United or Divided?

A salient point, indeed. The point is so salient that I have been making it myself. 

In principle, a pandemic ought to unite the nation. We ought all to come together to fight the common enemy. So says Joel Kotkin, and I concur.

Kotkin also says that the virus ought to unite the world in the fight against the virus. On that point, I am less sanguine than he. After all, the symbol of world unity is the World Health Organization. Add to that the United Nations. And you discover that these international institutions are less than worthless in times of pandemic. Nations ought to cooperate, which is not the same as coming together.

And yet, American politicians, having long since abandoned the goal of being statesmanlike, have simply gone on doing what they always do-- playing the virus for political advantage.

Nothing matters more than winning. And the way to win, these politicians believe, lies in affixing blame. This applies especially to Democrats, whose party has been taken over by halfwits who have nothing to offer by vitriol and invective directed against their least favorite president.

Kotkin summarizes:

Democrats like party strategist James Carville and Speaker Nancy Pelosi insist that Trump has “blood on his hands” and one of Pelosi’s more excitable colleagues has suggested that Trump be tried in The Hague for his handling of the pandemic. On the Right, meanwhile, the pandemic has engendered, in the US and elsewhere, a predictably anti-China and nativist tone, which have sometimes drifted into overt racism, particularly in Italy. Some journalists toss around terms like “Manchurian media,” a regrettable throwback to McCarthyism.

Those who have nothing of substance to offer launch attacks on America’s leadership. And yet, I disagree with Kotkin on the other point. Conservatives who are blaming China are trying, even if not very successfully, to unite the nation against a common enemy. Blaming Trump and Republicans is not the same as blaming China. We ought not to confuse internal and external.

As it happens, most Americans want us to have a more collaborative, even more rational approach to the problem. Fancy that:

This is no way to handle a global pandemic. Most Americans, according to a recent survey, would prefer a more collaborative approach. They have so far been disappointed. At a time when we need a rational discussion of policy alternatives and a thoughtful debate among experts, including not just epidemiologists, but also economists, psychologists, and social scientists, we are seeing an escalation of finger-pointing, blame-shifting, and character assassination from both sides.

As I said, I have been promoting such an approach from the onset of the pandemic. It’s nice to feel at one with most Americans.