Having delayed action against the Delta variant, a timely red listing of India and applying elementary precautions to travellers coming from there, could have avoided hundreds of thousands of infections, tens of thousands of long Covid cases, and thousands of deaths. The lesson, at least superficially, has been learned. Sajid Javid was seen to act quickly to suspend travel from South Africa, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Lesotho, and Eswatini from lunch time this Friday. Speaking in the Commons earlier, he said it "may pose substantial risk to public health." Yes, so substantial a risk that passengers disembarking from the last flights into the country weren't required to take a PCR test or quarantine themselves for 10 days. Nor are there any plans to introduce these as mandatory precautions any time soon. British nationals can return from the red listed countries and they will be asked to self-isolate at home. Pathetic.
Unfortunately, if Omicron is as bad as feared we can expect the UK to be badly hit. With 150,000 people dead and about a million living with the long-term effects of the disease, it's unlikely the government are going to have a change of heart. Their public health strategy has long determined that property and class relations come before prolonged illness and death. From the moment the first lockdown came into force, Boris Johnson and his clique of super spreaders have worked to make sure the introduction of elementary precautions are next to impossible. Social distancing, mask mandates, adequate support for the sick, anything requiring more than "you're on your own" is too much of an ask. Perhaps chief medical officer Chris Whitty, moaning to the BBC about how people won't accept the need for Covid curbs, should have thought about this when he rubber stamped the government's scheme to run the pandemic hot and relying on vaccines only. 15,000 have died since so-called freedom day - many times than would otherwise have been the case if the UK had adopted the same sorts of precautions as France, Germany, Italy, etc.
Crimes enough that should have Johnson and his cronies in court, not level pegging in the polls. But their culpability does not end there. Along with the heads of all the rich nations, the Tories share responsibility for the new variant by hoarding vaccines. In August, it was reported the G7 had stockpiled a billion doses. In the same month, the Tories threw away 600,000 expired doses, doses that could have been shipped overseas, been administered, saved lives and who knows, a shot might have gone into the arm of someone destined to incubate the new variant. We can't ever know, but what we do is the more Western governments stockpile vaccines, the more the virus spreads, the greater the likelihood new, dangerous variants can emerge. Something even our fool of a Prime Minister knows full well, seeing as he warned against vaccine nationalism earlier this year.
It's become a cliche to refer to our current crop of Tories as the worst possible government at the worst possible time, but any incoming wave of the Omicron variant will underline it with a grim tally of thousands of more unnecessary deaths and serious disease. Given the Tories' gross ineptitude and skewed priorities, we're reduced to a state of helplessness, of hoping beyond hope that somehow the scientists' early warning signs are wrong and that the new variant will amount to nothing.
Image Credit
14 comments:
Sajid ‘Portrait of a Serial Killer’ Javid could not care less about our health, this much is surely obvious.
What he does care about is that we continue shopping and working, and from this perspective he is concerned, concerned that timely lockdowns elsewhere will force plague island (Britain) into actions it doesn’t really want to take. Incidentally the population of the UK is every bit as bad as the gov't on this, after all the reason we have this shitshow of a gov't and more to the point this shitshow of a capitalism red in tooth and claw, is the British population.
The disastrous response to Covid is the result of living in a capitalist system, which demands constant shopping and constant working to produce shit we absolutely do not need. This is why the only logical solution to the climate crisis is the end of exchange, anyone arguing something different is a climate denier. The same goes for Covid.
«It's become a cliche to refer to our current crop of Tories as the worst possible government at the worst possible time»
I keep reading "two minutes of hate" pieces like this on "The Guardian", and below-the-line comments too, as part of the character assassination campaign by the starmerites (and more importantly the business-onenation factions of the Conservatives) against Johnson.
I think that they are grossly stupid both on the merits and, relatedly, politically:
* There are no visible signs of social or economic collapse in the streets, not even at the level of "the north" in the 1980-1990s. It is very much business as usual, hard to reconcile with catastrophism, either of the "Remoaner" or the "starmerizer" varieties.
* On things like COVID-19 the UK Conservatives have achieved much the same results in much the same way as most other governing parties in the "first world", in particular USA and EU.
* Johnson has no character to assassinate, his voters know very well that instead of a character he seems a cluster of appetites.
* Tory voters think all politicians are corrupt incompetents, except "genocidal racist trot" Corbyn of course.
* Politically, on the issues that matter to Conservative voters, property and anti-EU posturing, Johnson has been competent and trustworthy.
* Politically, New Labour Wales and SNP Scotland have had much the same policies and results as Conservative England, and Starmer, Davey, Sturgeon have been mostly complicit with Johnson's policies, COVID-19 or else.
To properly oppose the Conservatives takes a little more than labeling them as “the worst possible government at the worst possible time”, one must mention the much better choices made by those governments (mostly right-wing as to COVID-19 policies) that have defied the "Washington Consensus", but this does not help in any way Starmer or the rest of the UK opposition, as they have been almost entirely complicit, except for "woke" talk. which however enlightened does not do much for public health or the political economy.
If this is “the worst possible government at the worst possible time”, then we also have "the worst possible oppositions at the worst possible time", and this leaves pretty much no chances for change as “There Is No Alternative”.
«There are no visible signs of social or economic collapse in the streets, not even at the level of "the north" in the 1980-1990s. It is very much business as usual, hard to reconcile with catastrophism, either of the "Remoaner" or the "starmerizer" varieties.»
The same largely applied to the "reign of terror" of Trump in the USA, where the character assassination campaign against him was equally imaginative; for most people, especially minorities, it has been "business as usual" under Obama, Trump, Biden. Just with bigger rents and meaner wages, social insurance, etc., job opportunities, except briefly for some misplaced hope under Trump.
«this leaves pretty much no chances for change as “There Is No Alternative”»
Does anybody here think that government with a "safe pair of hands" Starmer (or Davey...) administration would have been that different?
Would Starmer or Davey have dared to deviate from the "Washington Consensus" ("What's good for Pfizer is good for the USA and the EU") on COVID-19 policy like Finland or Norway (or New Zealand or Korea) when Sturgeon, Merkel, Macron, etc. did not?
Probably a Starmer administration would have raised benefits by £20, but I doubt it would have kept them £20 higher thereafter. A Starmer administration might have spaffed less public money to contractors; still running the state to enrich tory voters and businesses is the mission of the Conservatives. Etc. etc. etc.
The danger with "monstering" Johnson instead of doing political opposition is the obvious dissonance with (overrated) reality and the consequent loss of credibility: there are no columns of ragged english families at the irish or scottish border trying to escape the destitution and mass graves caused by the Johnson junta; there aren't even clusters of "gilets jaunes" at crossroads and roundabouts.
The problem with endless reruns of "Project Fear" is that if one loses and the feared-for events don't happen one might look silly: in the scottish referendum "Project Fear" won, so we will never know whether independence would really have made Scotland look like Somalia or Moldova, but in the exit referendum "Project Fear" lost, so now we know that being outside the EU has not made the UK look like Venezuela or Indonesia.
Similarly Johnson has not yet turned England into Bolsonaro's Brazil or Duterte's Philippines, or Pinochet's Chile (even if many tory voters would have hoped so).
All Labour have to do win is show that clip of Johnson dead-airing for 20 seconds on repeat.
«The danger with "monstering" Johnson instead of doing political opposition is the obvious dissonance with (overrated) reality and the consequent loss of credibility»
The other danger is missing out on what is truly wrong, the example here is the strategy used for COVID-19:
* "Monstering" leads to regard the adoption of half-baked general lockdowns instead of test-trace-isolate as a failure, as incompetence or sleaze.
* But when it came to do vaccinations, a much bigger logistical problem, even after 40 years of thatcherite brutalization, the machinery of the state worked and delivered mass vaccinations pretty quickly, for the glory of Pfizer. Also, if Finland and Norway or New Zealand or Australia (never mind big places like Japan, China-mainland, Korea-south, Thailand, ...) had 10-100 times better results, why not here?
* Thus to me it is quite obvious that the failed activation of test-trace-isolate (which was recommended by the CSO and CMO) was not an accident, it was a policy choice, as it was in France, Germany, Italy, etc. When I mention this online I get the usual hand-waving about "too intrusive" as if general lock-downs were not harsher.
* So doing the starmerization of this issue as mere incompetence or sleaze obscures the ideology and the politics.
As to the latter, as if there was a need of a double check, here is the whig's "Team C" starmerizing ad-lib:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/24/pms-incompetence-may-help-lib-dems-win-north-shropshire-says-davey
«"PM’s ‘incompetence’ may help Lib Dems win North Shropshire, says Davey"
[...] Davey said sleaze has barely come up in conversations with voters. Instead, he said they want to talk about long waits for local ambulance services, the NHS – and potholes. “What we’re finding is that there’s a lot of soft Tory voters out there: much softer than we expected. There’s a feeling the Tories have taken them for granted. They’re very open to the idea of voting for us,” he said. “Without prompting, we’re finding people saying on the doorstep, my neighbour had to wait eight hours for an ambulance, or my sister had to wait two hours. It’s much more about Boris Johnson’s incompetence, than sleaze,” he added. “We’re really clear that the Lib Dems are the challengers: if you want to send a message to Boris Johnson, vote for us.”»
«All Labour have to do win is show that clip of Johnson dead-airing for 20 seconds on repeat.»
Blair (Nov. 2017): «'Labour should be 20 points ahead in polls'»
Hattersley (Dec. 2017): «Fears about victory for the far-left helps to hold down Labour’s opinion poll lead to 4-5% at a time when the government’s incompetence should put him 20 points ahead.»
Funny isn't it how every twist, every turn, every nuance of the Covid epidemic confirms one's underlying political opinions.
«how every twist, every turn, every nuance of the Covid epidemic»
Let's skip over those, and focus instead on the 10-100 times bigger death rates, and the 5-10 percent point difference in the impact on GDP; those are not just a "twist", "turn", "nuance", and they are about the political response to the epidemic, not the epidemic.
«All Labour have to do win is show that clip of Johnson dead-airing for 20 seconds on repeat.»
To be more explicit, this is pure "centrism": it is implicitly based on the assumption that voters choose the best-looking thatcherite among thatcherites, and that given a choice between a clown thatcherite with a successful record, and a thatcherite who looks more forensic and managerial with no record, they will choose the latter.
But politics is not, like the centrists seem (often merely pretend) to believe, a beauty contest among thatcherite contestants for the PM title: it is actually about interests for most voters and "sponsors".
See the vicious reaction of "The Establishment" against the one non-thatcherite who attempted to argue (however mildly) class politics and class interests instead of just "competence", "character", "sleaze" ("I am shocked - shocked - to find that gambling is going on in here!").
"funny isn't it how every twist, every turn, every nuance of the Covid epidemic confirms one's underlying political opinions."
This logic doesn't really work because every nuance of covid disproves everything Dipper ever says.
"All Labour have to do win is show that clip of Johnson dead-airing for 20 seconds on repeat."
Did you see Johnson's utterly bumbling performance when delivering the omicron update?
I don't think even Blissex's arguments are enough to explain why this Bozo is so popular among the dick brains.
«even Blissex's arguments are enough to explain why this Bozo is so popular»
I don't think he is that popular, rather many tory voters are holding their noses and voting Conservative regardless of despising him because they are well satisfied with how the Conservatives deliver the goodies. Some are grateful for the goodies to him more than the party, and celebrate him personally, but I would think it is a minority. Most are no more attached to him than they were to Cameron or May.
And that is another problem with "monstering" Johnson: it is just a "centrist" delusion or propaganda that leaders matter that much, because their "centrist" conceit is that Tony Blair won three elections with his sheer charisma towards "soft" tory voters, when instead he was electorally toxic (e.g. even in 1997 when the Conservatives lost 4.5m votes New Labour gained only 2m of those, and then lost those 2m plus another 1m in 2001, such was Tony's charisma towards "aspirational" voters).
Those 10-14 million tories 2010-2019 have voted Conservative, not Cameron, May, Johnson; if Johnson looks like damaging Conservative electoral prospects, like Cameron and May eventually did, he will be gone in a moment. Whatever they think of Johnson, tory voters vote Conservative largely because of their material interests, and some because of brexitism/nationalism.
«I don't think even Blissex's arguments are enough to explain why this Bozo is so popular»
To belabour this point, I will use my usual quote from Tony Blair himself: “people judge us on their instincts about what they believe our instincts to be” and as to the instincts of the Conservatives, my usual quote from Boris Johnson himself: “I think the vast majority will want to put their pots into the market with the greatest yield over the past 40 years – and that is property” and secondarily “Get brexit done”.
It is pretty clear to most tory voters what the instincts of the Conservatives are, including those of Boris Johnson. The moment the Conservatives or Boris Johnson betray those instincts: gone, like John Major in the mid 1990s and Gordon Brown in the late 2000s.
Post a Comment