2. Virus and Freedom Everyone longs for freedom, and no one give it up easily. This is the same for those in the “free” world and the “unfree” one. Even viruses need the free movement of the hosts to spread and mutate. But what is freedom anyway? Virus, like a “freedom fighter” from nature, exacts revenge on people and deprives them of their life and freedom. We must fight it, and we must also self-reflect and self-criticize. In this capitalist world, the freedom of capital is the priority. Financial transactions, global trade, market competition—none of these are dispensable and none will stop. The accumulation of capital has guaranteed freedom to the endless extraction of oil, coal and minerals, water pollution and deforestation, poisoning of the air and slaughtering of the animals, as well as genetic modification. To satisfy their appetites, consumers presumptuously eat anything, be it civet, pangolin or bat. On this unhindered freedom, nature takes its revenge. The frequent hurricanes, locust outbreak, droughts, fires, floods, smog and the infectious diseases (H1N1, MERS, Ebola among others)—are they simply “natural”? The damage to the global economic order is clear when looking at the production and circulation of PPE during the ongoing pandemic. PPEs are urgently needed weapons to combat the virus. It seems the virus is laughing at neoliberal globalization. Without a doubt, according to capitalists, profit comes before workers’ lives. They are extremely reluctant to slow down, much less come to a full stop. With labor quarantined, and the separation of the means of production and labor power, it essentially means a stop of capital accumulation. Wouldn’t that force capitalists towards desperate thoughts of suicide? After all, this is the real reason behind the covering up and hesitation in politics that eventually led to the unchecked outbreak. Such a dilemma is the same for both the liberal democracies and the “others”. The outbreak in China happened to occur near the spring festival (Chinese or Lunar New Year), which is a normal vacation week every year. This helped avoid the dilemma in decision making. China also benefited from the early revelation of mistakes, the deep understanding of SARS among the policy makers, and a modest attitude towards suggestions from science experts, and most importantly, the central leadership’s timely decision to lockdown Wuhan and the whole country. During this time, Zhong Nanshan (a well-respected pulmonologist with a history of experience with SARS) earned a god-like reputation among both the leadership and the people. During the pandemic, a picture spread around social media in China, featuring Karl Marx and a fake quote: “When pandemics happen, capitalism shows its many problems; the pandemic is the death knell for capitalism as socialism inevitably replaces capitalism.” This is obviously voodoo logic. Proletariat revolution will toll the death knell, not some pandemic. Marx would never make such unscientific argument. But the overview picture in China reflects some social opinions. It is said that the pandemic dramatically reshaped youth politics: more disappointment in capitalism, more regard for socialism. After all, nature can continuously produce viruses and other natural disasters as long as human beings do not rethink the true meaning of “freedom” and do not eliminate capital and fundamentally resolve the human-nature contradiction. The end result, as Rosa Luxemburg pointed out a 100 years ago, is either socialism or barbarism. 3. The East and the West Since the epidemic first broke out in the East, the politicians in the West have framed the virus as something particular among the Asians. Correspondingly, the people in the East fought back with other conspiracy theories. The racist comments and conspiracy theories quickly mushroomed all over the world, and even different eating and life styles have been loaded with virus labels. For example, the southern Chinese like to eat wild animals, and since the virus did break out in the South (Wuhan), westerners were convinced thus that the Chinese people’s eating style produced the virus (which only infect the Chinese). Thus, they overlooked the potential of community spread in their own countries. A counter-rumor from the Chinese is that the virus originated from a US biochemistry lab. Thus, they can keep eating wild animals. Moreover, in the beginning, the Westerners discriminate against and even despised Asians wearing masks. This was based on the misconception that only sick people use masks, and masked “sick” people in public put others in danger. In other parts of the world, there is no such taboo. The Japanese wear masks to prevent hay fever, and the Chinese wear masks when air quality worsens. In fact, the pandemic has been so severe that even people in the West started buying masks, regardless of the official recommendations. The shortage of masks quickly expanded to sanitizer and toilet paper. It seems the “culture” of no-masks can quickly change under life threatening conditions. As another example, the lockdown policies in China were initially criticized in the Western media. They condemn the “inhumane” Chinese government on the one hand, and scorned the “obedient, no-free-will” Chinese people on the other. In fact, this has not been the case, at least in the last few months. The Chinese people gave their fullest support and cooperation to the coercive policies, mainly because of the memory of the pain experienced during the 2003 SARS crisis. The Chinese bureaucracy had a sluggish response in the beginning, but after quick personnel changes, the bureaucrats were put on alert, and the whole system has run very smoothly. The government has public resources like money and supplies, the medical workers have their expertise, and the people give strong community support. The three aspects together, as an effective combat team, are able to win the battle. The public health campaign has been effective so far and the general public has been pleased. The Party and the government lost points at first, but made up for it later. This does not, however, mean that the people have changed their overall view and will be gracious and loyal to the government. The Party Secretary in Wuhan City, made a bold “thank you” education plan, wanting the people of Wuhan to thank the Party and the leadership. The people disliked the plan so much that the officials do not talk about it anymore. According to the assessment from Johns Hopkins University before the pandemic, the US had the best capacity to deal with an epidemic, while China ranked 54th. Chinese experts also point out that US has much better medical expertise than China. As is imaginable, in a country with 1.4 billion population and a relatively low level of medical care like China, an unmitigated outbreak like the one happening now in the West would have had disastrous consequences. The Chinese people are already feeling some relief by now. 020
|