ezorigin--2020-04-29--The left is lukewarm on Biden. Will they turn out for him anyway?

“ Many Bernie supporters are eagerly awaiting his VP candidate announcement , ” says Kittee Hayes , a hairstylist from Eugene , Oregon .
“ Who that woman is will determine a huge percentage of who will vote for him.
” Above all , many say there are concessions Mr. Biden still must make to help unite the party – most prominently , his selection of a running mate .
Many on the left were outraged when New York decided this week to cancel its presidential primary in June , likely denying Mr. Sanders delegates that could have given him @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some Sanders supporters have been advancing charges that Mr. Biden sexually assaulted a former staffer in the mid- ’ 90s .
( Mr. Biden ’ s campaign has denied the allegation . )
But tensions between the progressive wing and the rest of the party haven ’ t dissipated , either .
As it prepares for a pugilistic general election contest with President Donald Trump , the Democratic Party – for once – doesn ’ t seem in disarray .
Former Vice President Joe Biden came from behind to wrap up the nomination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quickly endorsing him – including his last rival standing , Sen. Bernie Sanders .
Among dozens of Sanders supporters interviewed by the Monitor , only a handful say they absolutely will not vote for Mr. Biden in November .
Ray Barkoski has something particular he wants from presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden : respect .
Sure , it would be good if Mr. Biden picks a running mate who reflects progressive values , says Mr. Barkoski , a dog rescue coordinator for Connecticut who supported Bernie Sanders in the 2020 primary race @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incorporate some of Mr. Sanders ’ policy goals , such as universal health care and reining in Wall Street .
But if the Biden campaign truly wants to win over Mr. Sanders ’ army of dedicated supporters and unite the Democrats , the candidate himself needs to signal that he values them and understands why they became Sanders activists in the first place , Mr. Barkoski says .
“ It ’ s not Trumpers who are saying ‘ Oh you Bernie people are all losers.
’ That ’ s all coming from our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , who has cast his ballot for Democratic presidential nominees since he became old enough to vote in 1972 .
“ This party has no interest in me or what I stand for , unless it ’ s courting my vote.
” As it readies for what promises to be a pugilistic general election contest with President Donald Trump , the Democratic Party – for once – doesn ’ t seem to be in disarray .
Former Vice President Biden came from behind to wrap up the nomination relatively easily , with his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his last rival standing , Senator Sanders .
Many of the Vermont lawmaker ’ s loyal supporters , sometimes dubbed “ Bernie Bros , ” may eventually follow .
A USA Today/Suffolk poll from last week found that 77 percent of Sanders supporters say they will back Mr. Biden , and among dozens recently interviewed by the Monitor , only a handful said they won ’ t .
But tensions between the progressive wing and the rest of the party haven ’ t dissipated , either .
Many on the left were outraged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cancel its presidential primary in June , likely denying Mr. Sanders delegates that could have given him more clout at the party convention .
And some Sanders supporters have been advancing charges that Mr. Biden sexually assaulted a former staffer , Tara Reade , in the mid- ’ 90s .
( Mr. Biden ’ s campaign has denied the allegation . )
Many say there are policy and personnel concessions that Mr. Biden still must make to unite the party in coming months – most prominently , his selection of a running mate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left by not being in the center , ” says Kittee Hayes , a hairstylist from Eugene , Oregon .
“ That is the bottom line.
” To be sure , the request for respect cuts both ways .
Senator Sanders ’ grassroots army is notoriously active – and biting – on social media .
A previous Monitor analysis of Sanders supporters on Twitter , for example , found their negative replies to other candidates ’ tweets far outnumbered those of any other Democrats ’ supporters .
And Mr. Biden has already moved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he unveiled a plan to reduce U.S. net carbon emissions to zero by 2050 , at a cost of $ 1.7 trillion in federal investments .
He has proposed a health care budget that , over 10 years , is more than five times larger than the one proposed by Hillary Clinton in her 2016 presidential campaign .
In early March Mr. Biden endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren ’ s bankruptcy plan , which he had previously opposed .
The day after Mr. Sanders dropped out of the presidential race , Mr. Biden announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to lower the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 60 , and a pledge to forgive federal student loan debt for graduates of public universities or historically black colleges making less than $ 125,000 .
“ Senator Sanders and his supporters can take pride in their work in laying the groundwork for these ideas , ” wrote Mr. Biden in a blog post , “ and I ’ m proud to adopt them as part of my campaign.
” Still , some of Senator Sanders ’ most vocal supporters , such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr. Biden has further to go .
Mr. Biden has already committed to selecting a woman as his vice president , and Sanders supporters hope his choice will be a nod to the left .
They throw out a bunch of names , but the most common suggestion is Senator Warren .
“ Many Bernie supporters are eagerly awaiting his VP candidate announcement , ” says Ms. Hayes .
“ Who that woman is will determine a huge percentage of who will vote for him.
” A key question is how much political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possess .
After all , their candidate did lose , and with a smaller share of the vote than in 2016 .
“ After running for president twice and losing worse the second time , maybe [ Mr. Sanders ] is not the wave of the future at all for the party , ” says Matthew Dickinson , a political science professor at Middlebury College .
But if Mr. Biden wants to attract young voters , he needs to recognize what drew many of them to Senator Sanders , says Carmel Pryor , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Action , one of several activist groups that recently penned a letter to the former vice president outlining how he might win their support .
It ’ s more than just policies , she says – it ’ s a willingness to listen .
“ We shouldn ’ t be treated as children who are just complaining , ” says Ms. Pryor .
“ We are trying to find solutions and looking for someone to take us seriously.
” The country ’ s current struggle with COVID-19 will only hasten the party ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ COVID-19 is exposing the social ills of our nation , ” such as an unstable economy and inadequate health care , says Ms. Pryor .
“ It ’ s unearthing things that progressives have been yelling from the mountaintop this entire time.
” Others say the left should perhaps cut Mr. Biden some slack .
This primary contest ended on a far less acrimonious note than four years ago .
In 2016 , Senator Sanders did not endorse Mrs. Clinton until two weeks before the party ’ s nominating convention ; this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ five days after dropping out .
It ’ s clear the two septuagenarian grandfathers have a friendly relationship .
And of course , the stakes appear very different to many Democrats .
“ The elephant in the room is that , if not Biden , Trump , ” says John Landosky , a city employee for Little Rock , Arkansas , and a Sanders backer .
Many Sanders supporters didn ’ t expect Mr. Trump to win in 2016 , so they felt safe not voting for Mrs. Clinton .
Now , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The majority of people I ’ ve talked to so far have said , ‘ Yes , I will vote for Biden because the other choice is so much worse , ’ ” says Robin Chesnut-Tangerman , a state representative from Middletown Springs , Vermont .
“ I ’ d vote for the devil before I voted for Trump , ” says Lisa Geiger , a Sanders supporter and substitute teacher from Arkansas .
This either-or decision is clearly on the mind of Senator Sanders himself .
“ Do we be as active @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and doing everything we can to move Joe and his campaign in a more progressive direction ?
” he said to The Associated Press .
“ Or do we choose to sit it out and allow the most dangerous president in modern American history to get reelected ?
” But some , like Massachusetts substitute teacher Kasey Rogers , say the movement Senator Sanders built is more important than one election .
A few years ago , Ms. Rogers ’ husband got sick , lost his job , and died .
She was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failing – to pay all of her bills .
“ When I had to go to the grocery store with food stamps and people looked at me like a criminal ... ” Ms. Rogers trails off , crying .
“ It really changed my perspective on life .
I suddenly became one of those people that Bernie fights for.
” Ms. Rogers says she ’ ll vote for the Green Party nominee this November , just as she did in 2016 , seeing Mr. Biden as little better than Mr. Trump .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fighting for change .
“ We remind each other that Martin Luther King , Susan B. Anthony – they were never president , ” says Ms. Rogers .
“ Transformational things in our country have been done by non-presidents .
”

“Many Bernie supporters are eagerly awaiting his VP candidate announcement,” says Kittee Hayes, a hairstylist from Eugene, Oregon. “Who that woman is will determine a huge percentage of who will vote for him.”
Above all, many say there are concessions Mr. Biden still must make to help unite the party – most prominently, his selection of a running mate.
Many on the left were outraged when New York decided this week to cancel its presidential primary in June, likely denying Mr. Sanders delegates that could have given him more clout at the convention. And some Sanders supporters have been advancing charges that Mr. Biden sexually assaulted a former staffer in the mid-’90s. (Mr. Biden’s campaign has denied the allegation.)
While many Sanders supporters agree on the need to oust Trump, they’re still looking for concessions from the former vice president before they get on board. Some say they’re just tired of being taken for granted.
But tensions between the progressive wing and the rest of the party haven’t dissipated, either.
As it prepares for a pugilistic general election contest with President Donald Trump, the Democratic Party – for once – doesn’t seem in disarray. Former Vice President Joe Biden came from behind to wrap up the nomination relatively easily, with his former competitors quickly endorsing him – including his last rival standing, Sen. Bernie Sanders. Among dozens of Sanders supporters interviewed by the Monitor, only a handful say they absolutely will not vote for Mr. Biden in November.
Ray Barkoski has something particular he wants from presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden: respect.
Sure, it would be good if Mr. Biden picks a running mate who reflects progressive values, says Mr. Barkoski, a dog rescue coordinator for Connecticut who supported Bernie Sanders in the 2020 primary race. He hopes the Biden platform will incorporate some of Mr. Sanders’ policy goals, such as universal health care and reining in Wall Street.
But if the Biden campaign truly wants to win over Mr. Sanders’ army of dedicated supporters and unite the Democrats, the candidate himself needs to signal that he values them and understands why they became Sanders activists in the first place, Mr. Barkoski says.
Why We Wrote This While many Sanders supporters agree on the need to oust Trump, they’re still looking for concessions from the former vice president before they get on board. Some say they’re just tired of being taken for granted.
“It’s not Trumpers who are saying ‘Oh you Bernie people are all losers.’ That’s all coming from our own party,” says Mr. Barkoski, who has cast his ballot for Democratic presidential nominees since he became old enough to vote in 1972. “This party has no interest in me or what I stand for, unless it’s courting my vote.”
As it readies for what promises to be a pugilistic general election contest with President Donald Trump, the Democratic Party – for once – doesn’t seem to be in disarray. Former Vice President Biden came from behind to wrap up the nomination relatively easily, with his former competitors quickly endorsing him – including his last rival standing, Senator Sanders.
Many of the Vermont lawmaker’s loyal supporters, sometimes dubbed “Bernie Bros,” may eventually follow. A USA Today/Suffolk poll from last week found that 77 percent of Sanders supporters say they will back Mr. Biden, and among dozens recently interviewed by the Monitor, only a handful said they won’t.
But tensions between the progressive wing and the rest of the party haven’t dissipated, either. Many on the left were outraged when New York decided this week to cancel its presidential primary in June, likely denying Mr. Sanders delegates that could have given him more clout at the party convention. And some Sanders supporters have been advancing charges that Mr. Biden sexually assaulted a former staffer, Tara Reade, in the mid-’90s. (Mr. Biden’s campaign has denied the allegation.)
Many say there are policy and personnel concessions that Mr. Biden still must make to unite the party in coming months – most prominently, his selection of a running mate.
“Biden needs to unite the left by not being in the center,” says Kittee Hayes, a hairstylist from Eugene, Oregon. “That is the bottom line.”
Concessions to the left
To be sure, the request for respect cuts both ways.
Senator Sanders’ grassroots army is notoriously active – and biting – on social media. A previous Monitor analysis of Sanders supporters on Twitter, for example, found their negative replies to other candidates’ tweets far outnumbered those of any other Democrats’ supporters.
And Mr. Biden has already moved left on key issues. Last year he unveiled a plan to reduce U.S. net carbon emissions to zero by 2050, at a cost of $1.7 trillion in federal investments. He has proposed a health care budget that, over 10 years, is more than five times larger than the one proposed by Hillary Clinton in her 2016 presidential campaign. In early March Mr. Biden endorsed Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s bankruptcy plan, which he had previously opposed.
The day after Mr. Sanders dropped out of the presidential race, Mr. Biden announced two more policy shifts: a proposal to lower the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 60, and a pledge to forgive federal student loan debt for graduates of public universities or historically black colleges making less than $125,000.
“Senator Sanders and his supporters can take pride in their work in laying the groundwork for these ideas,” wrote Mr. Biden in a blog post, “and I’m proud to adopt them as part of my campaign.”
Still, some of Senator Sanders’ most vocal supporters, such as New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, say Mr. Biden has further to go.
Mr. Biden has already committed to selecting a woman as his vice president, and Sanders supporters hope his choice will be a nod to the left. They throw out a bunch of names, but the most common suggestion is Senator Warren.
“Many Bernie supporters are eagerly awaiting his VP candidate announcement,” says Ms. Hayes. “Who that woman is will determine a huge percentage of who will vote for him.”
A key question is how much political power Senator Sanders and his followers actually possess. After all, their candidate did lose, and with a smaller share of the vote than in 2016.
“After running for president twice and losing worse the second time, maybe [Mr. Sanders] is not the wave of the future at all for the party,” says Matthew Dickinson, a political science professor at Middlebury College.
But if Mr. Biden wants to attract young voters, he needs to recognize what drew many of them to Senator Sanders, says Carmel Pryor, communications director for the Alliance for Youth Action, one of several activist groups that recently penned a letter to the former vice president outlining how he might win their support.
It’s more than just policies, she says – it’s a willingness to listen. “We shouldn’t be treated as children who are just complaining,” says Ms. Pryor. “We are trying to find solutions and looking for someone to take us seriously.”
The country’s current struggle with COVID-19 will only hasten the party’s leftward shift, she suggests.
Recommended Why Georgia indictment could pose unique peril for Trump
“COVID-19 is exposing the social ills of our nation,” such as an unstable economy and inadequate health care, says Ms. Pryor. “It’s unearthing things that progressives have been yelling from the mountaintop this entire time.”
Not 2016
Others say the left should perhaps cut Mr. Biden some slack.
This primary contest ended on a far less acrimonious note than four years ago. In 2016, Senator Sanders did not endorse Mrs. Clinton until two weeks before the party’s nominating convention; this year, he endorsed Mr. Biden just five days after dropping out. It’s clear the two septuagenarian grandfathers have a friendly relationship.
And of course, the stakes appear very different to many Democrats.
“The elephant in the room is that, if not Biden, Trump,” says John Landosky, a city employee for Little Rock, Arkansas, and a Sanders backer.
Many Sanders supporters didn’t expect Mr. Trump to win in 2016, so they felt safe not voting for Mrs. Clinton. Now, that’s not the case.
“The majority of people I’ve talked to so far have said, ‘Yes, I will vote for Biden because the other choice is so much worse,’” says Robin Chesnut-Tangerman, a state representative from Middletown Springs, Vermont.
“I’d vote for the devil before I voted for Trump,” says Lisa Geiger, a Sanders supporter and substitute teacher from Arkansas.
This either-or decision is clearly on the mind of Senator Sanders himself. “Do we be as active as we can in electing Joe Biden and doing everything we can to move Joe and his campaign in a more progressive direction?” he said to The Associated Press. “Or do we choose to sit it out and allow the most dangerous president in modern American history to get reelected?”
But some, like Massachusetts substitute teacher Kasey Rogers, say the movement Senator Sanders built is more important than one election.
A few years ago, Ms. Rogers’ husband got sick, lost his job, and died. She was suddenly a single mom trying – and failing – to pay all of her bills.
“When I had to go to the grocery store with food stamps and people looked at me like a criminal...” Ms. Rogers trails off, crying. “It really changed my perspective on life. I suddenly became one of those people that Bernie fights for.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Ms. Rogers says she’ll vote for the Green Party nominee this November, just as she did in 2016, seeing Mr. Biden as little better than Mr. Trump. And she hopes the Sanders movement goes on fighting for change.
“We remind each other that Martin Luther King, Susan B. Anthony – they were never president,” says Ms. Rogers. “Transformational things in our country have been done by non-presidents.”


ezorigin--2020-04-29--The not-so-secret sauce of New Zealand's success

Unlike most other world leaders , New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has generally avoided war metaphors in uniting her country against COVID-19 .
She tends not to refer to the coronavirus as “ the enemy ” or her fellow citizens as “ soldiers.
” Instead , she speaks of a “ team of 5 million , ” the population of her nation .
When asked if she was afraid of the virus , she responded , “ No .
Because we have a plan.
” On Monday , that “ plan ” resulted in Ms. Ardern announcing that New @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reducing the number of known cases to single digits .
Instead of a war image , she used the language of a tsunami : “ We have stopped a wave of devastation.
” Her government , in fact , has relied on a phone alert system for tsunamis to send out messages during this crisis .
Early on , New Zealand took swift , strict , and decisive steps , such as closing its borders to foreigners by March 19 .
Perhaps just as effective was the tone of her language .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military terms , which can cause fear and panic by evoking images of violence and “ the other.
” Ms. Ardern focused on the mental well-being of her citizens as much as elimination of the virus .
She encouraged people to contact new mothers , for example , to lessen their isolation .
Special apps were provided to deal with mental health .
She asked people to “ be kind ” in uniting against COVID-19 as they were forced to stay at home .
She cut government salaries to help create a closeness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggested people rely on the “ creative , practical , country-minded ” culture of New Zealand .
She brought humor to her role , such as telling children that the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy were “ essential workers.
” She was open and transparent , not secretive like a military commander .
Her metaphors were those that inspired selflessness during the necessary self-isolation .
The country ’ s efforts , wrote the Weekend Herald newspaper , will be remembered for “ the acts of humanity which rose to the occasion.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ revival of kindness , ” the paper added .
“ Watch out , it ’ s contagious.
” For sure , other leaders around the world have used a similar approach .
For instance , Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg went on television to talk directly to children , who perhaps easily pick up the fears of adults .
Something like this approach was made famous in the 19th century by Florence Nightingale .
In her many reforms of the nursing profession , she advised that nurses deal as much with a patient @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a disease .
She wrote : “ Remember , he is face to face with his enemy all the time , internally wrestling with him , having long imaginary conversations with him .
You are thinking of something else .
‘ Rid him of his adversary quickly ’ is a first rule with the sick.
” When faced with biological threats , leaders must be careful in using metaphors of war , Lisa Keranen , a medical rhetorician , told Vox news .
Such images make us “ focus on fighting and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s initial success against COVID-19 may prove the point .
Kindness , starting at the top , can be a mental vaccine for an entire country .

Unlike most other world leaders, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has generally avoided war metaphors in uniting her country against COVID-19. She tends not to refer to the coronavirus as “the enemy” or her fellow citizens as “soldiers.” Instead, she speaks of a “team of 5 million,” the population of her nation. When asked if she was afraid of the virus, she responded, “No. Because we have a plan.”
On Monday, that “plan” resulted in Ms. Ardern announcing that New Zealand had effectively eliminated the virus, reducing the number of known cases to single digits. Instead of a war image, she used the language of a tsunami: “We have stopped a wave of devastation.” Her government, in fact, has relied on a phone alert system for tsunamis to send out messages during this crisis.
Early on, New Zealand took swift, strict, and decisive steps, such as closing its borders to foreigners by March 19. Perhaps just as effective was the tone of her language. The prime minister rarely framed the pandemic in military terms, which can cause fear and panic by evoking images of violence and “the other.”
Ms. Ardern focused on the mental well-being of her citizens as much as elimination of the virus. She encouraged people to contact new mothers, for example, to lessen their isolation. Special apps were provided to deal with mental health.
She asked people to “be kind” in uniting against COVID-19 as they were forced to stay at home. She cut government salaries to help create a closeness between officials and idled workers. She suggested people rely on the “creative, practical, country-minded” culture of New Zealand.
She brought humor to her role, such as telling children that the Easter Bunny and the tooth fairy were “essential workers.” She was open and transparent, not secretive like a military commander.
Her metaphors were those that inspired selflessness during the necessary self-isolation. The country’s efforts, wrote the Weekend Herald newspaper, will be remembered for “the acts of humanity which rose to the occasion.”
The “vicious virus has sparked a revival of kindness,” the paper added. “Watch out, it’s contagious.”
For sure, other leaders around the world have used a similar approach. For instance, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg went on television to talk directly to children, who perhaps easily pick up the fears of adults.
Something like this approach was made famous in the 19th century by Florence Nightingale. In her many reforms of the nursing profession, she advised that nurses deal as much with a patient’s feelings of apprehension and uncertainty as a disease. She wrote:
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“Remember, he is face to face with his enemy all the time, internally wrestling with him, having long imaginary conversations with him. You are thinking of something else. ‘Rid him of his adversary quickly’ is a first rule with the sick.”
When faced with biological threats, leaders must be careful in using metaphors of war, Lisa Keranen, a medical rhetorician, told Vox news. Such images make us “focus on fighting and not on caring.” New Zealand’s initial success against COVID-19 may prove the point. Kindness, starting at the top, can be a mental vaccine for an entire country.


ezorigin--2020-04-28--London-based Ned Temko navigates us through challenging times

In our series Navigating Uncertainty , the Monitor is delving deeply into the growing global disorder challenging leaders and institutions worldwide .
It ’ s a disorder that has been made all the more striking by the crises caused by the coronavirus pandemic .
But as the 12 correspondents reporting our Navigating Uncertainty series are discovering , with great challenges come new paths to progress .
Ned Temko is the Monitor ’ s London correspondent and wrote the first story for the series .
I asked Ned why the series was launched .
Many of us at the Monitor had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ unmooring ” from many of the institutions and assumptions that had underpinned national and international politics – and our own lives – since the aftermath of World War II .
In their place , in many countries , was a rising polarization and a brand of politics powered by populism , nationalism , and often resentment and anger .
All of this at a time when the old economic certainties were being challenged not just by new technology and a shift toward a more globally interwoven economy , but by ever-widening gaps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for many of those who were being left behind .
The aim of the series , as it evolved , was ambitious : to look at the human stories behind these headline trends ; to draw out the patterns and connections that linked these different stories .
I think what the series most aspires to do – what we think of as “ Monitor journalism ” – is to step back from the day-to-day headline events and , along with readers , navigate our way toward a clearer , more nuanced picture of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Also , importantly , we wanted to shine a light on individuals and institutions who are actively looking for new ways to make common cause on issues like human rights , social and religious tolerance , free speech , economic development and fairness – as well as to tackle specific new challenges like climate change .
In other words , efforts to shape whatever “ new world order ” emerges on the other side of the instability and uncertainty that have grown dramatically over the past few years .
Find all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ home page .
When the Monitor first planned the Navigating Uncertainty series , we were still weeks away from the point where millions of people were forced to shelter in their homes from a virus that is knocking the global economy off its axis .
Has coronavirus changed the need for this series ?
A good question , and one we have naturally been asking ourselves as the COVID-19 crisis has spread and intensified .
I think the answer is that it hasn ’ t so much changed the need for the series @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the issues we ’ d set out to chronicle and illuminate have proved strikingly relevant to the pandemic .
To take just one example , the question of the increasingly interconnected world economy , which both contributed to the worldwide spread of the virus and has had a major impact on the frantic scramble around the globe to secure things like ventilators or protective equipment – much of which turns out to come from the country where COVID-19 first appeared : China .
The halting , and in some cases belated , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spread of the virus also brings in other issues we ’ d set out to explore in the series : the rise of populist politics , or the growing distrust among many people of existing institutions , leaders , policy experts , and of the idea of facts-based policy .
The pandemic has also become a major stress test for longstanding international partnerships and alliances that were also , as the series reflects , becoming increasingly fragile .
We look back at what the world was experiencing in the 1930s as a reference @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Remind us what we went through then and how that compares and contrasts with what we ’ ve experienced in recent years ?
There are indeed potential parallels , I think , which are likely to become more significant in light of the huge economic contraction being caused by the shutdowns put in effect in many major countries to control the spread of COVID-19 .
The 1930s – the years of the Great Depression – also saw a rise in nationalism , populism , protectionism , and isolationism .
All of these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major democracies , or in opposition politicians opposing sitting governments .
The open question – part of the “ uncertainty ” we ’ re trying to navigate in the series – is whether those trends will become ever more dominant , or whether we ’ ll see a kind of new world order that retains an outward-looking , cooperative , international point of view .
Where are the biggest threats now to all of the gains that were achieved as democracy and human rights expanded after World War II ?
My own sense @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recreate a sense among governments , within communities , and among individual citizens both of the importance , and fragility , of the post-war consensus .
It was not perfect .
It was , of course , initially a series of structures and principles largely focused on Western countries and which was led , indeed created , largely by the United States .
But over many decades , the main guiding principles – democracy , free markets , trade and , perhaps above all , human rights and the rule of law – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or at least aspired to .
And maybe they also were , by the turn of the new century , simply taken for granted .
That ’ s why I say there is a new and important challenge for governments and civic groups and citizens who do believe in them .
In many countries , they ’ re having to make a renewed case for these principles , to explain why they matter , and to risk criticism , opprobrium , or sometimes personal freedom or even their lives , to defend them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ institutions who are countering the forces giving rise to growing authoritarian power and the decline of human rights .
That ’ s one of the most extraordinary things amid all the dramatic changes occurring in the world : the enormous resiliency of those who , broadly speaking , believe passionately in human rights and in the idea that might does not necessarily mean right .
This has been very much part of the series articles that have appeared so far , whether in Anne Scott Tyson ’ s fascinating look at the protest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ continue to defend a separate political path for Taiwan from mainland China ’ s ; or , for instance , Sara Miller Llana ’ s encounter with pro-democracy activists in populist President Jair Bolsinaro ’ s Brazil .
And in a series piece that ’ s coming up in the weeks ahead , our Middle East correspondent , Taylor Luck , will be looking at the lonely but determined struggle being waged by rights activists in the Arab world now that the proclaimed hope and promise of the so-called Arab Spring seem to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also a compelling “ Navigating Uncertainty ” audio report by Dominique Soguel based on conversations with a number of those opposing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban ’ s consolidation of power and his increasing constraints on democracy and free expression .
You also wrote in your overview story how a woman in a public housing development in the north of England is tied to NATO , the E.U.
, the White House and the Kremlin in the same way as China ’ s leader Xi Jinping .
What ’ s the connection and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The link is in the erosion of many of the institutions and life assumptions that for so long defined the politics of the post-World War II world , and which I suppose began to unravel in the wake of the international economic crisis of 2008 .
But the other reason we began with the example of this woman , Margaret Farley , whom I in fact met on a reporting assignment in the aftermath of 2008 crash , was to emphasize that the changes and challenges which we ’ ve been tracing in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not involve only heads-of-government , or international alliances , or corporate CEOs , but millions of individual citizens in dozens of countries around the world .
I was struck by a recent opinion piece by Henry Kissinger in the Wall Street Journal in which he states `` No country , not even the U.S. , can in a purely national effort overcome the virus .
Addressing the necessities of the moment must ultimately be coupled with a global collaborative vision and program .
If we can not do both in tandem , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' What ’ s your take on this ?
I agree wholeheartedly with Kissinger ’ s view .
What I ’ d add is that one of the major issues over the next few years is likely to be America ’ s role in the world .
Though President Donald Trump has supercharged the idea of “ America first , ” at the time he was elected the U.S. was already on a post-Iraq war path toward a less assertive and engaged role .
I recognize , and in fact share , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military action only in response to a clearly defined threat , and with a clearly defined and well-thought-out aim .
And I wouldn ’ t suggest that American policies and actions have always been perfect .
No country ’ s policies are .
Yet my long experience as an international correspondent has left me firmly convinced that American involvement has far more often been a force for good and that American leadership has been , and almost certainly still is , indispensable to achieving the kind of collaborative vision for which Dr. Kissinger @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come back to where we started , the Navigating Uncertainty series .
I ’ ve been hugely privileged in my journalistic career , beginning in Lisbon not long after the overthrow of the dictatorship , then , for the Monitor , based in Beirut and later Jerusalem , covering both sides of the Middle East conflict , in Moscow during the waning years of the Soviet Union , in South Africa during the waning years , and final violence , of apartheid .
For Monitor television , I returned there to cover the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in Berlin the night the wall came down .
All of this , I suppose , brought home to me the importance of the values and principles that were part of the post-World War II architecture built under that American leadership : above all , perhaps , institutions like an independent judiciary , an independent media , and basic individual rights and freedoms .
Read much more of Ned Temko ’ s interview on CSMonitor.com .
You can also find more profiles of our writers here .
Got a question for Ned Temko @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ d love to hear your feedback .
Send your thoughts to me at fitzgeraldg @ csmonitor.com .

In our series Navigating Uncertainty, the Monitor is delving deeply into the growing global disorder challenging leaders and institutions worldwide. It’s a disorder that has been made all the more striking by the crises caused by the coronavirus pandemic. But as the 12 correspondents reporting our Navigating Uncertainty series are discovering, with great challenges come new paths to progress.
Ned Temko is the Monitor’s London correspondent and wrote the first story for the series. I asked Ned why the series was launched.
Many of us at the Monitor had been witnessing the ground-level effects of that “unmooring” from many of the institutions and assumptions that had underpinned national and international politics – and our own lives – since the aftermath of World War II. In their place, in many countries, was a rising polarization and a brand of politics powered by populism, nationalism, and often resentment and anger. All of this at a time when the old economic certainties were being challenged not just by new technology and a shift toward a more globally interwoven economy, but by ever-widening gaps in income and a narrowing of opportunities for many of those who were being left behind.
The aim of the series, as it evolved, was ambitious: to look at the human stories behind these headline trends; to draw out the patterns and connections that linked these different stories.
I think what the series most aspires to do – what we think of as “Monitor journalism” – is to step back from the day-to-day headline events and, along with readers, navigate our way toward a clearer, more nuanced picture of the major changes that have been underway.
Also, importantly, we wanted to shine a light on individuals and institutions who are actively looking for new ways to make common cause on issues like human rights, social and religious tolerance, free speech, economic development and fairness – as well as to tackle specific new challenges like climate change. In other words, efforts to shape whatever “new world order” emerges on the other side of the instability and uncertainty that have grown dramatically over the past few years.
Find all of our Navigating Uncertainty stories on the series home page.
When the Monitor first planned the Navigating Uncertainty series, we were still weeks away from the point where millions of people were forced to shelter in their homes from a virus that is knocking the global economy off its axis. Has coronavirus changed the need for this series?
A good question, and one we have naturally been asking ourselves as the COVID-19 crisis has spread and intensified. I think the answer is that it hasn’t so much changed the need for the series as made it more timely. Some of the issues we’d set out to chronicle and illuminate have proved strikingly relevant to the pandemic.
To take just one example, the question of the increasingly interconnected world economy, which both contributed to the worldwide spread of the virus and has had a major impact on the frantic scramble around the globe to secure things like ventilators or protective equipment – much of which turns out to come from the country where COVID-19 first appeared: China. The halting, and in some cases belated, response of many Western governments to the spread of the virus also brings in other issues we’d set out to explore in the series: the rise of populist politics, or the growing distrust among many people of existing institutions, leaders, policy experts, and of the idea of facts-based policy. The pandemic has also become a major stress test for longstanding international partnerships and alliances that were also, as the series reflects, becoming increasingly fragile.
We look back at what the world was experiencing in the 1930s as a reference point to today’s global challenges. Remind us what we went through then and how that compares and contrasts with what we’ve experienced in recent years?
There are indeed potential parallels, I think, which are likely to become more significant in light of the huge economic contraction being caused by the shutdowns put in effect in many major countries to control the spread of COVID-19. The 1930s – the years of the Great Depression – also saw a rise in nationalism, populism, protectionism, and isolationism. All of these have been evident in a number of major democracies, or in opposition politicians opposing sitting governments. The open question – part of the “uncertainty” we’re trying to navigate in the series – is whether those trends will become ever more dominant, or whether we’ll see a kind of new world order that retains an outward-looking, cooperative, international point of view.
Where are the biggest threats now to all of the gains that were achieved as democracy and human rights expanded after World War II?
My own sense is that the main challenge is to recreate a sense among governments, within communities, and among individual citizens both of the importance, and fragility, of the post-war consensus. It was not perfect. It was, of course, initially a series of structures and principles largely focused on Western countries and which was led, indeed created, largely by the United States. But over many decades, the main guiding principles – democracy, free markets, trade and, perhaps above all, human rights and the rule of law – became more and more widely accepted, or at least aspired to. And maybe they also were, by the turn of the new century, simply taken for granted. That’s why I say there is a new and important challenge for governments and civic groups and citizens who do believe in them. In many countries, they’re having to make a renewed case for these principles, to explain why they matter, and to risk criticism, opprobrium, or sometimes personal freedom or even their lives, to defend them.
Give us examples of people and institutions who are countering the forces giving rise to growing authoritarian power and the decline of human rights.
That’s one of the most extraordinary things amid all the dramatic changes occurring in the world: the enormous resiliency of those who, broadly speaking, believe passionately in human rights and in the idea that might does not necessarily mean right. This has been very much part of the series articles that have appeared so far, whether in Anne Scott Tyson’s fascinating look at the protest movement in Hong Kong or those who continue to defend a separate political path for Taiwan from mainland China’s; or, for instance, Sara Miller Llana’s encounter with pro-democracy activists in populist President Jair Bolsinaro’s Brazil. And in a series piece that’s coming up in the weeks ahead, our Middle East correspondent, Taylor Luck, will be looking at the lonely but determined struggle being waged by rights activists in the Arab world now that the proclaimed hope and promise of the so-called Arab Spring seem to have largely faded. There’s also a compelling “Navigating Uncertainty” audio report by Dominique Soguel based on conversations with a number of those opposing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s consolidation of power and his increasing constraints on democracy and free expression.
You also wrote in your overview story how a woman in a public housing development in the north of England is tied to NATO, the E.U., the White House and the Kremlin in the same way as China’s leader Xi Jinping. What’s the connection and why is that important to progress?
The link is in the erosion of many of the institutions and life assumptions that for so long defined the politics of the post-World War II world, and which I suppose began to unravel in the wake of the international economic crisis of 2008. But the other reason we began with the example of this woman, Margaret Farley, whom I in fact met on a reporting assignment in the aftermath of 2008 crash, was to emphasize that the changes and challenges which we’ve been tracing in the “Navigating Uncertainty” series do not involve only heads-of-government, or international alliances, or corporate CEOs, but millions of individual citizens in dozens of countries around the world.
I was struck by a recent opinion piece by Henry Kissinger in the Wall Street Journal in which he states "No country, not even the U.S., can in a purely national effort overcome the virus. Addressing the necessities of the moment must ultimately be coupled with a global collaborative vision and program. If we cannot do both in tandem, we will face the worst of each." What’s your take on this?
I agree wholeheartedly with Kissinger’s view. What I’d add is that one of the major issues over the next few years is likely to be America’s role in the world. Though President Donald Trump has supercharged the idea of “America first,” at the time he was elected the U.S. was already on a post-Iraq war path toward a less assertive and engaged role. I recognize, and in fact share, the view that the U.S. should engage in military action only in response to a clearly defined threat, and with a clearly defined and well-thought-out aim. And I wouldn’t suggest that American policies and actions have always been perfect. No country’s policies are. Yet my long experience as an international correspondent has left me firmly convinced that American involvement has far more often been a force for good and that American leadership has been, and almost certainly still is, indispensable to achieving the kind of collaborative vision for which Dr. Kissinger is calling.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
And if I could come back to where we started, the Navigating Uncertainty series. I’ve been hugely privileged in my journalistic career, beginning in Lisbon not long after the overthrow of the dictatorship, then, for the Monitor, based in Beirut and later Jerusalem, covering both sides of the Middle East conflict, in Moscow during the waning years of the Soviet Union, in South Africa during the waning years, and final violence, of apartheid. For Monitor television, I returned there to cover the release of Nelson Mandela, and was in Berlin the night the wall came down. All of this, I suppose, brought home to me the importance of the values and principles that were part of the post-World War II architecture built under that American leadership: above all, perhaps, institutions like an independent judiciary, an independent media, and basic individual rights and freedoms.
Read much more of Ned Temko’s interview on CSMonitor.com. You can also find more profiles of our writers here. Got a question for Ned Temko or comments about our series? We’d love to hear your feedback. Send your thoughts to me at fitzgeraldg@csmonitor.com.


ezorigin--2020-05-18--For US-China groups, the adversary is COVID-19 – not a country

“ I ’ ve been in this country for 33 years , and I have never seen the Chinese community so mobilized , engaged , generous , ” says Haipei Shue , president of the nonprofit civic engagement group United Chinese Americans .
The reasons are many , but amid deteriorating U.S.-China relations , and a recent spike in anti-Asian racist attacks , some Chinese Americans feel a need “ to prove they are as American as others .
...
It is very upsetting and sad , ” he says .
Major companies like Microsoft are pitching in , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , at a time when many feel scrutinized .
While government face-offs continue , a wide array of American and Chinese organizations are stepping into the void , helping doctors and health experts learn from each other , donating protective equipment , and raising millions to support front-line workers .
Those efforts are especially widespread in Seattle , where COVID-19 first hit the United States hard .
The novel coronavirus has only heightened tensions between Beijing and D.C. , as leaders try to deflect blame .
There are valid concerns – yet some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been squandered .
As top Chinese doctors in Wuhan detailed best practices from their battle against the coronavirus , about 300 American health experts – including a dozen from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) – listened intently by videoconference .
“ During the early stage of the outbreak , you can … never imagine how the patients rushed the hospital , ” Dr. Peng Zhiyong , intensive care unit director at Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University , told the U.S. scientists , hospital chiefs , and public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The United States had fewer than 50 COVID-19 deaths and 2,000 confirmed cases , a number that would soon balloon .
China had been fighting the outbreak for months .
But such direct information sharing between Chinese and American practitioners was unexpectedly limited , said organizer Li Lu .
“ I was surprised , ” said Mr. Li , the Seattle-based investor and philanthropist who arranged the event .
Worsening U.S.-China tensions and a raging blame game over the virus between Washington and Beijing meant “ two months of valuable experiences [ from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” Mr. Li told the group .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .
When the world most needs to join forces against a common threat , the two superpowers , gripped by nationalist impulses , have squandered the opportunity to lead , analysts say .
Instead they have “ engaged in a deeply counterproductive rhetorical battle to see who can be more sanctimonious in blaming the other side , ” says Jessica Chen Weiss , associate professor of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping both face a domestic legitimacy crisis for failing to keep their people safe from the virus , and “ are seeking to deflect blame onto a rival , ” says Mira Rapp-Hooper , senior fellow for Asia Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations .
Nevertheless , a wide variety of American and Chinese organizations and individuals are stepping into the void .
Often behind the scenes and unreported , they are carrying out vital cooperation ranging from scientific exchanges and donations of protective equipment to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus doesn ’ t recognize political disputes , nor national boundaries … nor ideologies , ” nor trade wars , says Mr. Li , chairman of Himalaya Capital Management .
“ With this virus we have now found a real worthy adversary.
” Groups ranging from corporations and mom-and-pop businesses to local governments and nonprofits are bridging the divide .
They are also pushing back against a broader economic decoupling of China and the United States , advanced by some leaders in Beijing and Washington .
Many in both countries see decoupling as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they predict , such a policy could worsen internal divisions .
“ It would decouple Washington from the rest of the United States , because the rest of the United States is not ready to decouple from China , ” says Scott Kennedy , a senior adviser on China ’ s economy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies .
More than 100 leading U.S. academics , executives , and foreign policy experts , including prominent Republicans and Democrats , signed an April letter urging a joint fight against the coronavirus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Chinese academics .
Despite rising competition and valid concerns on either side , “ no effort against the coronavirus , ” says the U.S. letter , “ will be successful without some degree of cooperation between the United States and China.
” Such goodwill initiatives are widespread in Seattle , where COVID-19 first hit the United States hard .
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation helped fund China ’ s front-line responders and vaccine researchers as part of a global $ 100 million donation in February .
Microsoft procured masks and other supplies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China ’ s help to send stockpiles of protective gear to the Seattle area .
Early this year , Mr. Li started the Guardians of the Angeles Charitable Foundation , inspired by the death of Chinese doctor and virus whistleblower Li Wenliang , to help protect medical workers .
The foundation has contributed $ 4 million in medical supplies to more than 100 hospitals in China , and has raised $ 4.5 million for a similar U.S. effort , donating to 60 hospitals in 13 states .
Chinese and American cities are also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ties .
In Seattle ’ s waterfront industrial district , the fire department last month welcomed 10,000 respirator masks donated to the city by the coastal metropolis of Hangzhou .
“ That ’ s a few weeks ’ worth for the entire department , so the impact is big , ” says Seattle Fire Department warehouse chief Sundae Garner , adding that the department had only one pallet left in stock .
Washington state has relied heavily on donations for protective gear , with 20 % of N95 respirator masks donated , says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Washington State China Relations Council .
The WSCRC ’ s new sister charitable organization handled the mask import from Hangzhou , overcoming major bureaucratic hurdles in both China and the United States , says Man Wang , director of the council .
Groups like WSCRC with ties in both countries have proven particularly proactive .
Seattle-based entrepreneur Lv Lili , head of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Washington state , spearheaded campaigns to donate medical supplies in China and locally .
The chamber most recently helped launch a “ # FoodWithLove @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more than 15,000 free meals to front-line health care workers and police in the Seattle area .
“ I love this city , I love the people here , and I want the environment to be better , ” says Ms. Lv , who arrived from China in 2014 .
The food is donated and prepared by 15 local restaurants and delivered daily by Chowbus to 26 hospitals , clinics , testing sites , and police stations .
The goal is to raise donations to pay for future meals , to help keep @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing their best to help fight the coronavirus and get through this hard time , we ’ re just doing what we can , ” says Liu Zhixiong , whose family operates Frying Fish restaurant in Bellevue .
Despite suffering a 60 % to 70 % decline in business , Mr. Liu is donating hundreds of free meals to first responders .
“ They are doing something we are not brave enough to do , ” he says .
Receiving 30 meals of spicy tofu and stir-fried green beans from Frying Fish one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert Spingler calls the “ # FoodWithLove ” deliveries “ pretty unprecedented.
” “ The officers really enjoy it , ” he says .
“ The food will be gone in an hour or so.
” A similar scene unfolded at the University of Washington virology lab , where program coordinator Lisa Rider emerged from the around-the-clock COVID-19 test analysis facility to collect 50 meals and two ornate cakes from Chengdu Memory restaurant in Seattle ’ s Chinatown .
“ It ’ s been a godsend , particularly for people who are working @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rider , whose lab analyzes about 1,500 tests a day .
The Dolar Shop , a Chinese hot pot chain , is distributing 100 free meals to the public from its Bellevue restaurant and another 150 meals to hospitals and first responders each day .
Chinese Americans feel a special responsibility , says Haipei Shue , president of United Chinese Americans , a nationwide nonprofit focused on boosting civic engagement .
“ I ’ ve been in this country for 33 years , and I have never seen the Chinese community so mobilized @ @ @ @ @ @ @ says .
The reasons are many , but amid deteriorating U.S.-China relations , heightened scrutiny of ethnic Chinese , and a recent spike in anti-Asian racist attacks , Chinese Americans feel insecure , he says , “ like they have a target on their back.
” They want to go the extra mile to help , in part “ to prove they are as American as others .
...
It is very upsetting and sad , ” he says .
United Chinese Americans of Washington ( UCAWA ) rallied 65 local organizations to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pivoted to do the same for Seattle , while raising $ 140,000 for EvergreenHealth Foundation in Kirkland , the first U.S. epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic .
“ We are clearly living in an interconnected world , and the pandemic calls for more international cooperation , ” says Hong Qi , secretary of UCAWA .
“ We don ’ t feel like the government and public officials should ... play the blaming game , ” says Ms. Qi , who arrived in Seattle 30 years ago and has worked as a civil servant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suffering should compel the United States and China to rise above their differences , says Mr. Li , who has overcome his share of adversity .
Having survived Mao Zedong ’ s radical Cultural Revolution and the massive 1976 Tangshan earthquake , he emerged as a student leader in the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests .
After the military crackdown , he escaped China for the United States , where he is now a successful hedge fund manager , and last month was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ level of the two governments , if you feel the pain , people on both sides , you [ do ] what you ought to do , ” says Mr. Li , who describes himself as “ 100 % Chinese and 100 % American.
” A popular line from Chinese poetry expresses it best , he says : “ Though mountains and rivers separate nations , together we share the same sky.
” Editor ’ s note : An earlier version of this story misspelled Liu Zhixiong ’ s name .
As a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is free .
No paywall .

“I’ve been in this country for 33 years, and I have never seen the Chinese community so mobilized, engaged, generous,” says Haipei Shue, president of the nonprofit civic engagement group United Chinese Americans. The reasons are many, but amid deteriorating U.S.-China relations, and a recent spike in anti-Asian racist attacks, some Chinese Americans feel a need “to prove they are as American as others. ... It is very upsetting and sad,” he says.
Major companies like Microsoft are pitching in, as are Asian-American civic groups and mom-and-pop businesses, at a time when many feel scrutinized.
As China and the U.S. argue, we risk overlooking something obvious: beating the virus will take cooperation. Many people, especially Chinese Americans, are trying to connect doctors, gear, and donors between two countries.
While government face-offs continue, a wide array of American and Chinese organizations are stepping into the void, helping doctors and health experts learn from each other, donating protective equipment, and raising millions to support front-line workers. Those efforts are especially widespread in Seattle, where COVID-19 first hit the United States hard.
The novel coronavirus has only heightened tensions between Beijing and D.C., as leaders try to deflect blame. There are valid concerns – yet some experts fear the chance for life-saving cooperation has been squandered.
As top Chinese doctors in Wuhan detailed best practices from their battle against the coronavirus, about 300 American health experts – including a dozen from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) – listened intently by videoconference.
“During the early stage of the outbreak, you can … never imagine how the patients rushed the hospital,” Dr. Peng Zhiyong, intensive care unit director at Zhongnan Hospital of Wuhan University, told the U.S. scientists, hospital chiefs, and public health officials.
It was mid-March. The United States had fewer than 50 COVID-19 deaths and 2,000 confirmed cases, a number that would soon balloon. China had been fighting the outbreak for months. But such direct information sharing between Chinese and American practitioners was unexpectedly limited, said organizer Li Lu.
Why We Wrote This As China and the U.S. argue, we risk overlooking something obvious: beating the virus will take cooperation. Many people, especially Chinese Americans, are trying to connect doctors, gear, and donors between two countries.
“I was surprised,” said Mr. Li, the Seattle-based investor and philanthropist who arranged the event. Worsening U.S.-China tensions and a raging blame game over the virus between Washington and Beijing meant “two months of valuable experiences [from China] are largely lost in America,” Mr. Li told the group.
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.
When the world most needs to join forces against a common threat, the two superpowers, gripped by nationalist impulses, have squandered the opportunity to lead, analysts say. Instead they have “engaged in a deeply counterproductive rhetorical battle to see who can be more sanctimonious in blaming the other side,” says Jessica Chen Weiss, associate professor of political science at Cornell University.
President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping both face a domestic legitimacy crisis for failing to keep their people safe from the virus, and “are seeking to deflect blame onto a rival,” says Mira Rapp-Hooper, senior fellow for Asia Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Nevertheless, a wide variety of American and Chinese organizations and individuals are stepping into the void. Often behind the scenes and unreported, they are carrying out vital cooperation ranging from scientific exchanges and donations of protective equipment to financial and practical support.
Ann Scott Tyson/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption Couple Lucy Gao and Liu Zhixiong, owners of Frying Fish, pose in their family-run restaurant in Bellevue, Washington, April 28, 2020. Despite suffering a 60 to 70% decline in business, Mr. Liu is donating hundreds of free meals to first responders.
“The virus doesn’t recognize political disputes, nor national boundaries … nor ideologies,” nor trade wars, says Mr. Li, chairman of Himalaya Capital Management. “With this virus we have now found a real worthy adversary.”
Groups ranging from corporations and mom-and-pop businesses to local governments and nonprofits are bridging the divide. They are also pushing back against a broader economic decoupling of China and the United States, advanced by some leaders in Beijing and Washington.
Many in both countries see decoupling as self-defeating. In the United States, they predict, such a policy could worsen internal divisions. “It would decouple Washington from the rest of the United States, because the rest of the United States is not ready to decouple from China,” says Scott Kennedy, a senior adviser on China’s economy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
More than 100 leading U.S. academics, executives, and foreign policy experts, including prominent Republicans and Democrats, signed an April letter urging a joint fight against the coronavirus, following a similar appeal signed by 100 Chinese academics. Despite rising competition and valid concerns on either side, “no effort against the coronavirus,” says the U.S. letter, “will be successful without some degree of cooperation between the United States and China.”
Fueling the frontline
Such goodwill initiatives are widespread in Seattle, where COVID-19 first hit the United States hard. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation helped fund China’s front-line responders and vaccine researchers as part of a global $100 million donation in February. Microsoft procured masks and other supplies for China, and in March enlisted China’s help to send stockpiles of protective gear to the Seattle area.
Early this year, Mr. Li started the Guardians of the Angeles Charitable Foundation, inspired by the death of Chinese doctor and virus whistleblower Li Wenliang, to help protect medical workers. The foundation has contributed $4 million in medical supplies to more than 100 hospitals in China, and has raised $4.5 million for a similar U.S. effort, donating to 60 hospitals in 13 states.
Chinese and American cities are also leveraging sister city relationships and other municipal ties.
In Seattle’s waterfront industrial district, the fire department last month welcomed 10,000 respirator masks donated to the city by the coastal metropolis of Hangzhou.
Ann Scott Tyson/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption A Seattle Fire Department warehouse worker poses April 29, 2020, by 10,000 respirator masks that were donated to the city of Seattle by the city of Hangzhou in China's coastal Zhejiang Province.
“That’s a few weeks’ worth for the entire department, so the impact is big,” says Seattle Fire Department warehouse chief Sundae Garner, adding that the department had only one pallet left in stock.
Washington state has relied heavily on donations for protective gear, with 20% of N95 respirator masks donated, says J. Norwell Coquillard, executive director of the Washington State China Relations Council. The WSCRC’s new sister charitable organization handled the mask import from Hangzhou, overcoming major bureaucratic hurdles in both China and the United States, says Man Wang, director of the council.
Groups like WSCRC with ties in both countries have proven particularly proactive.
Seattle-based entrepreneur Lv Lili, head of the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Washington state, spearheaded campaigns to donate medical supplies in China and locally. The chamber most recently helped launch a “#FoodWithLove” drive that has so far delivered more than 15,000 free meals to front-line health care workers and police in the Seattle area.
“I love this city, I love the people here, and I want the environment to be better,” says Ms. Lv, who arrived from China in 2014. The food is donated and prepared by 15 local restaurants and delivered daily by Chowbus to 26 hospitals, clinics, testing sites, and police stations. The goal is to raise donations to pay for future meals, to help keep restaurants afloat.
“Everybody’s doing their best to help fight the coronavirus and get through this hard time, we’re just doing what we can,” says Liu Zhixiong, whose family operates Frying Fish restaurant in Bellevue. Despite suffering a 60% to 70% decline in business, Mr. Liu is donating hundreds of free meals to first responders. “They are doing something we are not brave enough to do,” he says.
Receiving 30 meals of spicy tofu and stir-fried green beans from Frying Fish one recent night, Bellevue police Capt. Robert Spingler calls the “#FoodWithLove” deliveries “pretty unprecedented.” “The officers really enjoy it,” he says. “The food will be gone in an hour or so.”
Ann Scott Tyson/The Christian Science Monitor View caption Hide caption A Chowbus driver delivers two ornately decorated cakes and 50 meals from Chengdu Memory, a Seattle Chinatown restaurant, to the University of Washington Virology Lab in South Lake Union, Washington, April 28, 2020. The free meals are part of the #FoodWithLove drive organized by the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in Washington State.
A similar scene unfolded at the University of Washington virology lab, where program coordinator Lisa Rider emerged from the around-the-clock COVID-19 test analysis facility to collect 50 meals and two ornate cakes from Chengdu Memory restaurant in Seattle’s Chinatown. “It’s been a godsend, particularly for people who are working the midnight shift,” says Ms. Rider, whose lab analyzes about 1,500 tests a day.
The Dolar Shop, a Chinese hot pot chain, is distributing 100 free meals to the public from its Bellevue restaurant and another 150 meals to hospitals and first responders each day.
Recommended Why Georgia indictment could pose unique peril for Trump
Help across borders
Chinese Americans feel a special responsibility, says Haipei Shue, president of United Chinese Americans, a nationwide nonprofit focused on boosting civic engagement. “I’ve been in this country for 33 years, and I have never seen the Chinese community so mobilized, engaged, generous,” he says. The reasons are many, but amid deteriorating U.S.-China relations, heightened scrutiny of ethnic Chinese, and a recent spike in anti-Asian racist attacks, Chinese Americans feel insecure, he says, “like they have a target on their back.” They want to go the extra mile to help, in part “to prove they are as American as others. ... It is very upsetting and sad,” he says.
United Chinese Americans of Washington (UCAWA) rallied 65 local organizations to obtain protective gear for China, then pivoted to do the same for Seattle, while raising $140,000 for EvergreenHealth Foundation in Kirkland, the first U.S. epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic.
“We are clearly living in an interconnected world, and the pandemic calls for more international cooperation,” says Hong Qi, secretary of UCAWA. “We don’t feel like the government and public officials should ... play the blaming game,” says Ms. Qi, who arrived in Seattle 30 years ago and has worked as a civil servant promoting election participation.
The sheer human suffering should compel the United States and China to rise above their differences, says Mr. Li, who has overcome his share of adversity. Having survived Mao Zedong’s radical Cultural Revolution and the massive 1976 Tangshan earthquake, he emerged as a student leader in the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests. After the military crackdown, he escaped China for the United States, where he is now a successful hedge fund manager, and last month was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
“No matter what happens on the level of the two governments, if you feel the pain, people on both sides, you [do] what you ought to do,” says Mr. Li, who describes himself as “100% Chinese and 100% American.”
A popular line from Chinese poetry expresses it best, he says: “Though mountains and rivers separate nations, together we share the same sky.”
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
Editor’s note: An earlier version of this story misspelled Liu Zhixiong’s name.
As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.


ezorigin--2020-05-21--As all 50 states reopen, leaders weigh tough questions

Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other .
The two are inextricably connected and support each other , they say .
“ The question should be : How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything , period , ” says Benjamin Miller , chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust .
At the same time , isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them , mental health , children ’ s welfare , and financial ruin .
Unemployment stands at 14.7 % , the highest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “ deaths of despair , ” according to Well Being Trust .
This week , COVID-19 deaths topped 93,000 in the United States , far more than the 58,000-plus Americans who died in the Vietnam War .
Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt .
In California and across the country , pressure is on to reopen , expressed in lawsuits and protests .
Over it all looms an election in November .
No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov @ @ @ @ @ @ @ churches , businesses , and even a bride to be .
Michael Flood feels for America ’ s government leaders .
They have difficult choices to make in deciding how quickly to reopen economies .
As president of the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank , he ’ s seeing both sides of human hurt in the coronavirus pandemic .
On one hand , a lockdown to prevent spread of the virus has caused great economic and mental stress , illustrated in the skyrocketing demand for food pantries in Los Angeles County , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The food bank ’ s distribution has surged 80 % since the beginning of March – nearly twice the increase during the Great Recession .
Several times a week , upward of a thousand cars line up at parking lots for drive-through groceries .
At the same time , two people who worked at the food bank ’ s partners have died from the virus .
Los Angeles County is the epicenter for the outbreak in California , with about 2,000 deaths so far .
The disease “ feels like a personal threat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mr .
Flood .
Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .
“ We ’ re seeing on both ends , people who have died from COVID and this huge impact .
I really struggle with this .
It ’ s so hard to figure out.
” It is no wonder that Mr .
Flood is wrestling with trade-offs in the reopening .
Much of the country is entering a “ gray space , ” as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti @ @ @ @ @ @ @ flinging open the doors and cautionary measures to prevent a virus resurgence .
It includes ethical dimensions as governors and local officials make life-altering choices , while those unhappy with the decisions push back in the courts and on the street .
Americans need to have a national conversation about these choices and their consequences , say social scientists .
But it ’ s a tough subject .
As New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo recently put it , “ How much is a human life worth ?
That is the real discussion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or freely.
” The national narrative on choices surrounding the pandemic is evolving , says Anita Chandra , director of the Rand Corp. ’ s research on social and economic well-being .
It started with “ we ’ re all in this together ” and “ sheltering in place ” to save lives and not overwhelm hospitals .
Now , with the curve flattening in states like California , Washington , and New York , some people are saying that their personal liberty and other aspects of their well-being are more important .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and be more directly addressed , says Dr. Chandra .
She puts it plainly , “ How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other ?
” It ’ s an “ uncomfortable ” question , she says , but necessary , because it forces moral questions about American values and prepares the country to deal with a possible resurgence of the virus – and learn from it .
For instance , what choices will government leaders make if the nation muddles through a summer of retail @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an uptick in the economy – and then faces a spike of infections ?
Many people will want to keep the economic vitality going , while others will worry about contracting the virus .
“ There ’ s a lot of fear .
Even as we reopen , a lot of people say to me , ‘ Don ’ t reopen .
I don ’ t want to work .
It ’ s not safe , ’ ” says Dr. Barbara Ferrer , director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 93,000 in the United States , far more than the 58,000 Americans who died in the Vietnam War .
Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt .
At the same time , isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them , mental health , children ’ s welfare , and financial ruin .
Unemployment stands at 14.7 % , the highest rate since the Great Depression .
The pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “ deaths of despair ” resulting from drug or alcohol abuse and suicide , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wellness foundation .
In trying to prevent COVID deaths , the medical profession is doing exactly what you would expect them to – save lives , says Dr. Chandra .
But that needs to be “ balanced against all these other aspects of well-being.
” Governments do have a mathematical way to figure a cost-benefit analysis for policies as they relate to risk of a lost life .
It ’ s called the value of a statistical life , or VSL , and it ’ s based on how much individuals themselves are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of death .
Right now , VSLs range between $ 9 million and $ 11 million per life and are used to determine , for instance , the cost of environmental regulations or road improvements .
But some say that ’ s too blunt of an instrument to use – or at least use by itself – because it ’ s rooted in narrow trade-offs that don ’ t fit a broad condition like a pandemic .
Questions about American values also have to be considered , says Dr. Chandra : “ What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of movement ?
What are the ethics around whose life is worth more ?
And what are the ethics around protecting the most vulnerable ?
” Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other .
The two are actually inextricably connected and support each other , they say .
“ The question should be : How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything , period , ” says Benjamin Miller , chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust .
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ presented is between saving grandma and saving the economy , and the way we look at it is if we ’ re not careful , we ’ re going to kill grandma and kill the economy , ” says Alex Tabarrok , director of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University in Fairfax , Virginia .
“ These two things are not in opposition to one another.
” He co-authored an Op-Ed in The Washington Post arguing that quick , congressional funding of sufficient testing , contact tracing , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safety needed to open up businesses and bring people back to work .
This should be combined with “ zones ” that open at different paces , recognizing that the virus has not hit all regions equally .
Others see more federal spending as the way to protect against harm from disease and a decimated economy , pointing to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell ’ s remarks that Congress may need to do more in the way of fiscal support .
The House passed a $ 3 trillion stimulus bill that would aid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uncertain future in the Senate .
On the other hand , President Donald Trump is pushing for a speedy reopening , as is his treasury secretary , Steve Mnuchin .
And then there are those who point to American creativity as a bridge to carry the country forward .
A case in point : Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services , which provides free mental health , substance abuse , and suicide prevention help .
The group completely reoriented its work from on-site only to allow people to work remotely .
In a herculean @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 215 volunteers with laptops and headsets , trained them , and changed the setup for callers to the crisis line .
The inflow of calls related to COVID-19 has been huge , and for the first time , caller and counselor have been experiencing many of the same things .
The nonprofit had to contend with virus exposure , quarantining staff .
Some staff have lost family members , says Carolyn Levitan , the crisis line director .
On the other hand , the forced reorientation has opened a whole new way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ It ’ s a huge eye-opener .
I ’ m really excited about it , ” she says .
It turns out not everyone wants to endure Los Angeles traffic to volunteer in person , and people have other reasons for wanting to work from home .
No matter what state and county officials decide about the pace of reopening , though , her group will take a “ thoughtful ” approach .
“ It ’ s going to be a very slow return for us , ” in part because of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ though the center has put social distancing and extra hygiene measures in place .
County leaders are now hoping to open up more fully by July 4 , but they still want to keep a lid on hospitalizations .
“ We do acknowledge there are trade-offs , ” says Paul Simon , chief science officer for LA County ’ s Department of Public Health .
Early on , everyone was focused on locking down the disease , but now health officials are looking closely at other indicators such as suicides ( a lagging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ We ’ re in a tough situation with this pandemic and hard choices are going to have to be made , but I think they can be made in a thoughtful way.
” In California and across the country , pressure is on to reopen , expressed in lawsuits and protests .
Over it all looms an election in November .
No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov .
Gavin Newsom by gun shops , churches , businesses , and even a bride to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court overturned the state ’ s “ safer at home ” order , saying it needed approval in the Legislature .
Eugene Volokh , who teaches at the University of California Los Angeles law school , says it is unlikely that it will be the courts that push reopening .
Governments have “ extremely broad authority ” in a pandemic , especially over everyday business , he explains , citing the 1905 Supreme Court smallpox case , Jacobson v. Massachusetts .
It may be a little different where some specific individual rights are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guns .
Stay-at-home orders also may violate some state constitutions .
But it is economic pressure that will do the pushing , he says .
“ Long before the courts accept any of these business claims , many states are going to recognize that at some point , the shutdown causes more harm than good.
” Governors don ’ t want to be seen as causing more deaths than the pandemic , he says , and at the same time , they need revenues to implement their programs and balance their budgets .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interests of citizens , and the interests of government officials , while not completely aligned , will be largely aligned in favor of opening things up as long as it is seen as marginally safe.
” Indeed , with decreased hospitalizations , Governor Newsom this week relaxed criteria for counties to move further along the road to reopening .
LA County officials , too , feel a sense of urgency from businesses to open or risk permanent job loss .
“ Time is of the essence , ” said Kathryn Barger , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Supervisors after meeting with business leaders this week .
“ Now it is time to begin to move from safer at home , to safer at work , and safer in our communities.
” Editor ’ s note : As a public service , all our coronavirus coverage is free .
No paywall .

Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other. The two are inextricably connected and support each other, they say. “The question should be: How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything, period,” says Benjamin Miller, chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust.
At the same time, isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them, mental health, children’s welfare, and financial ruin. Unemployment stands at 14.7%, the highest rate since the Great Depression. The pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “deaths of despair,” according to Well Being Trust.
“How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other?” As all 50 states begin reopening this week, that’s a question leaders are weighing – one that forces moral questions about American values.
This week, COVID-19 deaths topped 93,000 in the United States, far more than the 58,000-plus Americans who died in the Vietnam War. Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt.
In California and across the country, pressure is on to reopen, expressed in lawsuits and protests. Over it all looms an election in November. No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov. Gavin Newsom by gun shops, churches, businesses, and even a bride to be.
Michael Flood feels for America’s government leaders. They have difficult choices to make in deciding how quickly to reopen economies. As president of the Los Angeles Regional Food Bank, he’s seeing both sides of human hurt in the coronavirus pandemic.
On one hand, a lockdown to prevent spread of the virus has caused great economic and mental stress, illustrated in the skyrocketing demand for food pantries in Los Angeles County, the most populous county in the nation. The food bank’s distribution has surged 80% since the beginning of March – nearly twice the increase during the Great Recession. Several times a week, upward of a thousand cars line up at parking lots for drive-through groceries.
At the same time, two people who worked at the food bank’s partners have died from the virus. Los Angeles County is the epicenter for the outbreak in California, with about 2,000 deaths so far. The disease “feels like a personal threat to all of us,” explains Mr. Flood.
Why We Wrote This “How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other?” As all 50 states begin reopening this week, that’s a question leaders are weighing – one that forces moral questions about American values.
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.
“We’re seeing on both ends, people who have died from COVID and this huge impact. I really struggle with this. It’s so hard to figure out.”
It is no wonder that Mr. Flood is wrestling with trade-offs in the reopening. Much of the country is entering a “gray space,” as Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti puts it. That space lies between flinging open the doors and cautionary measures to prevent a virus resurgence. It includes ethical dimensions as governors and local officials make life-altering choices, while those unhappy with the decisions push back in the courts and on the street. Americans need to have a national conversation about these choices and their consequences, say social scientists. But it’s a tough subject.
Hans Gutknecht/The Orange County Register/AP View caption Hide caption Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, shown at a press conference in Reseda, Calif., May 19, 2020, says the country is entering a “gray space” when it comes to decisionmaking around the coronavirus outbreak.
As New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently put it, “How much is a human life worth? That is the real discussion that no one is admitting, openly or freely.”
The national narrative on choices surrounding the pandemic is evolving, says Anita Chandra, director of the Rand Corp.’s research on social and economic well-being. It started with “we’re all in this together” and “sheltering in place” to save lives and not overwhelm hospitals. Now, with the curve flattening in states like California, Washington, and New York, some people are saying that their personal liberty and other aspects of their well-being are more important.
The bottom-line question
But the conversation needs to advance further, and be more directly addressed, says Dr. Chandra. She puts it plainly, “How much do you weigh different parts of our total well-being against each other?” It’s an “uncomfortable” question, she says, but necessary, because it forces moral questions about American values and prepares the country to deal with a possible resurgence of the virus – and learn from it.
For instance, what choices will government leaders make if the nation muddles through a summer of retail and restaurants at half capacity and sees an uptick in the economy – and then faces a spike of infections? Many people will want to keep the economic vitality going, while others will worry about contracting the virus.
“There’s a lot of fear. Even as we reopen, a lot of people say to me, ‘Don’t reopen. I don’t want to work. It’s not safe,’” says Dr. Barbara Ferrer, director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
Weighing the costs
This week, COVID-19 deaths topped 93,000 in the United States, far more than the 58,000 Americans who died in the Vietnam War. Marginalized and vulnerable populations are bearing the brunt.
At the same time, isolation and joblessness have their own costs – among them, mental health, children’s welfare, and financial ruin. Unemployment stands at 14.7%, the highest rate since the Great Depression. The pandemic could lead to 75,000 additional “deaths of despair” resulting from drug or alcohol abuse and suicide, according to the Well Being Trust, a national wellness foundation.
In trying to prevent COVID deaths, the medical profession is doing exactly what you would expect them to – save lives, says Dr. Chandra. But that needs to be “balanced against all these other aspects of well-being.”
Governments do have a mathematical way to figure a cost-benefit analysis for policies as they relate to risk of a lost life. It’s called the value of a statistical life, or VSL, and it’s based on how much individuals themselves are willing to pay to reduce the risk of death. Right now, VSLs range between $9 million and $11 million per life and are used to determine, for instance, the cost of environmental regulations or road improvements.
But some say that’s too blunt of an instrument to use – or at least use by itself – because it’s rooted in narrow trade-offs that don’t fit a broad condition like a pandemic. Questions about American values also have to be considered, says Dr. Chandra: “What are the ethics around liberty and freedom of movement? What are the ethics around whose life is worth more? And what are the ethics around protecting the most vulnerable?”
Not a dichotomy
Wellness experts regret that public health and the economy are being pitted against each other. The two are actually inextricably connected and support each other, they say. “The question should be: How do we prevent the most number of people from dying from anything, period,” says Benjamin Miller, chief strategy officer of Well Being Trust.
Gregory Bull/AP View caption Hide caption Workers at Pigment prepare floral arrangements for curbside service May 19, 2020, in San Diego. With encouraging results in their fight against the coronavirus, San Diego County supervisors voted Tuesday to ask the state to be a test case for whether more rapid reopening can safely occur.
“I think the way the choice is being presented is between saving grandma and saving the economy, and the way we look at it is if we’re not careful, we’re going to kill grandma and kill the economy,” says Alex Tabarrok, director of the Center for Study of Public Choice at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia. “These two things are not in opposition to one another.”
He co-authored an Op-Ed in The Washington Post arguing that quick, congressional funding of sufficient testing, contact tracing, and quarantining would provide the confidence and safety needed to open up businesses and bring people back to work. This should be combined with “zones” that open at different paces, recognizing that the virus has not hit all regions equally.
Others see more federal spending as the way to protect against harm from disease and a decimated economy, pointing to Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell’s remarks that Congress may need to do more in the way of fiscal support. The House passed a $3 trillion stimulus bill that would aid state and local governments that faces an uncertain future in the Senate. On the other hand, President Donald Trump is pushing for a speedy reopening, as is his treasury secretary, Steve Mnuchin.
Can ingenuity provide a bridge?
And then there are those who point to American creativity as a bridge to carry the country forward. A case in point: Didi Hirsch Mental Health Services, which provides free mental health, substance abuse, and suicide prevention help.
The group completely reoriented its work from on-site only to allow people to work remotely. In a herculean effort, it outfitted its 80 staff and 215 volunteers with laptops and headsets, trained them, and changed the setup for callers to the crisis line.
The inflow of calls related to COVID-19 has been huge, and for the first time, caller and counselor have been experiencing many of the same things. The nonprofit had to contend with virus exposure, quarantining staff. Some staff have lost family members, says Carolyn Levitan, the crisis line director.
On the other hand, the forced reorientation has opened a whole new way of operating, says Ms. Levitan. “It’s a huge eye-opener. I’m really excited about it,” she says. It turns out not everyone wants to endure Los Angeles traffic to volunteer in person, and people have other reasons for wanting to work from home.
Recommended Why Georgia indictment could pose unique peril for Trump
No matter what state and county officials decide about the pace of reopening, though, her group will take a “thoughtful” approach. “It’s going to be a very slow return for us,” in part because of people’s fears about safety, though the center has put social distancing and extra hygiene measures in place.
County leaders are now hoping to open up more fully by July 4, but they still want to keep a lid on hospitalizations.
“We do acknowledge there are trade-offs,” says Paul Simon, chief science officer for LA County’s Department of Public Health. Early on, everyone was focused on locking down the disease, but now health officials are looking closely at other indicators such as suicides (a lagging indicator that has actually decreased slightly).
“We’re in a tough situation with this pandemic and hard choices are going to have to be made, but I think they can be made in a thoughtful way.”
Forcing their hand
In California and across the country, pressure is on to reopen, expressed in lawsuits and protests. Over it all looms an election in November. No fewer than a dozen suits have been filed against California and Gov. Gavin Newsom by gun shops, churches, businesses, and even a bride to be. Last week, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned the state’s “safer at home” order, saying it needed approval in the Legislature.
Eugene Volokh, who teaches at the University of California Los Angeles law school, says it is unlikely that it will be the courts that push reopening. Governments have “extremely broad authority” in a pandemic, especially over everyday business, he explains, citing the 1905 Supreme Court smallpox case, Jacobson v. Massachusetts. It may be a little different where some specific individual rights are involved – such as with churches or guns. Stay-at-home orders also may violate some state constitutions.
But it is economic pressure that will do the pushing, he says. “Long before the courts accept any of these business claims, many states are going to recognize that at some point, the shutdown causes more harm than good.” Governors don’t want to be seen as causing more deaths than the pandemic, he says, and at the same time, they need revenues to implement their programs and balance their budgets.
“The interests of business, and the interests of citizens, and the interests of government officials, while not completely aligned, will be largely aligned in favor of opening things up as long as it is seen as marginally safe.”
Indeed, with decreased hospitalizations, Governor Newsom this week relaxed criteria for counties to move further along the road to reopening. LA County officials, too, feel a sense of urgency from businesses to open or risk permanent job loss.
Get stories that
empower and uplift daily. By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads.
“Time is of the essence,” said Kathryn Barger, chair of the county’s Board of Supervisors after meeting with business leaders this week. “Now it is time to begin to move from safer at home, to safer at work, and safer in our communities.”
Editor’s note: As a public service, all our coronavirus coverage is free. No paywall.