could simply bring a laptop full of music to gigs, meaning there was a lot of moderately heavy lifting. But in those days I would lug my records anywhere, and play them for anyone—at house parties very early or very late in the night, the opening of a shoe store, an empty rooftop while everyone disappeared in search of cigarettes. I was not a very good d.j., and, beyond a little money and the shots from the bartender’s secret stash, it rarely seemed worth the trouble. But I loved playing out. It didn’t matter that, more often than not, someone would sidle up to the d.j. booth not to commend the excellent vibes but to ask for “the birthday song” by 50 Cent. I lived to hear my favorite songs played as loudly as possible.
I had been attracted to the seeming glamour of it all, the all-powerful selector finely calibrating a room’s ambience. But what I realized in those hundreds of hours sequestered behind the decks was that d.j.ing is actually a fairly lonely pursuit. You’re among people, trying to move a roomful of strangers, but you’re also apart from them—the dynamic isn’t dissimilar from that of writing. You’re helping people loosen up and unwind, hopeful that the right tempo might relieve them of the day’s troubles. Perhaps a head nod or tapped toe will metastasize into something more bodily. You’re providing the soundtrack to botched come-ons, shouted confessions, measured walks to the bathroom. You see it all from afar, and then you offer something in exchange. Are you playing for the crowd, or for yourself? In the best moments, a d.j. is able to do both at once.
But, nostalgia aside, I’ve been watching because I like these glimpses of d.j.s working on their craft. Sometimes they’re seasoned professionals, essentially throwing the kinds of effervescent, feel-good parties they would be commanding in more peaceable times. In the future society that emerges from the pandemic’s wake, the rapper, photographer, and celebrity d.j. D-Nice will deserve special commendation for hosting Club Quarantine, a party of hip-hop and R. & B. classics, from his Los Angeles apartment. Tens of thousands joined around the globe, including seemingly every famous person, and even Joe Biden, who otherwise seemed to be in hiding. I watched Mannie Fresh d.j. from inside the otherwise empty New Orleans club Maison. Fresh, who seems congenitally upbeat, kept an eye on the stream of comments, cheering his followers on, encouraging and teasing them. Through it all, he remained most amused by his own wondrous blends, which retrofitted Tears for Fears or Adele with his city’s famed bounce rhythm.
But I’ve been just as charmed watching more intimate rooms and more low-key versions of people playing music for others. Most d.j.s I know hate requests. But seeing one tapped into the comments of a live Instagram feed—this now felt like a sign of life, a connection bridging our social distances. DJ Ayres began hosting noontime “Homeschool” sessions, scribbling song titles and shout-outs on a dry-erase board resting on his turntables. I spent dinner tuned into Prince Klassen spinning seven-inch singles under bluish-green lights. He was workmanlike and serious, save for moments when a particular song, like Carly Simon’s “Why,” coaxed a head nod. I tuned into the feed of the guy who ran Soul Strut, a message board about record collecting that I used to frequent, and it was filled with handles and lingo that I hadn’t thought about for a decade. It was strange to see his face, hear his voice, see the inside of his house. One night, I fell asleep watching the writer Noah Yoo sipping a drink and playing a wicked set of dance tunes. A few hours later, I woke up and tuned into my friend Makoto’s feed. He runs a record bar in Tokyo, where a d.j. was playing spacious reggae tunes to nobody in particular, in the middle of the night.
It’s been cool to see musicians take requests from their living rooms, orchestras play to empty concert halls, and producers like DJ Premier and RZA battle one another beat-for-beat on Instagram Live. One wonders how long artists will be able to play for free—or for app-based tips—online. As we dig out of the crisis—or, as it begins to feel more normal—we can’t forget that this is work, too. A d.j. is often just a mood conjurer, and there’s something ultimately solitary about the trip they’re taking; we’re just lucky to catch a ride. I miss going out to shows, though I have a toddler rather than a virus to blame for why that doesn’t happen as much as it once did. And what I miss most is the strange, magical language of music in the air—being able to make out thoughts that come to you in a stream of tunes. The d.j. finds sense in randomness. You listen, and you recognize the next track’s slow incursion; you hold onto a fragment that blossoms into a whole new vibe.
Instagram often works according to the principle of FOMO, which no longer applies. As well, its tendency toward brevity—the perfectly composed shot, the clever visual joke—no longer matters either. Instead, it’s a place to hang out and drop by for a tune, with the added benefit that you can’t use your phone for anything else while you’re there. As opposed to watching someone spin records in a bar, these are just scenes of people living with music—the emphasis on living. A couple weeks ago, it was my friend Chris’s birthday. He runs one of the planet’s best record stores, Groove Merchant, in San Francisco. The sun had set in New York, but it was still afternoon in the Bay Area, as he played soul singles, with the leaf of a house plant obscuring his face. The leaf swayed in the breeze, or maybe it was his phone tipping to the beat. He was playing a stack of sixties soul ballads, each carried by a kind of epic anguish. But these songs took on a new feel—plaintive, yearning cries filling up a bright room somewhere unreachable across the country. Each song ended, giving way to a low, fuzzy hum of the needle tracing the record’s runout groove. Chris’s hand reached out from beyond the frame to replace each single with a new one. The pleasant plink of the record falling into place, a click to begin the next tale of someone surviving a wretched heartbreak, and the hand disappeared.
A Guide to the Coronavirus


newyorker--2020-04-17--Fauci: No Evidence That Warmer Weather Will Make Trump Disappear

WASHINGTON ( The Borowitz Report ) —Responding to what he called “ wishful thinking ” on the part of millions of Americans , Dr. Anthony Fauci said on Thursday that there was “ no scientific evidence ” that warmer weather will make Donald J. Trump disappear .
Answering a question from CNN ’ s Jake Tapper , Fauci said , “ There ’ s a lot of stuff on the Internet about how , when the warmer weather comes , maybe Trump will disappear , or at least somewhat diminish the wreckage he causes .
Unfortunately , there ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be the case.
” Fauci said that , based on the photographic and video record of Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort , “ He appears to be more active in the warmer weather.
” “ When the temperature goes up , he seems to get less lethargic and goes golfing , ” Fauci said .
“ This suggests that , when the summer months come , we could be seeing a second wave of him , unfortunately.
” The esteemed virologist did hold out some hope to Americans who have been counting on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Something like that could happen in November , ” he said .

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Responding to what he called “wishful thinking” on the part of millions of Americans, Dr. Anthony Fauci said on Thursday that there was “no scientific evidence” that warmer weather will make Donald J. Trump disappear.
Answering a question from CNN’s Jake Tapper, Fauci said, “There’s a lot of stuff on the Internet about how, when the warmer weather comes, maybe Trump will disappear, or at least somewhat diminish the wreckage he causes. Unfortunately, there’s no evidence to suggest that this will be the case.”
Fauci said that, based on the photographic and video record of Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort, “He appears to be more active in the warmer weather.”
“When the temperature goes up, he seems to get less lethargic and goes golfing,” Fauci said. “This suggests that, when the summer months come, we could be seeing a second wave of him, unfortunately.”
The esteemed virologist did hold out some hope to Americans who have been counting on a seasonal change to make Trump vanish. “Something like that could happen in November,” he said.


newyorker--2020-04-18--Love Poems for Anxious People

Love Poems for Anxious People

“ Here Comes Someone Whose Name I Should Know ” We have met so many times , you and I .
And yet I have no idea what your name is as I stand , frozen , inane grin on my face .
Do you have a name ?
Here you come , smiling , calling my name as well as the names of my wife , children , and dog , Fortinbras .
Which I kind of can ’ t believe you remember .
My God , you ’ re almost here .
And I will need to introduce @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whose name may be Beth .
Or Valentina .
I ’ m not sure .
Here ’ s a quick thought— not about your name but about the urge I have right now to just start running .
That would be a weird thing to do , though , at a children ’ s birthday party .
But not as weird as what I do .
Which is stuff two cupcakes into my mouth so as not to be able to speak but then choke and spit them out onto the man whose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alan .
Which I now will never forget .
At school drop-off , one of the moms said casually , “ Have a nice day !
” And I thought , what the hell did she mean by that ?
Does she think I don ’ t have nice days ?
Was she being sarcastic ?
She kind of hit the word day as if to say , Have a nice day , you freak .
Did I say something wrong ?
Why did she use the word nice ?
Does she think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ?
Maybe it was the have .
Have a nice day .
What does that even mean ?
Like I don ’ t have any purpose to my days ?
I ’ ll tell you what I have now .
I have a pain in the pit of my stomach from that bomb you just dropped on me .
So , thanks for that .
You have a nice day , too !
That ’ s what I should have said .
Alone finally in the car just us two .
A night @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we call them ?
you asked on the drive , smiling .
But also serious .
Nope , I said .
We shouldn ’ t .
Your parents are fine with the kids .
You ’ re right , you said .
This is so fun without them .
When we got to our room you said , Is it weird that I miss them ?
I thought it was incredibly weird As I barely remembered their names at this point .
I wanted to drink an overpriced beer and have sex .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans included sitting at the foot of the bed with a glass of wine crying while looking at pictures of the kids on your phone .
So sex is probably off the table , I said , as we checked out .
I think the man at the front desk thought I was talking to him .
Struggling a bit with the anxious book .
Isn ’ t that funny ?
I ’ m anxious writing it .
Ha ha .
Anxious and also a little drunk .
Which is also funny .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ change the title to “ Love Poems ( for People Who Cry for No Reason ) ” .
I could write that one !
Kidding .
Sort of .
E-mail me back soon .
Haven ’ t heard from you in a while .
John ( Kenney ) ( I ’ m one of your authors ) I know that I am contractually obligated to deliver by January 30 .
But that ’ s a crazy time-frame .
.
.
maybe you were joking ?
( Hope so ! )
John ( Kenney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ People , ” by John Kenney , to be published by G. P. Putnam ’ s Sons .

“Here Comes Someone Whose Name I Should Know”
We have met so many times,
you and I.
And yet I have no idea
what your name is
as I stand,
frozen,
inane grin on my face.
Do you have a name?
Here you come,
smiling,
calling my name
as well as the names of my wife,
children,
and dog, Fortinbras.
Which I kind of can’t believe you remember.
My God, you’re almost here.
And I will need to introduce you
to the person next to me
whose name may be Beth. Or Valentina. I’m not sure.
Here’s a quick thought—
not about your name
but about the urge I have right now
to just start running.
That would be a weird thing to do, though,
at a children’s birthday party.
But not as weird as what I do.
Which is stuff two cupcakes
into my mouth
so as not to be able to speak
but then choke
and spit them out
onto the man
whose name, it turns out, is Alan.
Which I now will never forget.
“Have a Nice Day”
At school drop-off,
one of the moms said
casually,
“Have a nice day!”
And I thought,
what the hell did she mean by that?
Does she think I don’t have nice days?
Was she being sarcastic?
She kind of hit the word day
as if to say,
Have a nice day, you freak.
Did I say something wrong?
Why did she use the word nice?
Does she think my days aren’t normally nice?
Maybe it was the have.
Have a nice day.
What does that even mean?
Like I don’t have any purpose to my days?
I’ll tell you what I have now.
I have a pain in the pit of my stomach
from that bomb you just dropped on me.
So, thanks for that.
You have a nice day, too!
That’s what I should have said.
“Our Weekend Without the Kids”
Alone
finally
in the car
just us two.
A night away at the fancy hotel.
Should we call them?
you asked
on the drive, smiling.
But also serious.
Nope, I said. We shouldn’t.
Your parents are fine with the kids.
You’re right, you said.
This is so fun without them.
When we got to our room you said,
Is it weird that I miss them?
I thought it was incredibly weird
As I barely remembered their names at this point.
I wanted to drink an overpriced beer
and have sex.
You had other fun plans.
Those plans included sitting
at the foot of the bed
with a glass of wine
crying
while looking at pictures of the kids on your phone.
So sex is probably off the table, I said,
as we checked out.
I think the man at the front desk thought I was talking to him.
“Unanswered E-mail to My Editor”
Dear Sally,
Struggling a bit with the anxious book.
Isn’t that funny? I’m anxious writing it.
Ha ha.
Anxious and also a little drunk.
Which is also funny.
Here’s a thought—
maybe we change the title to
“Love Poems (for People Who Cry for No Reason)”.
I could write that one! Kidding. Sort of.
E-mail me back soon.
Haven’t heard from you in a while.
John (Kenney)
(I’m one of your authors)
P.S.
I know that I am contractually obligated to deliver by January 30.
But that’s a crazy time-frame . . . maybe you were joking? (Hope so!)
John (Kenney)
From “Love Poems for Anxious People,” by John Kenney, to be published by G. P. Putnam’s Sons.


newyorker--2020-04-18--Gordon Brown’s Case for Global Coöperation During the Coronavirus Pandemic

Gordon Brown , the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom , had been in office for less than a year at the start of the Great Recession , in December of 2007 .
Brown , who had spent the previous decade as Britain ’ s Chancellor of the Exchequer , implemented a rescue plan after the 2008 market crash , which included aiding British banks and hosting a G-20 summit that led to a crucial package of support for ailing economies from the International Monetary Fund .
Despite generally high marks for his management of the crisis , however @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Conservative Party ’ s David Cameron , after which the Conservatives embarked on an austerity push .
Brown remained in Parliament for five more years , and published a book , “ Beyond the Crash , ” that reviews Britain ’ s response to the financial crisis , surveys global economic challenges , and argues for greater worldwide coördination in order to head off future disasters .
As the coronavirus pandemic and economic distress have worsened around the world , Brown has again been talking up the benefits of international coöperation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ inject more money into their economies than at any time in recent history , but has led to only halting collaboration .
In the United Kingdom , which has had some fourteen thousand deaths from the coronavirus , Prime Minister Boris Johnson flirted with a “ herd immunity ” strategy before announcing that a lockdown has only just started to stymie the further spread of the disease , which at one point landed him in an intensive-care unit .
On Wednesday , I spoke by phone with Brown , who is currently the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
During our conversation , which has been edited for length and clarity , we discussed the difficulties of international coöperation at a time of rising demagoguery , the future of center-left politics , and why Downing Street is a very bad place for social distancing .
Sir , it ’ s Isaac Chotiner , at The New Yorker .
Yes .
I am sorry for getting you up so early in California .
You must at least have good weather out there .
Where are you right now ?
Just outside Edinburgh @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : June and winter .
What was your biggest lesson about global coöperation in 2008 and how does it relate to today ?
That you ’ ve got to work hard to make it effective .
And I think people may be discouraged at the moment , because they see China going in one direction , America going in another direction , Europe quite divided over its own response .
And , therefore , people may feel that some international coöperation is not going to be effective , and therefore it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be a terrible mistake .
When we created the G-20 as the new leaders ’ organization , the G-7 was not that much in favor , because it could have been overshadowed .
And so we had to work very hard to get everybody together around the same table .
[ Laughs ] In fact , it was called the G-20 , but I think there were twenty-three or twenty-four countries at the first meeting , just because the politics of it made it difficult to get everybody agreed , even on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lesson is that , if it ’ s necessary and it has to be done , you have got to work really hard .
And I can ’ t see that an exit strategy from the virus is going to work as successfully as it should unless we have that level of international coöperation .
What does “ work hard ” mean in practice , if you ’ re a world leader ?
Well , night and day .
We were talking to Australia at one point in the day and to New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the day .
People were going to sleep all over the world as we were trying to bring people together—with the advantage , of course , of being in London at that time and being able to operate with the different time zones .
It was difficult to persuade people initially that this was going to be necessary , because for a while the Europeans did not think that the global financial crisis was global .
They thought it was American or Anglo-Saxon .
They didn ’ t realize until quite late @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were actually in Europe .
Half the subprime in America was actually being sold to European banks .
So you have to persuade people that it ’ s relevant to them , as well .
World leaders were far from perfect in 2008 and 2009 , but we didn ’ t see the situation we have today , with authoritarians rising around the world and some of the biggest countries on Earth , such as Brazil and India and the United States , controlled by demagogues , often with no interest in science @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global coöperation is even possible now in the same way ?
Interestingly enough , we have America First , we have China First , we have India First .
The “ First movement , ” so to speak , has gone global , and you have probably what might be called an international coalition of anti-internationalists .
After 2010 , we had a defensive nationalism , which was basically about tariffs , closing borders , building walls , and immigration controls .
More recently , we ’ ve had a more aggressive nationalism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It ’ s unilateral action .
You could argue that America in a unipolar age acted more multilaterally , and in a multipolar age is acting unilaterally .
So there are difficulties .
But the issue of global health invites a popular understanding—which I think is shared actually across America—that you need international coöperation to deal with a global pandemic .
And I think the Pew opinion poll that I saw a few days ago suggested that a vast majority of Americans , Republicans and Democrats , believe that the one issue on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global pandemics or global health .
And you need it really for three reasons .
One is research for a vaccine .
It ’ s going to be best achieved by coördinating efforts internationally .
There are about a hundred vaccines that have been investigated at the moment , and I think about five in development .
There are about two in testing .
You ’ d probably get to a stage where you may have three or four that are worth scaling up .
But you need to do that on such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think people do understand that , if the vaccine is going to work , it ’ s going to have to be available in all countries , and therefore it ’ s a collaborative international effort .
The same thing is true of capacity—the ventilators , the test equipment , the protective health equipment .
The issue at the moment that people find difficult is that everybody ’ s competing for a limited amount of capacity or supply , when in fact what we should be doing is building up the capacity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to produce them , to procure a huge amount of additional capacity in these areas where we know that testing equipment is going to be needed in every part of the world .
And we know that ventilators are needed even in some of the poorest parts of the world , where they don ’ t have them .
The third thing is the second round of the disease .
And I think people do realize that if you have a second and third wave , and perhaps it comes out of some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the protected health systems or the social safety nets that could allow for social distancing and people not to go to work and everything else—we ’ ve got to do something to help these countries .
And so the case is very strong .
I think public opinion is actually more attuned to this than people believe .

Gordon Brown, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, had been in office for less than a year at the start of the Great Recession, in December of 2007. Brown, who had spent the previous decade as Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer, implemented a rescue plan after the 2008 market crash, which included aiding British banks and hosting a G-20 summit that led to a crucial package of support for ailing economies from the International Monetary Fund. Despite generally high marks for his management of the crisis, however, Brown lost an election in 2010 to the Conservative Party’s David Cameron, after which the Conservatives embarked on an austerity push.
Brown remained in Parliament for five more years, and published a book, “Beyond the Crash,” that reviews Britain’s response to the financial crisis, surveys global economic challenges, and argues for greater worldwide coördination in order to head off future disasters. As the coronavirus pandemic and economic distress have worsened around the world, Brown has again been talking up the benefits of international coöperation. The crisis has compelled governments to inject more money into their economies than at any time in recent history, but has led to only halting collaboration. In the United Kingdom, which has had some fourteen thousand deaths from the coronavirus, Prime Minister Boris Johnson flirted with a “herd immunity” strategy before announcing that a lockdown has only just started to stymie the further spread of the disease, which at one point landed him in an intensive-care unit.
On Wednesday, I spoke by phone with Brown, who is currently the United Nations special envoy for global education. During our conversation, which has been edited for length and clarity, we discussed the difficulties of international coöperation at a time of rising demagoguery, the future of center-left politics, and why Downing Street is a very bad place for social distancing.
Sir, it’s Isaac Chotiner, at The New Yorker.
Yes. I am sorry for getting you up so early in California. You must at least have good weather out there.
Where are you right now?
Just outside Edinburgh. They say Scotland has two seasons: June and winter.
What was your biggest lesson about global coöperation in 2008 and how does it relate to today?
That you’ve got to work hard to make it effective. And I think people may be discouraged at the moment, because they see China going in one direction, America going in another direction, Europe quite divided over its own response. And, therefore, people may feel that some international coöperation is not going to be effective, and therefore it’s not worth fighting for, and that would be a terrible mistake.
When we created the G-20 as the new leaders’ organization, the G-7 was not that much in favor, because it could have been overshadowed. And so we had to work very hard to get everybody together around the same table. [Laughs] In fact, it was called the G-20, but I think there were twenty-three or twenty-four countries at the first meeting, just because the politics of it made it difficult to get everybody agreed, even on the composition. But I think the lesson is that, if it’s necessary and it has to be done, you have got to work really hard. And I can’t see that an exit strategy from the virus is going to work as successfully as it should unless we have that level of international coöperation.
What does “work hard” mean in practice, if you’re a world leader?
Well, night and day. We were talking to Australia at one point in the day and to New York and Washington at a different point in the day. People were going to sleep all over the world as we were trying to bring people together—with the advantage, of course, of being in London at that time and being able to operate with the different time zones. It was difficult to persuade people initially that this was going to be necessary, because for a while the Europeans did not think that the global financial crisis was global. They thought it was American or Anglo-Saxon. They didn’t realize until quite late that the biggest problems in the banks were actually in Europe. Half the subprime in America was actually being sold to European banks. So you have to persuade people that it’s relevant to them, as well.
World leaders were far from perfect in 2008 and 2009, but we didn’t see the situation we have today, with authoritarians rising around the world and some of the biggest countries on Earth, such as Brazil and India and the United States, controlled by demagogues, often with no interest in science. Is it naïve to assume that global coöperation is even possible now in the same way?
Interestingly enough, we have America First, we have China First, we have India First. The “First movement,” so to speak, has gone global, and you have probably what might be called an international coalition of anti-internationalists. After 2010, we had a defensive nationalism, which was basically about tariffs, closing borders, building walls, and immigration controls. More recently, we’ve had a more aggressive nationalism, which is an us-versus-them nationalism. It’s unilateral action. You could argue that America in a unipolar age acted more multilaterally, and in a multipolar age is acting unilaterally. So there are difficulties.
But the issue of global health invites a popular understanding—which I think is shared actually across America—that you need international coöperation to deal with a global pandemic. And I think the Pew opinion poll that I saw a few days ago suggested that a vast majority of Americans, Republicans and Democrats, believe that the one issue on which you needed international coöperation most was global pandemics or global health.
And you need it really for three reasons. One is research for a vaccine. It’s going to be best achieved by coördinating efforts internationally. There are about a hundred vaccines that have been investigated at the moment, and I think about five in development. There are about two in testing. You’d probably get to a stage where you may have three or four that are worth scaling up. But you need to do that on such a massive scale around the globe that I think people do understand that, if the vaccine is going to work, it’s going to have to be available in all countries, and therefore it’s a collaborative international effort.
The same thing is true of capacity—the ventilators, the test equipment, the protective health equipment. The issue at the moment that people find difficult is that everybody’s competing for a limited amount of capacity or supply, when in fact what we should be doing is building up the capacity. We should have an international plan to produce them, to procure a huge amount of additional capacity in these areas where we know that testing equipment is going to be needed in every part of the world. And we know that ventilators are needed even in some of the poorest parts of the world, where they don’t have them.
The third thing is the second round of the disease. And I think people do realize that if you have a second and third wave, and perhaps it comes out of some of the poorest countries—which have never had the protected health systems or the social safety nets that could allow for social distancing and people not to go to work and everything else—we’ve got to do something to help these countries. And so the case is very strong. I think public opinion is actually more attuned to this than people believe.