theamericanconservative--2020-03-20--Neither Snow Nor Rain Nor Heat Nor…Coronavirus?

A United States mail carrier wearing a mask is seen delivering mail in NYC as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States , on March 14 , 2020 .
( Photo by Jamie McCarthy/Getty Images ) With its unfunded debts and liabilities north of $ 140 billion , the United States Postal Service ( USPS ) has no shortage of issues .
Now the beleaguered agency is facing a new , historic test : the spread of the coronavirus .
At a time when the federal government is actively trying to keep its workforce at home and away @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers must continue going door-to-door to deliver mail to hundreds of millions of Americans .
This is a harrowing challenge for the USPS , which has already taken encouraging steps to mitigate the spread of the pandemic .
But there ’ s still more the agency can do to protect consumers and its own workers .
From CPAC attendees to students at a high school basketball tournament to , yes , even Tom Hanks , stories abound about COVID-19 cases .
Yet perhaps most concerning of all is the case of a Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Network Distribution Center .
Similar cases then followed at the Westchester Processing and Distribution Center in New York .
While these workers primarily operate machinery and don ’ t interact with the public , they can come into contact with workers who handle packages and mail .
Conceivably , millions of postal consumers could have had second-degree contact with the infected workers .
Thousands of postal employees , in turn , have second-degree access to foreign postal staff , who are more likely to have had direct and sustained exposure to coronavirus patients @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trying to limit exposure , releasing a 2020 Pandemic Influenza Plan , which contains policies and procedures “ generally applicable to a potential COVID-19 pandemic.
” The recommendations are mostly common sense , advising postal workers to maintain a safe distance from consumers and offering face masks upon request .
The agency followed up by urging supervisors to offer “ liberal sick leave ” policies to their workers .
Preparation and sick leave policies are good steps in the right direction , but USPS leadership must make sure that supervisors get the memo @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( APWU ) western regional coordinator Omar Gonzalez , “ as in the past , directives emanating from Washington do not always filter down to or are acted upon by managers tasked with ensuring the nation ’ s mail is processed and delivered often hampered by short staff .
Safety is seldom first to the bosses.
” These concerns have prompted the APWU to call for due diligence in the workplace , including the regular cleaning of shared operation work areas .
Most consumer-facing postal workers , of course , are trying their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clear risks posed by visiting quarantined households .
But even if they get sick , they may be afraid to report their illnesses to their bosses for fear of losing their livelihoods .
According to a recent analysis by ProPublica , the USPS fired more than 40,000 workers for injuries incurred on the job over a five-year period ( 2006 to 2011 ) .
While this “ National Reassessment Program ” has since ended , the USPS has not compensated those employees for wrongful termination .
The U.S .
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases and the USPS is disputing each ex-worker ’ s allegation .
This has fed into persistent fear and low morale among USPS staff , who believe they could , say , contract a deadly disease on the job and get terminated with no financial recourse .
Adversarial leadership and poor management-employee relations all but guarantee that postal workers will try to “ brave it out ” if they get COVID-19 symptoms rather than asking their bosses for time off .
It ’ s difficult to maintain discipline in such a chaotic and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do everything in its power to shore up morale as the coronavirus spreads .
The agency must do its best to create safe , clean work environments for postal workers across the country .
It must also make clear that its workers can come clean about their symptoms without their jobs or compensation being put on the line .
The Pandemic Influenza Plan is a good start , but the agency must continue to do its part to contain COVID-19 .
Ross Marchand is the director of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance @

With its unfunded debts and liabilities north of $140 billion, the United States Postal Service (USPS) has no shortage of issues. Now the beleaguered agency is facing a new, historic test: the spread of the coronavirus.
At a time when the federal government is actively trying to keep its workforce at home and away from each other, thousands of postal workers must continue going door-to-door to deliver mail to hundreds of millions of Americans. This is a harrowing challenge for the USPS, which has already taken encouraging steps to mitigate the spread of the pandemic. But there’s still more the agency can do to protect consumers and its own workers.
From CPAC attendees to students at a high school basketball tournament to, yes, even Tom Hanks, stories abound about COVID-19 cases. Yet perhaps most concerning of all is the case of a Washington State postal worker assigned to the Seattle Network Distribution Center. Similar cases then followed at the Westchester Processing and Distribution Center in New York. While these workers primarily operate machinery and don’t interact with the public, they can come into contact with workers who handle packages and mail. Conceivably, millions of postal consumers could have had second-degree contact with the infected workers.
Thousands of postal employees, in turn, have second-degree access to foreign postal staff, who are more likely to have had direct and sustained exposure to coronavirus patients. Postal leadership has been helpful in trying to limit exposure, releasing a 2020 Pandemic Influenza Plan, which contains policies and procedures “generally applicable to a potential COVID-19 pandemic.” The recommendations are mostly common sense, advising postal workers to maintain a safe distance from consumers and offering face masks upon request. The agency followed up by urging supervisors to offer “liberal sick leave” policies to their workers.
Preparation and sick leave policies are good steps in the right direction, but USPS leadership must make sure that supervisors get the memo. According to American Postal Workers Union (APWU) western regional coordinator Omar Gonzalez, “as in the past, directives emanating from Washington do not always filter down to or are acted upon by managers tasked with ensuring the nation’s mail is processed and delivered often hampered by short staff. Safety is seldom first to the bosses.” These concerns have prompted the APWU to call for due diligence in the workplace, including the regular cleaning of shared operation work areas.
Most consumer-facing postal workers, of course, are trying their best to avoid spreading coronavirus despite the clear risks posed by visiting quarantined households. But even if they get sick, they may be afraid to report their illnesses to their bosses for fear of losing their livelihoods. According to a recent analysis by ProPublica, the USPS fired more than 40,000 workers for injuries incurred on the job over a five-year period (2006 to 2011). While this “National Reassessment Program” has since ended, the USPS has not compensated those employees for wrongful termination. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is currently going through thousands of these cases and the USPS is disputing each ex-worker’s allegation.
This has fed into persistent fear and low morale among USPS staff, who believe they could, say, contract a deadly disease on the job and get terminated with no financial recourse. Adversarial leadership and poor management-employee relations all but guarantee that postal workers will try to “brave it out” if they get COVID-19 symptoms rather than asking their bosses for time off.
It’s difficult to maintain discipline in such a chaotic and uncertain work environment, and management must do everything in its power to shore up morale as the coronavirus spreads. The agency must do its best to create safe, clean work environments for postal workers across the country. It must also make clear that its workers can come clean about their symptoms without their jobs or compensation being put on the line. The Pandemic Influenza Plan is a good start, but the agency must continue to do its part to contain COVID-19.
Ross Marchand is the director of policy for the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.


theamericanconservative--2020-03-23--Liberty and the Coronavirus: Not An Either/Or Proposition

It ’ s always difficult during a crisis for the government to address problems effectively while guarding against potential collateral damage to the freedoms Americans take for granted .
That dilemma has become acute with the current coronavirus outbreak and the measures being taken to stem it .
No one should doubt that this pandemic is a worrisome problem .
Not only is the virus highly contagious , the mortality rate ( especially among elderly victims and those with underlying health problems ) is substantially higher than with influenza or similar diseases .
That gap shows signs of narrowing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a serious health menace .
Nevertheless , the troubling reality is that governments have always exploited crises to expand their powers—often to a dangerous degree .
That has certainly been the case throughout American history .
Some of the precedents state and local officials are setting to address the corona virus outbreak are truly alarming .
Both California Governor Gavin Newsom and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo have issued executive orders essentially placing their entire states on lockdown .
Abuses of power during earlier crises should alert us to the potential dangers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only resulted in blatant assaults on the First Amendment ( including the jailing of war critics ) , it led to statutes and executive orders that haunt us to this day .
Various administrations have trotted out the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish whistleblowers and intimidate investigative journalists .
Subsequent presidents used other laws passed during the war in ways never contemplated by the legislators who enacted them .
For example , in August 1971 , Richard Nixon declared a national emergency under the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gold window for international payments , and establish wage and price controls .
World War II produced additional abuses and alarming precedents .
The most egregious was President Franklin D. Roosevelt ’ s executive order putting Japanese Americans in “ relocation centers ” ( concentration camps ) for the crime of being Japanese Americans .
In an especially shameful ruling , the Supreme Court upheld the legality of his action , which made it an ongoing policy option .
During the Korean War , President Harry Truman attempted to seize control of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wartime measure .
More recently , the policy responses to the 9/11 terrorist attacks included the so-called Patriot Act and its legendary erosions of the Fourth Amendment ’ s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures , as well as the weakening of other rights guaranteed in the Constitution .
The result has been an intrusive surveillance state that no one can seem to control .
Americans need to assess soberly the governmental response to the coronavirus crisis and guard against another casual expansion of arbitrary power that could set dangerous precedents .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that amount to the regimentation of entire populations .
Such measures have shuttered virtually all businesses , barred “ nonessential ” travel , prohibited most gatherings , imposed curfews , and established martial law in all but name .
This has taken place not only in dictatorial China and North Korea , but in democratic countries such as Italy , Spain , and France .
In some cases , additional restrictions have been imposed on those considered especially vulnerable to contracting the virus , such as people over the age of 70 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ with such draconian restrictions—at least not yet .
President Trump reiterated at his March 16 press conference that he had no intention of imposing a national lockdown or curfew .
The pressure on him to do so , though , may rise .
In an especially alarming development , however , the Justice Department is now seeking the authority to petition a federal judge for authority to detain a person indefinitely in this or any other “ emergency.
” A number of states and localities have already taken harsh measures .
Early on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and prohibited an array of large-scale public events , such as concerts and athletic contests .
Some states have gone even further .
Louisiana and Georgia canceled primary elections , and Ohio and Maryland have since followed suit .
Illinois , Ohio , California , New York , New Jersey , Connecticut , and other states ( plus a soaring number of local governments ) have ordered restaurants , bars , gyms , casinos , and other private businesses to close .
San Francisco ordered a “ shelter in place ” system , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nonessential ” activities outside their own homes .
Proposals to instruct all people over 70 years old to “ self-quarantine ” and not leave their homes are openly discussed .
Currently , such measures are voluntary , but how long will they stay that way ?
The repressive systems that China , Italy , Spain , and other foreign countries have adopted to deal with the outbreak are beginning to appear in at least some parts of America .
Matters are escalating rapidly .
North Carolina has gone well beyond shutting down individual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Outer Banks off limits to tourists and other outsiders .
Checkpoints will be established to examine identifications , and permits will be required for access .
There is more than a whiff of the ubiquitous checkpoints and “ show your papers ” mentality of countries in the old Soviet bloc .
It is not an image that Americans who value liberty should embrace .
The raw emotions underlying the arguments in favor of comprehensive lockdowns , such as those that Newsom and Cuomo have ordered , are understandable , but the economic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ basic civil liberties may ultimately prove great .
Officials have imposed restrictions without any provisions for appeal .
Worse , it does not appear that they recognize any limits to their power .
It should be noted that the steps taken go far beyond the longstanding authority to impose quarantines .
Individuals diagnosed with certain contagious diseases ( and anyone else in their households ) have long been subjected to quarantines .
But now , entire cities and states are falling under similar restrictions , even though the overwhelming majority of residents are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ask questions , including how long such measures will last and what numerical targets must be reached regarding the disease ’ s decline before they ’ re lifted .
These are extremely important steps , especially if this is not a crisis of short duration .
Originally , there appeared to be a pervasive assumption that the emergency would last only a few weeks and then life would return to normal .
But there is a growing sense now that the crisis environment might continue until mid-summer or even beyond .
In Trump @ @ @ @ @ @ @ both the president and his health policy advisers indicated that the outbreak could last until July or August .
That raises some very serious dilemmas .
There is no realistic way of running a complex , interconnected economy for an extended period of time when a country—or even major portions of it—are on lockdown .
A similar problem arises if the coronavirus does not prove to be a one-time visitor , but resembles influenza outbreaks that ebb and flow each year but never entirely go away .
In addition to the economic obstacles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should ) become deeply resentful if their lives are repeatedly upended by bureaucratic edicts .
We should also be concerned about the precedents being set .
We don ’ t want either overcautious or egotistical public officials to be tempted to impose drastic measures in response to lesser health or other emergencies .
The postponement of elections should be a special cause for unease , if not alarm .
Giving incumbent officials such authority creates an obvious potential for abuse—especially if the incumbents face the prospect of electoral defeat .
A short postponement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Given the historical record of how the policies of previous emergencies continued to menace basic freedoms years and even decades later , it is neither inappropriate nor premature to ask probing questions about the responses to the current crisis .
Indeed , legal limitations on governments ’ health emergency powers should be sought in the near future , either through new laws or court decisions .
We must take care not be stampeded into endorsing whatever policies self-interested officials insist are necessary .
Ted Galen Carpenter , a senior fellow in security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contributing editor at the American Conservative , is the author of 12 books and more than 850 articles on public policy issues .

It’s always difficult during a crisis for the government to address problems effectively while guarding against potential collateral damage to the freedoms Americans take for granted. That dilemma has become acute with the current coronavirus outbreak and the measures being taken to stem it. No one should doubt that this pandemic is a worrisome problem. Not only is the virus highly contagious, the mortality rate (especially among elderly victims and those with underlying health problems) is substantially higher than with influenza or similar diseases. That gap shows signs of narrowing, but there is little question that coronavirus is a serious health menace.
Nevertheless, the troubling reality is that governments have always exploited crises to expand their powers—often to a dangerous degree. That has certainly been the case throughout American history.
Some of the precedents state and local officials are setting to address the corona virus outbreak are truly alarming. Both California Governor Gavin Newsom and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo have issued executive orders essentially placing their entire states on lockdown. Abuses of power during earlier crises should alert us to the potential dangers of a repetition.
World War I not only resulted in blatant assaults on the First Amendment (including the jailing of war critics), it led to statutes and executive orders that haunt us to this day. Various administrations have trotted out the Espionage Act of 1917 to punish whistleblowers and intimidate investigative journalists. Subsequent presidents used other laws passed during the war in ways never contemplated by the legislators who enacted them. For example, in August 1971, Richard Nixon declared a national emergency under the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 to impose import tariffs, close the gold window for international payments, and establish wage and price controls.
World War II produced additional abuses and alarming precedents. The most egregious was President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s executive order putting Japanese Americans in “relocation centers” (concentration camps) for the crime of being Japanese Americans. In an especially shameful ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the legality of his action, which made it an ongoing policy option. During the Korean War, President Harry Truman attempted to seize control of the nation’s steel mills as a wartime measure.
More recently, the policy responses to the 9/11 terrorist attacks included the so-called Patriot Act and its legendary erosions of the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the weakening of other rights guaranteed in the Constitution. The result has been an intrusive surveillance state that no one can seem to control.
Americans need to assess soberly the governmental response to the coronavirus crisis and guard against another casual expansion of arbitrary power that could set dangerous precedents. We are already witnessing edicts in other countries that amount to the regimentation of entire populations. Such measures have shuttered virtually all businesses, barred “nonessential” travel, prohibited most gatherings, imposed curfews, and established martial law in all but name. This has taken place not only in dictatorial China and North Korea, but in democratic countries such as Italy, Spain, and France. In some cases, additional restrictions have been imposed on those considered especially vulnerable to contracting the virus, such as people over the age of 70.
The federal government has not followed suit with such draconian restrictions—at least not yet. President Trump reiterated at his March 16 press conference that he had no intention of imposing a national lockdown or curfew. The pressure on him to do so, though, may rise. In an especially alarming development, however, the Justice Department is now seeking the authority to petition a federal judge for authority to detain a person indefinitely in this or any other “emergency.”
A number of states and localities have already taken harsh measures. Early on, authorities ordered the closures of schools and prohibited an array of large-scale public events, such as concerts and athletic contests. Some states have gone even further. Louisiana and Georgia canceled primary elections, and Ohio and Maryland have since followed suit. Illinois, Ohio, California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and other states (plus a soaring number of local governments) have ordered restaurants, bars, gyms, casinos, and other private businesses to close. San Francisco ordered a “shelter in place” system, barring residents from engaging in any “nonessential” activities outside their own homes.
Proposals to instruct all people over 70 years old to “self-quarantine” and not leave their homes are openly discussed. Currently, such measures are voluntary, but how long will they stay that way? The repressive systems that China, Italy, Spain, and other foreign countries have adopted to deal with the outbreak are beginning to appear in at least some parts of America.
Matters are escalating rapidly. North Carolina has gone well beyond shutting down individual enterprises; authorities have placed most of the Outer Banks off limits to tourists and other outsiders. Checkpoints will be established to examine identifications, and permits will be required for access. There is more than a whiff of the ubiquitous checkpoints and “show your papers” mentality of countries in the old Soviet bloc. It is not an image that Americans who value liberty should embrace.
The raw emotions underlying the arguments in favor of comprehensive lockdowns, such as those that Newsom and Cuomo have ordered, are understandable, but the economic costs are enormous and the damage to basic civil liberties may ultimately prove great. Officials have imposed restrictions without any provisions for appeal. Worse, it does not appear that they recognize any limits to their power. It should be noted that the steps taken go far beyond the longstanding authority to impose quarantines. Individuals diagnosed with certain contagious diseases (and anyone else in their households) have long been subjected to quarantines. But now, entire cities and states are falling under similar restrictions, even though the overwhelming majority of residents are not victims of coronavirus
We need to ask questions, including how long such measures will last and what numerical targets must be reached regarding the disease’s decline before they’re lifted. These are extremely important steps, especially if this is not a crisis of short duration. Originally, there appeared to be a pervasive assumption that the emergency would last only a few weeks and then life would return to normal. But there is a growing sense now that the crisis environment might continue until mid-summer or even beyond. In Trump’s March 16 press conference, both the president and his health policy advisers indicated that the outbreak could last until July or August.
That raises some very serious dilemmas. There is no realistic way of running a complex, interconnected economy for an extended period of time when a country—or even major portions of it—are on lockdown. A similar problem arises if the coronavirus does not prove to be a one-time visitor, but resembles influenza outbreaks that ebb and flow each year but never entirely go away. In addition to the economic obstacles, forcibly cocooned populations will (and should) become deeply resentful if their lives are repeatedly upended by bureaucratic edicts.
We should also be concerned about the precedents being set. We don’t want either overcautious or egotistical public officials to be tempted to impose drastic measures in response to lesser health or other emergencies. The postponement of elections should be a special cause for unease, if not alarm. Giving incumbent officials such authority creates an obvious potential for abuse—especially if the incumbents face the prospect of electoral defeat. A short postponement can easily turn into an extended one.
Given the historical record of how the policies of previous emergencies continued to menace basic freedoms years and even decades later, it is neither inappropriate nor premature to ask probing questions about the responses to the current crisis. Indeed, legal limitations on governments’ health emergency powers should be sought in the near future, either through new laws or court decisions. We must take care not be stampeded into endorsing whatever policies self-interested officials insist are necessary.
Ted Galen Carpenter, a senior fellow in security studies at the Cato Institute and a contributing editor at the American Conservative, is the author of 12 books and more than 850 articles on public policy issues.


theamericanconservative--2020-03-24--The Staggering Collapse of U.S. Intelligence on the Coronavirus

An agency tasked with tracking future bio threats fell down on the job , causing us to wonder what else we do n't know .
The coronavirus pandemic has impacted the United States unlike any other event in recent history , proving to be far more disruptive to American society , and far most damaging to the U.S. economy , than even the events of 9/11 .
The U.S. response is something President Trump has likened to a “ war , ” going so far as to label himself a “ wartime President , ” leading the U.S. against “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in which he vows “ total victory.
” If the fight against the coronavirus is a war , then the virus clearly took the U.S. government by surprise .
“ Certainly we didn ’ t get an early run on it , Trump noted in a press conference on March 17 .
“ It would ’ ve been helpful if we knew about it earlier.
” It is the job of the U.S. intelligence community to provide senior U.S. government policy makers , including the president , with advance warning about potential crises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for this service ; in 2020 , the budget for the National Intelligence Program , which includes all programs , projects and activities of the U.S. intelligence community , was $ 62.8 billion .
Included in this budget is a small , specialized intelligence unit known as the National Center for Medical Intelligence ( NCMI ) , which operates as part of the Defense Intelligence Agency .
The mission of the NCMI is to serve as the lead activity within the Department of Defense ( DoD ) “ for the production of medical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coordinate “ integrated , all-source intelligence for the DoD and other government and international organizations on foreign health threats and other medical issues to protect U.S. interests worldwide.
” For a small agency , the NCMI packs a large punch in terms of the overall impact of its product .
For example , in April 2009—two months prior to when the WHO and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) officially declared the global outbreak of H1N1 influenza a pandemic , NCMI published an intelligence product , known as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” which predicted that a recent outbreak of the Swine Flu ( H1N1 ) would become a pandemic .
The positive work done by the NCMI in relation to the H1N1 outbreak contributed to the creation of the 2012 “ National Strategy for Biosurveillance , ” designed to help facilitate a full-time institutionalized process for obtaining timely and accurate insight on current and emerging biological risks .
President Obama himself noted the critical role played by “ accurate and timely information ” during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic that enabled decision makers , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responses that save lives .
“ The sooner we can detect and understand a threat , ” Obama wrote in the introduction to the first National Strategy for Biosurveillance , “ the faster we can take action to protect the American people.
” Providing this early detection of a threat is the mission of the NCMI .
When it comes to diseases like H1N1 and the coronavirus , this task falls under the remit of the NCMI ’ s Infectious Disease Division , whose baseline requirement , according to a former commanding officer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Anthony M. Rizzo , “ is to understand the risk of every type of [ endemic ] infectious disease in every country.
” “ When we think of the word biosurveillance , we think of the kinds of things that the public health community does—collecting cases , taking cultures , deciding which disease is which , ” Rizzo said .
“ But we in the intelligence community are looking way before that to determine [ if there are ] threats on the horizon.
” The NCMI ’ s job , Rizzo noted , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is happening , but rather “ what we believe is going to happen.
” To do this , NCMI has access to the resources of the totality of the intelligence community , including intercepted communications , satellite imagery , and sensitive human intelligence , including covert sample collection .
The coronavirus was clearly part of the NCMI ’ s remit .
And yet its first Infectious Disease Risk Assessment for COVID-19 was issued on January 5 , 2020 , reporting that 59 people had been taken ill in Wuhan , China .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intelligence collection effort or independent biosurveillance activity , but rather from a report issued to the WHO by the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission , dated January 5 , 2020 .
The next day the CDC warned American citizens to take precautions if traveling to China , followed a day later with the activation of a COVID-19 incident management team within the CDC Emergency Management System .
This , however , is not the kind of predictive analysis that U.S. policymakers needed if they were going to get ahead of the coronavirus pandemic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a full two months heads up about the threat of a Swine Flu pandemic , in 2020 the Trump administration was taking its cues from the WHO , which waited until January 30 , 2020 to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern ( PHEIC ) .
The NCMI had been relegated to a mere observer , having failed in its mission to provide timely , predictive analysis of pending epidemiological threats .
Almost everything the NCMI knew about the current situation in Wuhan came from the WHO , which had been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chinese Center of Disease Control ( CCDC ) to determine the origin and nature of the coronavirus outbreak .
While a great deal of attention has been paid to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in the city of Wuhan , which sells live poultry , fish , and several kinds of wild animals to the public , a detailed investigation by the Joint Field Epidemiology Investigation Team , a specialized task force working under the auspices of the Chinese Center for Disease Control ( CCDC ) , found that the COVID-19 epidemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market , as originally believed , but rather human-to-human transmission totally unrelated to the operation of the market .
Moreover , by analyzing the characteristic of some 27 genomes of the COVID-19 virus provided by the Chinese and published by the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data ( GSAID ) , research scientists were able to determine that the “ most recent common ancestor ” for the coronavirus could be dated back to as early as October 1 , 2019 .
The importance of this date as it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mid-October 2019 a delegation of 300 U.S. military athletes arrived in Wuhan to participate in the 2019 Military World games .
China has suggested that these personnel might have introduced the coronavirus infection to Wuhan , citing their own research thatsuggests that the virus was introduced into China from elsewhere , and Japanese and Taiwanese studies that point to the U.S. as the likely source of the virus .
There is , however , no independent evidence to support these allegations .
The importance of the U.S. military athletes rests in the fact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threat briefs for all deployments of military personnel world-wide , which meant that a Wuhan-specific Infectious Disease Risk Assessment would have necessarily been prepared in support of this deployment .
Infectious Disease Risk Assessments are the bread-and-butter intelligence product produced by the NCMI ’ s Infectious Disease Division , one in which the totality of the medical intelligence collection and analytical capabilities would be utilized .
The production of a Wuhan-specific Infectious Disease Risk Assessment would have created a window of opportunity for the NCMI to have collected the kind of medical intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the existence of the coronavirus .
Moreover , these athletes should have been subjected to screening upon return as part of the national biosurveillance program , providing yet another opportunity for early detection of the coronavirus if anyone had been exposed to it during their travel .
The CDC has recently acknowledged , during a hearing of the House Oversight Committee on March 11 , that its biosurveillance program has uncovered evidence that Americans who had previously died to what had been originally diagnosed as influenza have , through post-mortem testing , been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus .
Normally , the details obtained from this kind of biosurveillance would be widely shared to better understand the scope and potential spread of the infection , as well as to better pin down the source and timing of the infections .
However , the initial meetings regarding a national-level coronavirus response conducted under the auspices of the Department of Health and Human Services , where intelligence gathered as a result of any such biosurveillance activity would logically be discussed , were all treated as classified events , under orders from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result , many people who otherwise would have been present were excluded , and those who did attend these meetings were precluded from discussing what occurred .
This lack of transparency on the part of the Trump administration only fuels speculation about the reasons for meetings normally conducted in the open suddenly being classified , as well as precisely what information is being hidden from the public .
The sufficiency and efficacy of the Trump administration ’ s response to the coronavirus pandemic remains to be seen .
As President Trump noted on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been helpful to have had advance warning .
That was the job of the NCMI , and they failed .
This failure may have been a result of complacency , incompetence , or just a byproduct of circumstance .
Regardless of the reason , the NCMI needs to learn from this experience , and reexamine the totality of the intelligence cycle—the direction , collection , analysis and feedback loop—associated with its failure to adequately predict the coronavirus pandemic .
This reexamination should ensure that the U.S. will not be caught flat-footed the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a next time around .
Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties , in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm , and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD .
He is the author of several books , including his forthcoming , Scorpion King : America ’ s Embrace of Nuclear Weapons From FDR to Trump ( 2020 ) .

The coronavirus pandemic has impacted the United States unlike any other event in recent history, proving to be far more disruptive to American society, and far most damaging to the U.S. economy, than even the events of 9/11.
The U.S. response is something President Trump has likened to a “war,” going so far as to label himself a “wartime President,” leading the U.S. against “the toughest enemy” in a struggle in which he vows “total victory.” If the fight against the coronavirus is a war, then the virus clearly took the U.S. government by surprise. “Certainly we didn’t get an early run on it, Trump noted in a press conference on March 17. “It would’ve been helpful if we knew about it earlier.”
It is the job of the U.S. intelligence community to provide senior U.S. government policy makers, including the president, with advance warning about potential crises. The U.S. taxpayer pays a premium for this service; in 2020, the budget for the National Intelligence Program, which includes all programs, projects and activities of the U.S. intelligence community, was $62.8 billion.
Included in this budget is a small, specialized intelligence unit known as the National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI), which operates as part of the Defense Intelligence Agency. The mission of the NCMI is to serve as the lead activity within the Department of Defense (DoD) “for the production of medical intelligence,” and to prepare and coordinate “integrated, all-source intelligence for the DoD and other government and international organizations on foreign health threats and other medical issues to protect U.S. interests worldwide.”
For a small agency, the NCMI packs a large punch in terms of the overall impact of its product. For example, in April 2009—two months prior to when the WHO and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officially declared the global outbreak of H1N1 influenza a pandemic, NCMI published an intelligence product, known as an “Infectious Disease Risk Assessment,” which predicted that a recent outbreak of the Swine Flu (H1N1) would become a pandemic.
The positive work done by the NCMI in relation to the H1N1 outbreak contributed to the creation of the 2012 “National Strategy for Biosurveillance,” designed to help facilitate a full-time institutionalized process for obtaining timely and accurate insight on current and emerging biological risks. President Obama himself noted the critical role played by “accurate and timely information” during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic that enabled decision makers, including himself, to “develop the effective responses that save lives.
“The sooner we can detect and understand a threat,” Obama wrote in the introduction to the first National Strategy for Biosurveillance, “the faster we can take action to protect the American people.”
Providing this early detection of a threat is the mission of the NCMI. When it comes to diseases like H1N1 and the coronavirus, this task falls under the remit of the NCMI’s Infectious Disease Division, whose baseline requirement, according to a former commanding officer, Air Force Col. (Dr.) Anthony M. Rizzo, “is to understand the risk of every type of [endemic] infectious disease in every country.”
“When we think of the word biosurveillance, we think of the kinds of things that the public health community does—collecting cases, taking cultures, deciding which disease is which,” Rizzo said. “But we in the intelligence community are looking way before that to determine [if there are] threats on the horizon.”
The NCMI’s job, Rizzo noted, is predictive in nature—not to explain what is happening, but rather “what we believe is going to happen.” To do this, NCMI has access to the resources of the totality of the intelligence community, including intercepted communications, satellite imagery, and sensitive human intelligence, including covert sample collection.
The coronavirus was clearly part of the NCMI’s remit. And yet its first Infectious Disease Risk Assessment for COVID-19 was issued on January 5, 2020, reporting that 59 people had been taken ill in Wuhan, China. This report was derived not from any sensitive intelligence collection effort or independent biosurveillance activity, but rather from a report issued to the WHO by the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, dated January 5, 2020.
The next day the CDC warned American citizens to take precautions if traveling to China, followed a day later with the activation of a COVID-19 incident management team within the CDC Emergency Management System. This, however, is not the kind of predictive analysis that U.S. policymakers needed if they were going to get ahead of the coronavirus pandemic. Unlike 2009, when the NCMI provided a full two months heads up about the threat of a Swine Flu pandemic, in 2020 the Trump administration was taking its cues from the WHO, which waited until January 30, 2020 to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). The NCMI had been relegated to a mere observer, having failed in its mission to provide timely, predictive analysis of pending epidemiological threats.
Almost everything the NCMI knew about the current situation in Wuhan came from the WHO, which had been working very closely with Chinese authorities from the Chinese Center of Disease Control (CCDC) to determine the origin and nature of the coronavirus outbreak. While a great deal of attention has been paid to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in the city of Wuhan, which sells live poultry, fish, and several kinds of wild animals to the public, a detailed investigation by the Joint Field Epidemiology Investigation Team, a specialized task force working under the auspices of the Chinese Center for Disease Control (CCDC), found that the COVID-19 epidemic did not originate by animal-to-human transmission in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, as originally believed, but rather human-to-human transmission totally unrelated to the operation of the market.
Moreover, by analyzing the characteristic of some 27 genomes of the COVID-19 virus provided by the Chinese and published by the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GSAID), research scientists were able to determine that the “most recent common ancestor” for the coronavirus could be dated back to as early as October 1, 2019.
The importance of this date as it relates to the NCMI is that in mid-October 2019 a delegation of 300 U.S. military athletes arrived in Wuhan to participate in the 2019 Military World games. China has suggested that these personnel might have introduced the coronavirus infection to Wuhan, citing their own research thatsuggests that the virus was introduced into China from elsewhere, and Japanese and Taiwanese studies that point to the U.S. as the likely source of the virus. There is, however, no independent evidence to support these allegations.
The importance of the U.S. military athletes rests in the fact that the NCMI is responsible for conducting threat briefs for all deployments of military personnel world-wide, which meant that a Wuhan-specific Infectious Disease Risk Assessment would have necessarily been prepared in support of this deployment. Infectious Disease Risk Assessments are the bread-and-butter intelligence product produced by the NCMI’s Infectious Disease Division, one in which the totality of the medical intelligence collection and analytical capabilities would be utilized.
The production of a Wuhan-specific Infectious Disease Risk Assessment would have created a window of opportunity for the NCMI to have collected the kind of medical intelligence that could have provided early warning about the existence of the coronavirus. Moreover, these athletes should have been subjected to screening upon return as part of the national biosurveillance program, providing yet another opportunity for early detection of the coronavirus if anyone had been exposed to it during their travel.
The CDC has recently acknowledged, during a hearing of the House Oversight Committee on March 11, that its biosurveillance program has uncovered evidence that Americans who had previously died to what had been originally diagnosed as influenza have, through post-mortem testing, been found to have actually have perished from the coronavirus. Normally, the details obtained from this kind of biosurveillance would be widely shared to better understand the scope and potential spread of the infection, as well as to better pin down the source and timing of the infections.
However, the initial meetings regarding a national-level coronavirus response conducted under the auspices of the Department of Health and Human Services, where intelligence gathered as a result of any such biosurveillance activity would logically be discussed, were all treated as classified events, under orders from the National Security Council. As a result, many people who otherwise would have been present were excluded, and those who did attend these meetings were precluded from discussing what occurred. This lack of transparency on the part of the Trump administration only fuels speculation about the reasons for meetings normally conducted in the open suddenly being classified, as well as precisely what information is being hidden from the public.
The sufficiency and efficacy of the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus pandemic remains to be seen. As President Trump noted on March 17, however, it would have been helpful to have had advance warning. That was the job of the NCMI, and they failed. This failure may have been a result of complacency, incompetence, or just a byproduct of circumstance. Regardless of the reason, the NCMI needs to learn from this experience, and reexamine the totality of the intelligence cycle—the direction, collection, analysis and feedback loop—associated with its failure to adequately predict the coronavirus pandemic. This reexamination should ensure that the U.S. will not be caught flat-footed the next time around, because there will be a next time around.
Scott Ritter is a former Marine Corps intelligence officer who served in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control treaties, in the Persian Gulf during Operation Desert Storm, and in Iraq overseeing the disarmament of WMD. He is the author of several books, including his forthcoming, Scorpion King: America’s Embrace of Nuclear Weapons From FDR to Trump (2020).


theamericanconservative--2020-03-24--The Coronavirus’s Spread is the Federal Bureaucracy’s Failure

U.S. President Donald Trump listens to FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn ( R ) speak on the latest developments of the coronavirus outbreak , in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House March 19 , 2020 in Washington , DC .
( Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images ) The truth is always less glamorous than the perception .
And the truth about 9/11 is that it was first and foremost a failure of bureaucracy .
As early as spring 2000 , the CIA had learned that two of the future hijackers had traveled to Malaysia for an al-Qaeda @ @ @ @ @ @ @ yet the information was never acted on .
In California , the pair roomed with an undercover FBI agent .
In Oklahoma , one of them was pulled over for speeding .
Mere days before the attacks , they were hunkered down in Laurel , Maryland , not far from the National Security Agency ’ s headquarters .
They were never stopped , nor were several of the other soon-to-be hijackers who were cited for traffic violations and raised eyebrows at flight schools , more Rocky and Mugsy than SPECTRE .
After 9/11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attacks could have been prevented were it not for FBI and CIA ineptitude .
According to that and subsequent reports , the agencies had failed to share information with each other , gotten bogged down in turf wars , and lacked outside-the-box thinking .
They did this because this is how bureaucracies work .
The state isn ’ t some enchanted repository of our national priorities ; it ’ s a sprawling network of individuals , who , like the rest of us , tend to place their own interests before the common @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of innovation , cling to rote procedure even under extraordinary circumstances , abuse their power .
And just as the predictable failures of the security bureaucracy allowed 9/11 to happen , so too are the predictable failures of the medical bureaucracy enabling the coronavirus to spread .
Start with the feds ’ delayed reaction to the virus ’ s outbreak in Washington State .
There , the first case of COVID-19 in America was confirmed all the way back in January , and an infectious disease expert in Seattle , Dr. Helen Chu @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the New York Times , her lab had been using nasal swabs to research the flu ; were they to repurpose the tests , they could check for the coronavirus .
The team quickly sought the approval of the CDC , which kicked them over to the FDA .
The FDA then denied their request , citing both privacy concerns over the swab results and the fact that the labs were not certified for clinical purposes .
After weeks of the agency refusing to budge , the team decided to do that most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
They tested for coronavirus and found a positive .
The bureaucrats promptly told the team to stop ; they later relented but only in part .
Those FDA rules may be in place for good reason—patient privacy must be protected , labs must be classified correctly—but such rationales should quickly fall to the floor when an epidemic is raging .
Because they didn ’ t , Chu ’ s team was forced to waste valuable time .
And even those laboratories approved for clinical work were having a tough go of it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the feds for emergency approval to develop their own tests , and were being stymied .
“ This virus is faster than the FDA , ” grumbled one researcher to the Times .
So are turtles with polio .
It ’ s worth pointing out that all this transpired well after the government had declared the coronavirus a public health emergency .
The root of the problem seems to be that the bureaucracy underestimated just how widely the coronavirus would spread .
Initial tests were limited to those who had just returned from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus was proliferating were ignored .
The CDC , meanwhile , developed its own test , but the kits were quickly determined to be faulty and retracted .
Precious weeks slipped by .
Had measures been implemented , had people started social distancing earlier and the infected been identified and quarantined faster , the coronavirus could have been better contained .
Instead the FDA tried to control the process , only to find that it couldn ’ t .
Private labs were brought in too late and struggled to meet demand , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wasn ’ t until last week that the FDA started permitting companies to market tests without federal blessing , though they still must get the agency ’ s approval within two weeks .
The process remains hamstrung by that most bureaucratic of problems : lack of coordination .
Only whereas prior to 9/11 it was agencies failing to coordinate with each other , now it ’ s the government failing to coordinate the supply chain .
The labs , the medical providers , the supply manufacturers—all need to be in harmony in order @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equipment .
Instead hospitals warn of ventilator shortages .
Masks are running dangerously low , with Vice President Mike Pence announcing only last weekend that the government had at last placed an order for hundreds of millions more .
A run on supplies following the FDA ’ s belated easing of restrictions on private labs caused shortages , according to the Wall Street Journal .
Tom Rogan at the Washington Examiner reports that pallets of medical equipment are sitting unused in warehouses because the FDA hasn ’ t loosened its inspection protocols .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ which streamlined its medical bureaucracy following the MERS outbreak in 2015 .
There , officials sounded the alarm in January and one week later a private lab had developed a test .
Today , about 10,000 South Koreans are tested daily , many of them at drive-through diagnosis centers , compared to just a small fraction of that number in the United States .
Yes , the fish rots from the head down .
Donald Trump ’ s complacent reaction to the virus set a terrible example .
His pronouncement that the outbreak @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will disappear ” now sounds insane .
Yet the president can also only reach so far down into the bureaucracy ; some of those gears need to align on their own .
And they clearly failed to do so .
This also can ’ t be blamed on a lack of funding , given that Trump ’ s supposed cuts to the medical bureaucracy never actually happened .
Amid a massive federal budget and trillion-dollar deficits , we ’ re paying more than enough to expect the government to do better than this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ourselves that the country would run better if only the damned libertarians would get out of the way , but it may be that the real problems are less trite than that .
And one of them is clearly that the government has mummified itself in its own red tape .
This happened despite the bright minds running its departments , human genome pioneer Francis Collins at the NIH and the oncologist Stephen Hahn at the FDA .
So now the bureaucracy is taking a more deregulatory approach , lifting roadblocks to private @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lifting barriers to telehealth .
They ’ re about two months too late .
Those early weeks were critical and the feds spent them methodically tripping over their own banana peels .
After 9/11 , the nation consoled itself by establishing a new government agency with a fancy name , the Department of Homeland Security .
Anyone who ’ s ever talked to a DHS employee knows the confusion and bureaucratic jostling that reigned there for years .
Instead of doing the same , once the coronavirus has passed , Congress should take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : the 9/11 Commission .
Establish a body to investigate the government ’ s blunders .
Mimic South Korea and clear away the clutter .
Because this time the costs of bureaucracy aren ’ t just abstract notions of productivity and GDP ; they ’ re human lives .

The truth is always less glamorous than the perception. And the truth about 9/11 is that it was first and foremost a failure of bureaucracy.
As early as spring 2000, the CIA had learned that two of the future hijackers had traveled to Malaysia for an al-Qaeda summit. Both men had U.S. visas yet the information was never acted on. In California, the pair roomed with an undercover FBI agent. In Oklahoma, one of them was pulled over for speeding. Mere days before the attacks, they were hunkered down in Laurel, Maryland, not far from the National Security Agency’s headquarters.
They were never stopped, nor were several of the other soon-to-be hijackers who were cited for traffic violations and raised eyebrows at flight schools, more Rocky and Mugsy than SPECTRE. After 9/11, a congressional investigation found that the attacks could have been prevented were it not for FBI and CIA ineptitude. According to that and subsequent reports, the agencies had failed to share information with each other, gotten bogged down in turf wars, and lacked outside-the-box thinking.
They did this because this is how bureaucracies work. The state isn’t some enchanted repository of our national priorities; it’s a sprawling network of individuals, who, like the rest of us, tend to place their own interests before the common good, show reluctance in the face of innovation, cling to rote procedure even under extraordinary circumstances, abuse their power. And just as the predictable failures of the security bureaucracy allowed 9/11 to happen, so too are the predictable failures of the medical bureaucracy enabling the coronavirus to spread.
Start with the feds’ delayed reaction to the virus’s outbreak in Washington State. There, the first case of COVID-19 in America was confirmed all the way back in January, and an infectious disease expert in Seattle, Dr. Helen Chu, had an idea. According to the New York Times, her lab had been using nasal swabs to research the flu; were they to repurpose the tests, they could check for the coronavirus. The team quickly sought the approval of the CDC, which kicked them over to the FDA. The FDA then denied their request, citing both privacy concerns over the swab results and the fact that the labs were not certified for clinical purposes. After weeks of the agency refusing to budge, the team decided to do that most American of things: ignore the government. They tested for coronavirus and found a positive. The bureaucrats promptly told the team to stop; they later relented but only in part.
Those FDA rules may be in place for good reason—patient privacy must be protected, labs must be classified correctly—but such rationales should quickly fall to the floor when an epidemic is raging. Because they didn’t, Chu’s team was forced to waste valuable time. And even those laboratories approved for clinical work were having a tough go of it. They still had to apply with the feds for emergency approval to develop their own tests, and were being stymied. “This virus is faster than the FDA,” grumbled one researcher to the Times. So are turtles with polio. It’s worth pointing out that all this transpired well after the government had declared the coronavirus a public health emergency.
The root of the problem seems to be that the bureaucracy underestimated just how widely the coronavirus would spread. Initial tests were limited to those who had just returned from China. Warnings from local officials that the virus was proliferating were ignored. The CDC, meanwhile, developed its own test, but the kits were quickly determined to be faulty and retracted. Precious weeks slipped by. Had measures been implemented, had people started social distancing earlier and the infected been identified and quarantined faster, the coronavirus could have been better contained. Instead the FDA tried to control the process, only to find that it couldn’t. Private labs were brought in too late and struggled to meet demand, forcing them to ration tests. It wasn’t until last week that the FDA started permitting companies to market tests without federal blessing, though they still must get the agency’s approval within two weeks.
The process remains hamstrung by that most bureaucratic of problems: lack of coordination. Only whereas prior to 9/11 it was agencies failing to coordinate with each other, now it’s the government failing to coordinate the supply chain. The labs, the medical providers, the supply manufacturers—all need to be in harmony in order to develop tests and distribute badly needed equipment. Instead hospitals warn of ventilator shortages. Masks are running dangerously low, with Vice President Mike Pence announcing only last weekend that the government had at last placed an order for hundreds of millions more. A run on supplies following the FDA’s belated easing of restrictions on private labs caused shortages, according to the Wall Street Journal. Tom Rogan at the Washington Examiner reports that pallets of medical equipment are sitting unused in warehouses because the FDA hasn’t loosened its inspection protocols.
Contrast all this with South Korea, which streamlined its medical bureaucracy following the MERS outbreak in 2015. There, officials sounded the alarm in January and one week later a private lab had developed a test. Today, about 10,000 South Koreans are tested daily, many of them at drive-through diagnosis centers, compared to just a small fraction of that number in the United States.
Yes, the fish rots from the head down. Donald Trump’s complacent reaction to the virus set a terrible example. His pronouncement that the outbreak was “like a miracle, it will disappear” now sounds insane. Yet the president can also only reach so far down into the bureaucracy; some of those gears need to align on their own. And they clearly failed to do so. This also can’t be blamed on a lack of funding, given that Trump’s supposed cuts to the medical bureaucracy never actually happened. Amid a massive federal budget and trillion-dollar deficits, we’re paying more than enough to expect the government to do better than this.
I know we’ve convinced ourselves that the country would run better if only the damned libertarians would get out of the way, but it may be that the real problems are less trite than that. And one of them is clearly that the government has mummified itself in its own red tape. This happened despite the bright minds running its departments, human genome pioneer Francis Collins at the NIH and the oncologist Stephen Hahn at the FDA. So now the bureaucracy is taking a more deregulatory approach, lifting roadblocks to private labs, easing restrictions on trucking, lifting barriers to telehealth. They’re about two months too late. Those early weeks were critical and the feds spent them methodically tripping over their own banana peels.
After 9/11, the nation consoled itself by establishing a new government agency with a fancy name, the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone who’s ever talked to a DHS employee knows the confusion and bureaucratic jostling that reigned there for years. Instead of doing the same, once the coronavirus has passed, Congress should take a cue from another post-September 11 authority: the 9/11 Commission. Establish a body to investigate the government’s blunders. Mimic South Korea and clear away the clutter. Because this time the costs of bureaucracy aren’t just abstract notions of productivity and GDP; they’re human lives.


theamericanconservative--2020-03-25--With Coronavirus Comes the Hobbesian Leviathan

The frontispiece of the book Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes ; engraving by Abraham Bosse ( 1651 ) ( public domain ) Many thoughtful observers—including here at TAC—have warned that civil liberties , and perhaps freedom itself , could fall victim to the coronavirus .
They have a point , but on the other hand , there ’ s a virus out there , and beating it by any means necessary seems to be the predominant concern right now .
Thus the mainstream media , which only a month ago was warning about the dangers of racism and xenophobia , is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health measures .
For instance , on March 19 , The Washington Post published a survey of actions taken by various Asian countries tagged with this remarkable sub-headline : “ Big Brother looks after you.
” As the Post explained , “ Singapore used its FBI equivalent , the Criminal Investigation Department , to effectively interrogate every confirmed case with stunning granularity—even using patients ’ digital wallets to trace their footsteps .
Those caught lying face fines and jail time.
” It would appear that the Singapore Civil Liberties Union—if there even is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in that Confucian city-state .
Looking to another Asian country , the Post added , “ Taiwan tracks infected people ’ s whereabouts via smartphones : Stray too far from home and you receive a message ; ignore it and the police will pay a visit.
” As if on cue , a Taiwanese tweeter added independently on March 21 , “ My phone , which is satellite-tracked by the Taiwan gov to enforce quarantine , ran out of battery at 7:30 AM .
By 8:15 , four different units called me .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ at my door.
” Now that ’ s some serious big government—and most people in Taiwan seem to support it .
Indeed , that same Post story concluded , “ Experts agree…that Western governments must be prepared to limit their citizens ’ movements , mandate isolation for positive cases and track contacts regardless of privacy concerns.
” In that same severe spirit , on March 22 , The New York Times headlined , “ Italy , Pandemic ’ s New Epicenter , Has Lessons for the World.
” According to the Times , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that steps to isolate the coronavirus and limit people ’ s movement need to be put in place early , with absolute clarity , then strictly enforced.
” As we can see , it ’ s almost as if the Times is yearning for the make-the-trains-run-on-time days of Il Duce , Benito Mussolini , in the ’ 20s , or at least the heavy hand of Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the ’ 90s .
To be sure , none of the media ’ s sudden celebration of discipline and order has translated into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ routinely been accused these past three years of being an authoritarian—or worse .
Interestingly , when the moment of truth came , Trump wasn ’ t nearly as dictatorial as some might have feared—and as others might have hoped .
Yes , he has mostly closed travel with China , Mexico , and the EU ( actions that just about every major country in the world followed , providing a mostly unheralded victory for Trumpism ) .
Yet the 45th president has hardly been draconian on issues of domestic order and economic mobilization @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the president seems inclined to loosen up substantially ; that is , he is said to be in tune with his libertarian economic advisers , not his orthodox public health experts .
Thus many governors—including Democrats leading big states such as California , New York , and Pennsylvania—have found themselves to the “ right ” of Trump .
That is , they are issuing “ stay at home ” orders , thus making them appear , for better or worse , tougher than the presumed tough guy in the White House .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the real face of public health .
In recent decades , public health has been seen as a “ liberal ” profession , arguing for gun control , worrying about climate change , coddling the homeless , and the like .
Yet when a genuine medical emergency comes along , the public health calling rediscovers its ancient muscles—and flexes them .
That is , thousands of years of accumulated experience spring back to life , and a lot of illiberal words , such as “ quarantine ” and “ triage , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well as newer concepts , such as “ social distancing ” and “ social media monitoring.
” Yes , today , plenty of stern atavisms are making a comeback .
One is reminded , for instance , of what Cicero wrote 2,000 years ago : Salus populi suprema lex esto , “ The health of the people shall be the highest law.
” ( We can note that salus can be also be translated , less medically , as “ well-being ” or “ safety.
” ) Yet by any translation , Cicero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been resonant , even in give-me-liberty-or-give-me-death America ; they serve as the motto , for instance , of the State of Missouri , as well as many other local jurisdictions .
And if one sees the health and well-being of the people as the highest law , then today , a lot of friendly shibboleths must get shattered .
In his 1987 book Crisis and Leviathan : Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government , libertarian scholar Robert Higgs argued that crises explain why the state gets larger .
It was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Cold War that bulked up Uncle Sam—and once he got big , he never got small again .
The “ Leviathan ” in the title of Higgs ’ book , of course , refers to Thomas Hobbes ’ 1651 classic of political science , Leviathan or the Matter , Forme , & Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiastical and Civill .
( That ’ s how they wrote in the 17th century ; hereafter , we can modernize Hobbes ’ language for clarity . )
As Hobbes famously put it , life in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a state of government—is “ solitary , poor , nasty , brutish , and short.
” In Hobbes ’ telling , there was no such thing as a “ noble savage , ” only ignoble savagery .
“ During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe , ” Hobbes added , “ they are in that condition which is called war ; and such a war , as is of every man , against every man.
” In other words , to Hobbes ’ reckoning @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and no order .
We can note that Hobbes was writing in the wake of the English Civil War of the 1640s .
Having lived through the “ horrible calamities that accompany a civil war , ” Hobbes believed that just about any government had to be an improvement .
And so people had to come together—not necessarily voluntarily—for mutual support , through a “ common power to keep them all in awe.
” To Hobbes , this awe-inspiring creation , this Leviathan , was entirely man-made ; it was the government itself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an “ artificial man , ” composed of the very people for “ whose protection and defense it was intended.
” And it was through this new creation that “ sedition , sickness , and civil war ” could be checked .
Thus we come back to public health .
As we have seen , with its liberal veil stripped away , public health is , well , Hobbesian in its scope and Leviathan-like in its scale .
It ’ s all about abridgments of freedom : surveillance , quarantines , movement controls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people healthy .
Not everyone supports such tough measures , of course .
Nevertheless , Dr. Scott Gottlieb , a health scholar and former FDA chief in the Trump administration , tweeted this blunt assessment of the alternative to Hobbesian public health on March 23 : “ So long as covid-19 spreads uncontrolled , older people will die in historic numbers , middle aged folks doomed to prolonged ICU stays to fight for their lives , hospitals will be overwhelmed , and most Americans terrified to leave homes , eat out , take @ @ @ @ @ @ @ park.
” Gottlieb ’ s harrowing description of the virus on the loose sounds a bit like Hobbes ’ description of life in a state of nature .
Which is to say , if they must choose between being at risk and being under control , most people will be happy with the latter .
So we can see : it ’ s the fear of chaos—including , but certainly not limited to , public health—that grew the state in the first place , and it ’ s continuing fear that keeps the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s fear , there will be…Leviathan .

Many thoughtful observers—including here at TAC—have warned that civil liberties, and perhaps freedom itself, could fall victim to the coronavirus. They have a point, but on the other hand, there’s a virus out there, and beating it by any means necessary seems to be the predominant concern right now.
Thus the mainstream media, which only a month ago was warning about the dangers of racism and xenophobia, is now substantially on board with strong public health measures.
For instance, on March 19, The Washington Post published a survey of actions taken by various Asian countries tagged with this remarkable sub-headline: “Big Brother looks after you.” As the Post explained, “Singapore used its FBI equivalent, the Criminal Investigation Department, to effectively interrogate every confirmed case with stunning granularity—even using patients’ digital wallets to trace their footsteps. Those caught lying face fines and jail time.”
It would appear that the Singapore Civil Liberties Union—if there even is one— doesn’t have much clout in that Confucian city-state.
Looking to another Asian country, the Post added, “Taiwan tracks infected people’s whereabouts via smartphones: Stray too far from home and you receive a message; ignore it and the police will pay a visit.”
As if on cue, a Taiwanese tweeter added independently on March 21, “My phone, which is satellite-tracked by the Taiwan gov to enforce quarantine, ran out of battery at 7:30 AM. By 8:15, four different units called me. By 8:20, the police were knocking at my door.” Now that’s some serious big government—and most people in Taiwan seem to support it.
Indeed, that same Post story concluded, “Experts agree…that Western governments must be prepared to limit their citizens’ movements, mandate isolation for positive cases and track contacts regardless of privacy concerns.”
In that same severe spirit, on March 22, The New York Times headlined, “Italy, Pandemic’s New Epicenter, Has Lessons for the World.” According to the Times, “The country’s experience shows that steps to isolate the coronavirus and limit people’s movement need to be put in place early, with absolute clarity, then strictly enforced.”
As we can see, it’s almost as if the Times is yearning for the make-the-trains-run-on-time days of Il Duce, Benito Mussolini, in the ’20s, or at least the heavy hand of Mayor Rudy Giuliani in the ’90s.
To be sure, none of the media’s sudden celebration of discipline and order has translated into support for Donald Trump, who has routinely been accused these past three years of being an authoritarian—or worse.
Interestingly, when the moment of truth came, Trump wasn’t nearly as dictatorial as some might have feared—and as others might have hoped. Yes, he has mostly closed travel with China, Mexico, and the EU (actions that just about every major country in the world followed, providing a mostly unheralded victory for Trumpism). Yet the 45th president has hardly been draconian on issues of domestic order and economic mobilization. Indeed, as of this writing, the president seems inclined to loosen up substantially; that is, he is said to be in tune with his libertarian economic advisers, not his orthodox public health experts.
Thus many governors—including Democrats leading big states such as California, New York, and Pennsylvania—have found themselves to the “right” of Trump. That is, they are issuing “stay at home” orders, thus making them appear, for better or worse, tougher than the presumed tough guy in the White House.
We might pause to observe that toughness is the real face of public health. In recent decades, public health has been seen as a “liberal” profession, arguing for gun control, worrying about climate change, coddling the homeless, and the like. Yet when a genuine medical emergency comes along, the public health calling rediscovers its ancient muscles—and flexes them. That is, thousands of years of accumulated experience spring back to life, and a lot of illiberal words, such as “quarantine” and “triage,” are bandied about once again, as well as newer concepts, such as “social distancing” and “social media monitoring.”
Yes, today, plenty of stern atavisms are making a comeback. One is reminded, for instance, of what Cicero wrote 2,000 years ago: Salus populi suprema lex esto, “The health of the people shall be the highest law.” (We can note that salus can be also be translated, less medically, as “well-being” or “safety.”) Yet by any translation, Cicero’s bluntly utilitarian words have always been resonant, even in give-me-liberty-or-give-me-death America; they serve as the motto, for instance, of the State of Missouri, as well as many other local jurisdictions.
And if one sees the health and well-being of the people as the highest law, then today, a lot of friendly shibboleths must get shattered.
In his 1987 book Crisis and Leviathan: Critical Episodes in the Growth of American Government, libertarian scholar Robert Higgs argued that crises explain why the state gets larger. It was the Depression, two world wars, and the Cold War that bulked up Uncle Sam—and once he got big, he never got small again.
The “Leviathan” in the title of Higgs’ book, of course, refers to Thomas Hobbes’ 1651 classic of political science, Leviathan or the Matter, Forme, & Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiastical and Civill. (That’s how they wrote in the 17th century; hereafter, we can modernize Hobbes’ language for clarity.)
As Hobbes famously put it, life in a state of nature—that is, outside of a state of government—is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” In Hobbes’ telling, there was no such thing as a “noble savage,” only ignoble savagery. “During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe,” Hobbes added, “they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war, as is of every man, against every man.” In other words, to Hobbes’ reckoning, nothing was worse than no government and no order.
We can note that Hobbes was writing in the wake of the English Civil War of the 1640s. Having lived through the “horrible calamities that accompany a civil war,” Hobbes believed that just about any government had to be an improvement. And so people had to come together—not necessarily voluntarily—for mutual support, through a “common power to keep them all in awe.”
To Hobbes, this awe-inspiring creation, this Leviathan, was entirely man-made; it was the government itself. Hobbes thought of the state as an “artificial man,” composed of the very people for “whose protection and defense it was intended.” And it was through this new creation that “sedition, sickness, and civil war” could be checked.
Thus we come back to public health. As we have seen, with its liberal veil stripped away, public health is, well, Hobbesian in its scope and Leviathan-like in its scale. It’s all about abridgments of freedom: surveillance, quarantines, movement controls, mandatory vaccinations—whatever it takes to keep people healthy.
Not everyone supports such tough measures, of course. Nevertheless, Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a health scholar and former FDA chief in the Trump administration, tweeted this blunt assessment of the alternative to Hobbesian public health on March 23: “So long as covid-19 spreads uncontrolled, older people will die in historic numbers, middle aged folks doomed to prolonged ICU stays to fight for their lives, hospitals will be overwhelmed, and most Americans terrified to leave homes, eat out, take the subway, or go to the park.”
Gottlieb’s harrowing description of the virus on the loose sounds a bit like Hobbes’ description of life in a state of nature. Which is to say, if they must choose between being at risk and being under control, most people will be happy with the latter.
So we can see: it’s the fear of chaos—including, but certainly not limited to, public health—that grew the state in the first place, and it’s continuing fear that keeps the state big.
As long as there’s fear, there will be…Leviathan.


theamericanconservative--2020-03-26--Wake Up! Your Fears Are Being Manipulated

We have a terrifying example in 9/11 of how this goes .
Let 's calm down and figure out who has what to gain by stirring panic .
Customers rush to purchase toilet paper at a Target store during the panic shopping in Orlando , Florida .
( Paul Hennessy / Echoes Wire/Barcroft Media via Getty Images ) I ’ m not worried about the guy coughing next to me .
I ’ m worried about the ones who seem to be looking for Jim Jones .
Jones was the charismatic founder of the cult-like People ’ s Temple .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ followers ’ money and ran their lives .
He isolated them in Guyana where he convinced over 900 of them to commit suicide by drinking cyanide-laced grape Kool Aid .
Frightened people can be made to do anything .
They just need a Jim Jones .
So it is more than a little scary that media zampolit Rick Wilson wrote to his 753,000 Twitter followers : “ People who sank into their fear of Trump , who defended every outrage , who put him before what they knew was right , and pretended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new age will pay a terrible price .
They deserve it.
” The tweet was liked over 82,000 times .
The New York Times claims that “ the specter of death speeds across the globe , ‘ Appointment in Samara ’ -style , ever faster , culling the most vulnerable.
” Others are claiming Trump will cancel the election to rule as a Jim Jones .
“ Every viewer who trusts the words of Earhardt or Hannity or Regan could well become a walking , breathing , droplet-spewing threat to the public , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the damn Kool Aid and join in the panic en route to Guyana .
The grocery store in Manhattan , just after the announcement of the national state of emergency , was pure panic .
I saw a fight break out after an employee brought out paper towels to restock the shelf and someone grabbed the whole carton for himself .
The police were called .
One cop had to stay behind to oversee the lines at the registers and maintain order .
To their credit , the NYPD were cool about it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the fighters , saying , “ You wan na go to jail over Fruit Loops ?
Get a hold of yourself.
” Outside New York , sales of weapons and ammunition spiked .
Panic seems to be something we turn on and off , or moderate in different ways .
Understanding that helps reveal what is really going on .
No need for history .
Right now , in real time , behind the backs of the coronavirus , is the every-year , plain-old influenza .
Some 12,000 people have died , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just between October 2019 and February 2020 .
The death toll is screamingly higher ( as of this writing , coronavirus has infected 60,653 and killed 819 Americans ) .
Bluntly : more people have already died of influenza in the U.S. than from the coronavirus in China , Iran , and Italy combined .
Double in fact .
To be even blunter , no one really cares , even though a large number of bodies are piling up .
Why ?
The first cases of the swine flu , H1N1 , appeared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Obama finally declared a national emergency seven months later , the CDC was reporting that 50 million Americans , one in six people , had been infected , and 10,000 Americans had died .
In the early months , Obama had no HHS secretary or appointees to the department ’ s 19 key posts , as well as no commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration , no surgeon general , no CDC director .
The vacancy at the CDC was especially important because in the early days of the crisis , only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sound familiar ? )
.
Yet some 66 percent of Americans thought the president was protecting them .
There was no panic .
Why ?
Of course , Trump isn ’ t Obama .
But if you really think it is that black and white , that one man makes that much difference in the multi-leveled response of the vast federal government , you don ’ t know much about bureaucracy .
Most of the people who handled the swine flu are now working the coronavirus , from the rank and file at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headliners like Drs .
Andrew Fauci ( in government since 1968 , worked ebola ) and Deborah Brix ( in government since 1985 , prior to corona was an Obama AIDS appointee ) .
Maybe the most salient example is 9/11 .
Those who lived through it remember it well , the color threat alerts , the jihadi cells around every corner , the sense of learned/taught helplessness .
The enemy could be anywhere , everywhere , and we had no way to fight back .
But because the Dems and Repubs were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a patina of camaraderie to it ( led by Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg , where are they now ? )
, not discord .
But the panic was still very real .
Why ?
We panicked when people took steps to ensure we would .
We were kept calm when there was nothing to gain by spurring us to panic ( the swine flu struck in the midst of the housing crisis ; there was enough to worry about ) .
After 9/11 , a fearful populace not only supported everything the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more .
Nearly everyone cheered the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq , and not believing the government meant you were on their side .
The Patriot Act , which did away with whole swaths of the Bill of Rights , was overwhelmingly supported .
There was no debate over torture , offshore penal colonies , assassinations , kidnappings , and all the little horrors .
The American people counted that as competent leadership and re-elected George W. Bush .
Fear was political currency .
Need a 2020 example of how to manipulate panic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the TSA limited carry-on liquids to four ounces for years .
Can ’ t be too careful !
Yet because of corona , they just changed the limit for hand sanitizer only ( which , with its alcohol content , is actually flammable , as opposed to say , shampoo ) to 12 ounces .
Security theater closed down alongside Broadway tonight .
False metrics are also manipulative because they make fear seem scientific .
We ignore the low death rate and focus on the number of tests done .
But whatever @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never can be enough , the same way any post-disaster aid is never delivered quick enough because the testing is not ( just ) about discovering the extent of the virus .
For those with naughty motives , it is about creating a race we can ’ t win , so testing becomes proof of failure .
Think about the reality of “ everyone who wants one should get a test.
” The U.S. has 331 million people .
Testing 10 percent of them in seven days means 4,714,285 individuals a day while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Testing on demand is not realistic at this scale .
Selective decision-based testing is what will work .
South Korea , held up as the master of mass testing , conducted at its peak about 20,000 a day .
Only 4 percent were positive , a lot of effort for a little reassurance .
Tests are valuable to pinpoint the need for social distancing , but blunt tools like mass social distancing ( see China ) also work .
Tests do not cure the virus .
You can hide the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so to spur fear ) , but very sick people make themselves known at hospitals and actual dead bodies are hard to ignore .
Tests get the press , but actual morbidity is the clearest data point .
There will be time for after-action reviews and arguments over responsibility .
That time is never in the midst of things , and one should question the motives of journalists who use rare access to the president to ask questions meant largely to undermine confidence .
If they succeed , we will soon turn on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; that ’ s why we ’ re here now .
Vote for Bernie and Trump wins and we all literally die .
You bought the last toilet paper .
You can afford treatment I can ’ t .
You ’ re safe working from home while I have to go out .
Just wait until the long-standing concept of medical triage is repackaged by the media as “ privilege ” and hell breaks loose in the ERs .
We could end up killing each other even as the virus fades .
At @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been conditioned to new precedents of control over personal decisions , civil life , freedom of movement and assembly , whole city lockdowns , education , and an increasing role for government and the military in health care .
Teachers , don ’ t be surprised if less of you , and fewer classrooms , are needed in the virus-free future , in favor of more classes online .
It ’ s almost as if someone is taking advantage of our fears for their own profits and self-interest .
There are many reasons @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no good reasons for fear and panic .
The fear being promoted has no rational basis compared to regular influenza and the swine flu of 2009 .
We have a terrifying example in 9/11 of how easily manipulated fearful people are .
Remaining calm and helping others do so is a big part of what your contribution to the disaster relief could be .
That ’ s one way to see this .
Too many right now , however , seem to be looking for Jim Jones .
Peter Van Buren , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ author of We Meant Well : How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People , Hooper ’ s War : A Novel of WWII Japan , and Ghosts of Tom Joad : A Story of the # 99 Percent .

I’m not worried about the guy coughing next to me. I’m worried about the ones who seem to be looking for Jim Jones.
Jones was the charismatic founder of the cult-like People’s Temple. Through fear-based control, he took his followers’ money and ran their lives. He isolated them in Guyana where he convinced over 900 of them to commit suicide by drinking cyanide-laced grape Kool Aid. Frightened people can be made to do anything. They just need a Jim Jones.
So it is more than a little scary that media zampolit Rick Wilson wrote to his 753,000 Twitter followers: “People who sank into their fear of Trump, who defended every outrage, who put him before what they knew was right, and pretended this chaos and corruption was a glorious new age will pay a terrible price. They deserve it.” The tweet was liked over 82,000 times.
The New York Times claims that “the specter of death speeds across the globe, ‘Appointment in Samara’-style, ever faster, culling the most vulnerable.” Others are claiming Trump will cancel the election to rule as a Jim Jones. “Every viewer who trusts the words of Earhardt or Hannity or Regan could well become a walking, breathing, droplet-spewing threat to the public,” opined the Washington Post. Drink the damn Kool Aid and join in the panic en route to Guyana.
The grocery store in Manhattan, just after the announcement of the national state of emergency, was pure panic. I saw a fight break out after an employee brought out paper towels to restock the shelf and someone grabbed the whole carton for himself. The police were called. One cop had to stay behind to oversee the lines at the registers and maintain order. To their credit, the NYPD were cool about it. I heard them talk down one of the fighters, saying, “You wanna go to jail over Fruit Loops? Get a hold of yourself.” Outside New York, sales of weapons and ammunition spiked.
Panic seems to be something we turn on and off, or moderate in different ways. Understanding that helps reveal what is really going on.
No need for history. Right now, in real time, behind the backs of the coronavirus, is the every-year, plain-old influenza. Some 12,000 people have died, with over 13 million infected from influenza just between October 2019 and February 2020. The death toll is screamingly higher (as of this writing, coronavirus has infected 60,653 and killed 819 Americans). Bluntly: more people have already died of influenza in the U.S. than from the coronavirus in China, Iran, and Italy combined. Double in fact. To be even blunter, no one really cares, even though a large number of bodies are piling up. Why?
The first cases of the swine flu, H1N1, appeared in April 2009. By the time Obama finally declared a national emergency seven months later, the CDC was reporting that 50 million Americans, one in six people, had been infected, and 10,000 Americans had died. In the early months, Obama had no HHS secretary or appointees to the department’s 19 key posts, as well as no commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, no surgeon general, no CDC director. The vacancy at the CDC was especially important because in the early days of the crisis, only they could test for the virus (sound familiar?). Yet some 66 percent of Americans thought the president was protecting them. There was no panic. Why?
Of course, Trump isn’t Obama. But if you really think it is that black and white, that one man makes that much difference in the multi-leveled response of the vast federal government, you don’t know much about bureaucracy. Most of the people who handled the swine flu are now working the coronavirus, from the rank and file at CDC, HHS, and DHS to headliners like Drs. Andrew Fauci (in government since 1968, worked ebola) and Deborah Brix (in government since 1985, prior to corona was an Obama AIDS appointee).
Maybe the most salient example is 9/11. Those who lived through it remember it well, the color threat alerts, the jihadi cells around every corner, the sense of learned/taught helplessness. The enemy could be anywhere, everywhere, and we had no way to fight back. But because the Dems and Repubs were saying the same thing, there was a patina of camaraderie to it (led by Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg, where are they now?), not discord. But the panic was still very real.
Why? We panicked when people took steps to ensure we would. We were kept calm when there was nothing to gain by spurring us to panic (the swine flu struck in the midst of the housing crisis; there was enough to worry about). After 9/11, a fearful populace not only supported everything the government wanted to do, they demanded more. Nearly everyone cheered the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and not believing the government meant you were on their side. The Patriot Act, which did away with whole swaths of the Bill of Rights, was overwhelmingly supported. There was no debate over torture, offshore penal colonies, assassinations, kidnappings, and all the little horrors. The American people counted that as competent leadership and re-elected George W. Bush. Fear was political currency.
Need a 2020 example of how to manipulate panic? Following fears of a liquid bomb, the TSA limited carry-on liquids to four ounces for years. Can’t be too careful! Yet because of corona, they just changed the limit for hand sanitizer only (which, with its alcohol content, is actually flammable, as opposed to say, shampoo) to 12 ounces. Security theater closed down alongside Broadway tonight.
False metrics are also manipulative because they make fear seem scientific. We ignore the low death rate and focus on the number of tests done. But whatever we do will never be enough, never can be enough, the same way any post-disaster aid is never delivered quick enough because the testing is not (just) about discovering the extent of the virus. For those with naughty motives, it is about creating a race we can’t win, so testing becomes proof of failure. Think about the reality of “everyone who wants one should get a test.” The U.S. has 331 million people. Testing 10 percent of them in seven days means 4,714,285 individuals a day while the other 90 percent hold their breath. Testing on demand is not realistic at this scale. Selective decision-based testing is what will work.
South Korea, held up as the master of mass testing, conducted at its peak about 20,000 a day. Only 4 percent were positive, a lot of effort for a little reassurance. Tests are valuable to pinpoint the need for social distancing, but blunt tools like mass social distancing (see China) also work. Tests do not cure the virus. You can hide the number of infections by not testing (or claim so to spur fear), but very sick people make themselves known at hospitals and actual dead bodies are hard to ignore. Tests get the press, but actual morbidity is the clearest data point.
There will be time for after-action reviews and arguments over responsibility. That time is never in the midst of things, and one should question the motives of journalists who use rare access to the president to ask questions meant largely to undermine confidence. If they succeed, we will soon turn on each other. You voted for him; that’s why we’re here now. Vote for Bernie and Trump wins and we all literally die. You bought the last toilet paper. You can afford treatment I can’t. You’re safe working from home while I have to go out. Just wait until the long-standing concept of medical triage is repackaged by the media as “privilege” and hell breaks loose in the ERs. We could end up killing each other even as the virus fades.
At the very least, we will have been conditioned to new precedents of control over personal decisions, civil life, freedom of movement and assembly, whole city lockdowns, education, and an increasing role for government and the military in health care. Teachers, don’t be surprised if less of you, and fewer classrooms, are needed in the virus-free future, in favor of more classes online. It’s almost as if someone is taking advantage of our fears for their own profits and self-interest.
There are many reasons to take prudent action. There are no good reasons for fear and panic. The fear being promoted has no rational basis compared to regular influenza and the swine flu of 2009. We have a terrifying example in 9/11 of how easily manipulated fearful people are. Remaining calm and helping others do so is a big part of what your contribution to the disaster relief could be.
That’s one way to see this. Too many right now, however, seem to be looking for Jim Jones.
Peter Van Buren, a 24-year State Department veteran, is the author of We Meant Well: How I Helped Lose the Battle for the Hearts and Minds of the Iraqi People, Hooper’s War: A Novel of WWII Japan, and Ghosts of Tom Joad: A Story of the #99 Percent.