Daily Archives: March 15, 2020

Sort by: Name Age Location Death Date Dallas Jean Baker 78 South Bend, IN March 13, 2020 Chris Bergschneider, Sr. 76 Clinton, AR March 13, 2020 Arminta Jane Berry 93 of Little Rock, AR March 11, 2020 Elener Jane Britton 76 of North Little Rock, AR March 13, 2020 Roosevelt Brown 86 of Little Rock, AR March 9, 2020 William "Bill" Lee Browning 82 of Sherwood, AR March 10, 2020 Paul Bruhn 85 of Little Rock , AR March 13, 2020 Rodney Lynn Brunetti 52 Humphrey, AR March 13, 2020 Jeanette L Bruton 65 Benton, AR March 11, 2020 Billy Joe Canada 62 Hot Springs , AR March 10, 2020 Joseph M. Casey 26 of Little Rock, AR March 14, 2020 Paul Cheader 74 Fayetteville, AR March 2, 2020 Geraldine "Jerry" Marylee Day 94 of North Little Rock, AR March 11, 2020 Dorain Dickinson 94 Garfield, AR February 28, 2020 Kent Mark Eskew 53 Fayetteville, AR March 1, 2020 Clara Lee Eskew 99 of Little Rock, AR March 9, 2020 Robert Eubanks 90 Arkadelphia, AR March 4, 2020 Ruby Marie Fields 98 Springdale, AR March 12, 2020 Lawrence M. Finn, III 79 Elizabeth, NJ March 12, 2020 James Hank Garrett 95 Prairie Grove, AR March 13, 2020 Bobbye Ann Glover 87 Star City, AR March 13, 2020 Clara N. Gregory 84 Benton, AR March 13, 2020 Tommie Harrison Hankins II 62 of North Little Rock, AR March 11, 2020 Wanda Jane Harvill 82 Benton, AR March 12, 2020 Euell Hatfield 94 Cave City, AR March 12, 2020 Albert "Billy" Holland 96 Cabot, AR March 14, 2020 Leisa Irene Hoofman 52 Judsonia, AR March 12, 2020 Syble F. Jared 100 Conway, AR March 13, 2020 Robert Lee Kenworthy 87 of Maumelle, AR February 29, 2020 Kreth James Koehler 58 of North Little Rock, AR March 9, 2020 Gladys E. Larson 97 Bella Vista, AR March 10, 2020 Pamela Ann Davis Looney 72 of Little Rock, AR March 13, 2020 Regina Ann Marrs 49 Lexington, AR March 11, 2020 Catherine Ellen Remmel Matthews 78 of Little Rock, AR February 22, 2020 Judith Brookings McDade 79 Fayetteville, AR March 5, 2020 Alice JoAnn Mead 87 Bella Vista, AR March 8, 2020 Dorothy Menning 93 Bryant, AR March 13, 2020 William "Bill" Miller 79 Bald Knob, AR March 13, 2020 Herbert Lee Montgomery 64 of Little Rock, AR March 12, 2020 Robert Franklin Morehead 84 Pine Bluff, AR March 8, 2020 Sandra Lynn Bulloch Murry 71 Bastrop, LA March 6, 2020 Charles Roland Nash 96 Sheridan, AR March 12, 2020 Donald Alton O'Kelley 88 Benton, AR March 12, 2020 Cynthia June Ogelvie 69 Lake Village , AR March 11, 2020 Anne Oswald 89 Fayetteville, AR March 10, 2020 Jeffrey Lewis Patton 47 Springdale, AR March 12, 2020 Dale Phillips 54 Bentonville, AR March 13, 2020 Larry Gene Pleimann 84 Fayetteville, AR March 6, 2019 Patsy Marie Riba 83 Mabelvale, AR March 7, 2020 Laura Bell Scoggins Rice 86 Long Beach, CA March 3, 2020 Mike James Roy 63 of Little Rock, AR March 13, 2020 Freddie Ruble Grimmett 87 Fort Smith, AR March 12, 2020 Marie Rawlings Scott 94 Rogers, AR March 10, 2020 Mary Anne (Forsyth) Shilkitus 48 Batesville, AR March 11, 2020 William Earl "Woody" Smith 73 Little Rock, AR March 12, 2020 Madelyn (Madge) Bridget Spiller 81 Rogers, AR March 9, 2020 Betty Jo Thibault 72 of North Little Rock, AR March 13, 2020 Richard Lee Thompson 70 of Little Rock, AR March 12, 2020 Glen Charles Wade 52 Greenbrier, AR March 12, 2020 Billy Arthur Webb 80 Springdale, AR March 11, 2020 MacKenzie Atticus White 1 Fayetteville, AR March 10, 2020 Matthew Dwayne White 27 Lowell, AR March 11, 2020 Patsy Jane (Sivley) Wittenburg 78 Springdale, AR March 12, 2020 Charles Joseph "Jim" Witzigman 93 Jefferson City, MO March 12, 2020

Go here to see the original:

Obituaries

A new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll has revealed sharp partisan divides between Americans over the coronavirus pandemic.

The poll found 68 percent of Democrats are worried that someone in their family could catch the virus, while just 40 percent of Republicans and 45 percent of independents share that concern.

The gulf in perception over an outwardly nonpolitical issue underscores how signals from politicians and media outlets have played a critical role in shaping how seriously Americans are taking a viral outbreak that has overwhelmed health care systems and triggered mass quarantines in several countries around the world.

Nearly 80 percent of Democrats believe the worst is yet to come, but just 40 percent of Republicans and 57 percent of independents believe that. Overall, 53 percent of all voters are concerned that someone in their immediate family might contract the coronavirus, and 60 percent believe the worst is yet to come.

The poll also found 56 percent of Democrats believe their day-to-day lives will change in a major way in the future while just 26 percent of Republicans hold that view.

In response to every question about whether a respondent would change plans that would expose them to others, like travel, eating out at restaurants, and attending large gatherings, Democratic voters consistently responded affirmatively at much higher rates than Republicans. For example, 61 percent of Democrats said theyve stopped or plan to stop attending large public gatherings, but only 30 percent of Republicans said the same.

The partisan disconnect is not due to a lack of information among conservatives or a function of not hearing much about the outbreak in certain regions of the country. NBC reports that 99 percent of respondents said theyve seen, heard, or read about the spread of the coronavirus and 89 percent say theyve heard a lot about it the highest percentage that one of their polls has found for a major event since 2009.

The more likely explanation is that, as with so many other issues, people with different political ideologies consume different kinds of information and take cues on how to think about events from different political figures and institutions. Given that President Donald Trump and media institutions that cater to conservative audiences, like Fox News, have been downplaying the issue from day one, its not surprising that Republican voters are not nearly as alarmed as Democrats.

Still, as the virus spreads and more people know someone affected, the typical partisan divides might not hold.

Ever since it has been clear that the US was at risk of a serious outbreak of the novel coronavirus, Trump has continually downplayed the risks it poses and dragged his feet on policy responses that would help contain and mitigate the spread of the virus. Reporting indicates that he has done this in part because hes worried about the political damage that would accompany treating the situation as a full-blown crisis.

As Voxs German Lopez has explained, Trump has underplayed whats at stake on many occasions:

Trump himself has tweeted comparisons of Covid-19 to the common flu which [director of the Harvard Global Health Institute Ashish] Jha describes as really unhelpful, because the novel coronavirus appears to be much worse. Trump also called concerns about the virus a hoax. He said on national television that, based on nothing more than a self-admitted hunch, the death rate of the disease is much lower than public health officials projected.

And Trump has rejected any accountability for the botched testing process: I dont take responsibility at all, he said on Friday.

Jha described the Trump administrations messaging so far as deeply disturbing, adding that its left the country far less prepared than it needs to be for what is a very substantial challenge ahead.

Trump also downplayed the issue by initially declining to get tested for it despite close contact with people who tested positive for the virus last week. He also never self-isolated despite being at risk of carrying the virus and spreading it to others (public health experts say it is possible to spread the virus even if youre not showing symptoms).

Trump did eventually get tested days after his exposure and on Saturday, the White House physician said the test was negative. But his behavior stood in stark contrast to Republican politicians like Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who has self-quarantined after learning he came in contact with people who have tested positive for the coronavirus. Cruz reports he is currently showing no symptoms.

Conservative news outlets like Fox News have also promoted skepticism of the seriousness of the coronavirus as a serious health hazard as part of an effort to shield the Trump administration from criticism. Here are just a few examples, via progressive watchdog Media Matters:

- Fox prime-time host Sean Hannity claimed people are faking concern about coronavirus just to bludgeon Trump with this new hoax.

- On her Saturday night show, Fox host Jeanine Pirro downplayed the possibility that the coronavirus is more deadly than the flu, arguing that thats only because theres a flu vaccine and if not for the vaccine, the flu would be a pandemic. Pirro somehow drew the conclusion that this means that the talk about coronavirus being so much more deadly [than the flu] doesnt reflect reality.

- Fox host Pete Hegseth downplayed the impact of coronavirus: I feel like the more I learn about this, the less there is to worry about.

- On Hannity, Fox News medical correspondent Marc Siegel said that the worst case scenario with coronavirus is that it could be the flu.

Other prominent right-wing commentators like radio personality Rush Limbaugh have painted coronavirus fears as a ploy to stop Trump rallies.

Messaging from Trump and hard-right news outlets like Fox News has diverged from the consensus among scientists and public health experts around the world who have indicated coronavirus is a serious health hazard that could easily overwhelm the US health care system and kill millions of Americans if not taken seriously by the federal government.

While mainstream and liberal media outlets have focused on pleas from the public health and scientific communities about the serious risks posed by the coronavirus, some conservative outlets and the Trump administration have gone the opposite way. And that in turn has led to a gap between liberals and conservatives on how seriously to take it.

Experts say that by the time everyone takes it seriously, it may be too late to mitigate risks.

Continue reading here:

Poll: Democrats are more worried about the coronavirus than Republicans - Vox.com

WESTWORLD 9 p.m. on HBO; stream on HBO platforms. This dystopian sci-fi thriller has been off the air for nearly two years. Now back for Season 3, it has undergone a partial reboot since the last season ended with Dolores (Evan Rachel Wood) and other robot hosts escaping from the titular theme park. Now, she is out in the human world and hungry for vengeance. She connects with a military veteran (played by a newcomer, Aaron Paul) and convinces him that humans and droids both live in cages, their lives predetermined. (This series is certainly not a pick-me-up.) Other new cast members include Vincent Cassel and Lena Waithe. The shows production remains sleek and eye-catching, Mike Hale wrote in his review for The New York Times. And the moment may be exactly right for a paranoid meditation on the possible end of the human race. The first season finale of AVENUE 5 follows at 10:15 p.m.

DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE 8 p.m. on CNN and Univision. Oh, how the world has changed since the last Democratic debate on Feb. 25. That night saw a crowded stage. Seven candidates vied to make their voices heard before Super Tuesday, and Senator Bernie Sanders was still the projected front-runner. Now two candidates remain, Sanders and former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. And the nation is scrambling to contain the spread of the coronavirus, which is why this debate, originally planned for Phoenix, has been moved to Washington to be filmed in a studio with no audience. Biden has been endorsed by several former candidates and politicians, while Sanders has vowed to power through, despite recent losses in several states. On Sunday, they likely will attack President Trumps handling of the health crisis, and Sanders is expected to challenge Biden on his policies and ability to defeat the president.

BLACK MONDAY 10 p.m. on Showtime. This comedy series about the stock market crash of 1987 is darkly resonant after Wall Streets fall this week, its worst since then. The second season chronicles the fallout of the crash. Mo (Don Cheadle) is on the run after being framed for murder while his former colleagues (played by Regina Hall and Andrew Rannells) carry on with their conniving ways.

ALWAYS SHINE (2016) Stream on Amazon, Crackle or Vudu; rent on Google Play, iTunes, YouTube. The director Sophia Takal threads sharp social commentary through a story about two frenemies in this tense psychological thriller. Beth (Caitlin FitzGerald) and Anna (Mackenzie Davis) head to Big Sur for a weekend getaway. Both are actresses, but Beth has found some measure of success by taking what she can get mostly demeaning roles that require nudity while Anna is more talented yet intense and uncompromising. Her jealousy is clear from the get-go, and it makes way for a grim time in the woods.

See the original post:

Whats on TV Sunday: Westworld and the Democratic Debate - The New York Times

The coronavirus pandemic could pose big problems for the two marquee political events before Election Day the Democratic and Republican national conventions this summer.

Party leaders are being forced to consider the possibility that the four-day gatherings may have to be dramatically scaled back or essentially cancelled, while the candidate nominating process and fundraising tens of millions of dollars for the events could be severely hampered, former convention officials told NBC News.

The economic impact on the host cities Milwaukee for the Democrats on July 13-16 and Charlotte for the Republicans on August 24-27 could be devastating. While the economic benefit for both 2016 conventions fell short of some projections, the GOP's Cleveland effort generated $142 million while in Philadelphia, the Democratic event brought about $231 million.

The conventions are still far enough down that both parties are still planning for them to start on time. But the unpredictability of the outbreak New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said his city's major arenas may be closed for months could leave organizers scrambling for alternatives in the not so distant future.

And the 2020 race has already become a non-contact campaign Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders have switched into "virtual" campaign mode, forgoing large events and Sunday's Democratic debate will not have a live audience.

The first issue to pop up for the national conventions has been the postponement of some state party conventions, the process by which certain state parties choose the delegates who will represent their states at the national conventions.

In an email to state party chairs on Thursday, DNC chairman Tom Perez said the committee's delegate selection team has been in contact with states that are contemplating changes to their delegate selection process in light of the coronavirus outbreak to ensure the candidate nominating process "can continue without major interruptions."

But that's not the biggest worry on the horizon for organizers, who, should the crisis fail to pass by the summer, could be pressed with having to make major changes to their plans, such as shortening the four-day conventions, holding them with only delegates in attendance or even going as far to stage a virtual nominating process.

The gatherings are large. The 2016 Republican National Convention pulled in about 44,400 visitors, according to a Cleveland State University study. Meanwhile, estimates for that year's Democratic National Convention were similar, with about 50,000 estimated to have attended.

Past organizers said the biggest issue on the immediate horizon involves the vast fundraising of millions of dollars to stage the events.

Let our news meet your inbox. The news and stories that matters, delivered weekday mornings.

"A big part of what we did was raising money this puts a lot of that in limbo," said Mike Dino, who served as CEO of the Denver host committee that helped organize the 2008 Democratic National Convention.

"And if you still want to bring all the delegates together, but you don't want anybody else there, as we're seeing in a lot of our public venues at this point, you don't have the people to pay for that that usually pay for that the corporations that want to attend to be a part of that, too," Dino continued.

For the upcoming conventions, Democrats are slated to have 4,750 delegates present while Republicans will feature 2,550. Those totals do not include alternate delegates who would also be in attendance. Based on 2016 totals for both the Republicans and Democrats, there could be anywhere from 75 speakers to more than 250 delivering addresses at the nominating events.

"Raising the money, to at least do what they had envisioned, is only going to get tougher at this point," he added, noting that the committees may even have to ask Congress for funding in the range of $10 million to $20 million for each convention. Congress already approved $100 million late last year in security funding for the conventions, but any new ask would be in addition to that and for non-security purposes.

David Gilbert, president and CEO of the Cleveland host committee which helped organize the 2016 Republican National Convention, told NBC News that from a planning perspective "something like this really is uncharted territory."

Even if the conventions go forward but have to be downsized, a major impact will be felt by the local economies in Milwaukee and Charlotte, which would be unlikely to see the anticipated return on their investments.

"The communities go through what they do because of the significant return they get," Gilbert said. "In terms of visitors, media exposure, influencers coming to their community and they would lose every bit of it. I mean, my heart really goes out to Charlotte and to Milwaukee right now."

If the conventions are dramatically scaled back or essentially canceled, Gilbert estimated the loss to the cities would be well into the hundreds of millions of dollars.

"A lot of the reasons these communities do it is also to have the eyes of the world on them," he added. "It's such a rare opportunity. When, otherwise, would cities, particularly cities like a Cleveland or a Milwaukee or a Charlotte that are great cities or mid-sized cities have 15,000 credentialed media in their community, and the byline is from that place? That's a hard pill to swallow if that's going to be lost."

At this point, Democratic and Republican officials said they closely monitoring the coronavirus outbreak but are focused on starting the conventions on time and holding them as long planned.

"We're still looking at planning a safe convention for everybody four months from now," a senior official on the Democratic National Convention committee told NBC News, adding they are "seriously monitoring" the crisis.

The outbreak, the official said, is being added to the "regular contingency planning that's part of planning for any convention."

Democratic convention CEO Joe Solmonese said his team is "in constant communication with the local, state, and federal officials responsible for protecting public health and security" as the "fluid" situation develops.

On the Republican side, Blair Ellis, the communications director for the GOP convention, said the organizers "prioritize the health and safety of delegates, media, community members, and staff and have full faith and confidence in the administration's aggressive actions to address COVID-19."

"As we move forward with planning, we remain in close contact with local, state and federal officials and we will continue to closely monitor the situation and work with all stakeholders and health authorities to ensure every necessary precaution is taken into account," she continued.

And what about the November election? If the outbreak doesn't abate, could it be postponed?

A 2004 Congressional Research Service report concluded that Congress has a better claim than the president when it comes to delaying the general election in the wake of a "sufficiently calamitous event." At the time of the report, the concerns were in the context of a possible terror attack.

"The power of Congress to protect the integrity of the presidential election, combined with its authority to set the time of election, would also seem to provide the Congress the power to postpone elections because of a national emergency," the report said.

Congress, the report said, could vote to "delegate" that power to the president.

Read the original:

Un-conventional? Coronavirus could risk Democratic, GOP national party gatherings - NBCNews.com

President Trump in an early morning tweet on Monday accused the"Fake News Media" and Democrats of trying to inflame the coronavirus outbreak as thevirus spreads globally and across the U.S.

The Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, is doing everything within its semi-considerable power (it used to be greater!) to inflame the CoronaVirus situation, far beyond what the facts would warrant, Trump tweeted.

Surgeon General, 'The risk is low to the average American, Trump added.

The Fake News Media and their partner, the Democrat Party, is doing everything within its semi-considerable power (it used to be greater!) to inflame the CoronaVirus situation, far beyond what the facts would warrant. Surgeon General, The risk is low to the average American.

Its unclear exactly what prompted Trump's tweet.

Many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have issued calls for putting politics aside as the nation grapples with the outbreak.

More than 500 cases have been confirmed in the U.S., and multiple people have died from the virus, mostly in Washington state.

At least eight states have declared states of emergency due to the outbreak, including Oregon, which announced its state of emergency Sunday after its number of cases doubled to 14.

Trump administration officials sought to ease fearsin a series of appearances on Sunday morning talk shows, but some Democrats have questioned the administrations response.

Despite Trumps claim last week that anyone who needs a test can get one, Sen. Chris MurphyChristopher (Chris) Scott MurphyCoronavirus takes toll on Capitol Hill Graham warns of 'aggressive' response to Iran-backed rocket attack that killed US troops US paints murky picture of Russian disinformation on coronavirus MORE (D-Conn.) said thats not the case in his state.

Issues over available tests make it difficult to assess the scope of the epidemic, Murphy said Sunday on CBSs Face the Nation.

Surgeon General Jerome Adams said on CNNs State of the Union that the nation is entering a so-called mitigation phase and people should not panic even as more cases appear.

Trump in tweets later Monday praised Vice President Pence and others members of the White House coronavirus task force, saying his decision to restrict travel from virus-stricken nations saved many lives.

Great job being done by the @VP and the CoronaVirus Task Force. Thank you!

The BEST decision made was the toughest of them all - which saved many lives. Our VERY early decision to stop travel to and from certain parts of the world!

"So much FAKE NEWS!" he added in another post.

So much FAKE NEWS!

Updated at 9:27 a.m.

Read more:

Trump: 'Fake News Media,' Democrats working to 'inflame the CoronaVirus situation' | TheHill - The Hill

Bernie Sanders has placed democratic socialism at the center of his presidential campaign and his vision for a better America. For proof, he points to Scandinavian countries like Sweden.

Sanders argument takes as its starting point the perception that the Scandinavian third-way economic model of democratic socialism combining the wealth creation of capitalism with the safety net of socialism works well, and that the U.S. could reach the same socioeconomic outcomes and prosperity by expanding the role of government.

A prosperous economy was built before the welfare states we know today were established.

But as a Scandinavian political scientist who has studied Nordic politics, economy and history in depth, I do not feel the Bern. The Vermont senator has embraced an urban legend; his love affair with Scandinavian socialism gets it all wrong.

Contrary to the prevailing narrative, the success of Nordic countries like Sweden as measured by relatively high living standards accompanied by low poverty, with government-funded education through university, universal health coverage, generous parental-leave policies and long life spans precedes the contemporary welfare state.

Get the think newsletter.

In fact, when we examine Nordic politics, economy and history as exemplified by Sweden, we find that the Northern European success story was not achieved thanks to a welfare model funded by high taxes, but perhaps despite it. It is high time Sanders stops misleading his followers on this score.

Research has suggested that the Northern European success story has its roots in cultural rather than economic factors. The Scandinavian countries of Sweden, Norway and Denmark, which have a combined population roughly comparable to the greater New York City area, historically developed remarkably high levels of social trust, a robust work ethic and considerable social cohesion, according to economic experts and scholars such as Assar Lindbeck and Nima Sanandaji.

These societal qualities predate and are independent from the formation of the modern welfare state. Indeed, on that foundation, a prosperous economy was built before the welfare states we know today were established.

Eleven years before Adam Smith published his classic book The Wealth of Nations in 1776, regarded as the foundation of contemporary economic thought, a Swedish parliamentarian had already published his own work advocating for the necessity of free markets in fostering economic prosperity.

During the following century, Sweden introduced extensive economic laissez-faire reforms deregulating the financial sector and promoting free enterprise, free competition and free trade. These reforms prompted Swedens transition to capitalism.

During the following 60 years of prosperity - during the first half of the 20th century - tax rates were generally lower than in other European countries and in the U.S. The fact that the country had participated in neither the First nor Second World War, which had devastated other European industrial nations, further contributed to Swedens development.

That economic freedom didnt last and neither did its economic growth. The 30 years to come were characterized by the expansion of the generous cradle-to-grave welfare state that Sanders admires, characterized by government intervention, an increase in tax rates and the re-regulation of previously free markets. The countrys total tax load peaked in 1990 at a rate of 52.3 percent, with a corresponding negative impact on business and job creation.

Talent and capital moved out of Sweden to escape the tax burden, with furniture giant IKEA leaving for the Netherlands and the worlds leading food packaging company, Tetra Pak, for Switzerland. In 1970 Sweden was the fourth-richest member of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) club of industrial countries, but had dropped to 13th in 1993.

The hardship didnt end there. A subsequent financial crisis in the 1990s saw the growth of the gross domestic product sink and unemployment spike, while the government raised interest rates to a staggering 500 percent in an effort to avoid devaluing its currency. Swedens long-standing social democratic Minister of Finance KjellOlof Feldt concluded: That whole thing with democratic socialism was absolutely impossible. It just didnt work. There was no other way to go than market reform.

The true lesson to be learned from the Scandinavian experience is that the Nordic-style welfare-state models havent worked nearly as well as American democratic socialists like to pretend.

Since then, Sanders and his supporters should be aware, Sweden actually worked to revise its economic model based on lessons drawn from its recession. State-owned companies were sold and financial markets were deregulated; public monopolies were replaced with competition.

The Nordic country needed healthy companies and skilled workers, so top tax rates were rolled back while government welfare programs were redesigned. These reforms laid the ground for todays competitive market-oriented economy based on international openness and the promotion of global free trade.

Rather than persistently suggesting that the American Dream can be realized by expanding government or raising taxes, it is time for Sanders and his comrades to go back to school and study history. The true lesson to be learned from the Scandinavian experience is that the Nordic-style welfare-state models havent worked nearly as well as American democratic socialists like to pretend.

Daniel Schatz

Daniel Schatz is a visiting scholar at New York Universitys Center for European and Mediterranean Studies and an International Security Program fellow at New America. He has served as a visiting scholar at Harvard, Stanford and Columbia.

Read more:

Bernie Sanders is wrong on democratic socialism in Sweden, and everywhere else - NBC News

Confronted by the coronavirus menace, politicians and governments around the world are thrashing about wildly, trying to decide what to do for the best. Politics isnt working is a common refrain among disaffected citizens in the modern era. But at this uniquely stressful moment, it really does appear to be true. While they mean well, most leaders havent got a clue.

The dawning realisation that national politicians cannot be relied upon to do the right or sensible thing, whatever that may turn out to be, has serious long-term implications for democracy and the principle of democratic consent. If the crisis is protracted, a catastrophic loss of confidence in the way the pandemic is managed could lead to unpredictable social disruption across many countries.

As is the case with victims of the disease, underlying conditions and vulnerabilities in politics too are being painfully exposed.

Its becoming clear, for example, that healthcare systems, even in wealthy countries such as the US, are chronically under-resourced and unprepared. Confusion reigns widely, fuelled by conflicting official advice in different countries about public gatherings, travel, and self-isolation.

Some leaders may emerge with their reputations enhanced. For others, the opposite holds true. The virus has already made fools of the worlds two most powerful men. Xi Jinping, Chinas president, has faced unprecedented criticism over his handling of the first recorded outbreak in Wuhan. He initially steered well clear of the problem an early example of social distancing.

But Xi has struggled since to contain the political and human fallout. The death from Covid-19 of Li Wenliang, a young doctor who sounded the alarm in Wuhan in December but was gagged by Communist party officials, sparked an online revolt. Xi finally ventured to the city last week, lavishing praise on its beleaguered residents in what almost sounded like an apology.

Predictably, Donald Trumps reaction has been all about him. Among other inanities, he suggested the pandemic was a fake Democrat plot to harm his re-election chances. Ignoring the science and minimising the threat, he claimed his Mexican border wall had somehow immunised Americans, and likened the foreign virus to an alien invasion. Its embarrassingly obvious Trump is not up to the job.

Both Trump and Xi could pay a heavy price. The US leader may have survived impeachment, but come November many voters will not forget or forgive this failure of leadership in a crisis. Xis aura of paternal infallibility has shattered. Trust has gone. To restore his grip, it is suggested, he may resort to more intrusive social controls, surveillance and censorship. Yet increased repression could prompt a career-ending backlash.

Trumps knee-jerk reaction in pulling up the drawbridge and blaming others is not unique. Fear not facts has led European leaders such as Austrias Sebastian Kurz to act alone, hastily closing borders and barring people from specific countries. These divisions recall Europes chaotic response to the 2015 migrant crisis when governments failed to agree a collective approach.

For the European Union, the pandemic is turning into a political nightmare. The commission in Brussels is struggling to keep up, relaxing rules on deficit spending that have already been broken. Piecemeal, national-level policy-making is a gift to Eurosceptics, not least rightwing populists keen to exploit splits, and could have lasting consequences for European cohesion. Public confidence may take a big hit.

Theres no doubt politicians face genuine dilemmas. In Italy, Europes worst-affected state, the prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, was initially attacked for doing too much, by ordering widespread testing in Lombardy, and subsequently for doing too little. What is certain is that Italy has received little help from the rest of Europe the subject of a bitter complaint last week.

Now that Italy is in total lockdown, it is being studied like a laboratory guinea pig. Boris Johnson, aware, like other leaders, that his reputation is at stake, treads a fine line between similarly drastic measures and keep calm and carry on stoicism. If it all goes wrong, his defence will be that he followed medical advice. Suddenly, experts are back on top in Britain if only as potential fall guys.

Many look for leadership to Angela Merkel, Germanys unflappable chancellor and Europes most respected politician. Yet her assessment last week, that Covid-19 would infect two out of three Germans and there was not a lot governments could do about it, was less than reassuring.

Merkel called for solidarity, common sense and open-heartedness. But her emphasis on Europe-wide cooperation carried a whiff of hypocrisy. Germany and France have limited exports of protective masks and equipment to safeguard domestic supply hardly an act of solidarity with the neighbours. Nor is Berlin rushing to bail out floundering eurozone partners.

Looked at globally, the politicians performance to date has been mostly unimpressive

The parallel absence of an effective, joined-up global strategy is also casting multilateral institutions in an unflattering light. The World Health Organization, the lead UN agency that might be expected to wield decisive influence, appears strangely diffident at times fearful, perhaps, of provoking a political backlash from heavy-hitters such as China.

Global financial institutions are not doing any better. The IMF has thrown $50bn at the problem. Interest rates have been randomly cut and emergency budgets announced. But compared with the 2008 financial crisis, when governments and central banks collaborated to stave off a banking collapse, international coordination to calm markets and reduce risk is lacking. Virus-related economic damage may thus be worse, and longer lasting, than might have been the case.

Despite all the angst, the WHOs chief, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, complained about alarming levels of inaction by politicians and it seems many governments remain in denial. That may be due to vanity (in the case of North Koreas defiantly face-mask-free Kim Jong-un) or incapacity (in the case of poorer countries). Iran repeatedly denied it had a problem, until its leaders started dying. Now it is reportedly digging mass graves.

Unscrupulous politicians stand accused of using the pandemic as cover for furtive power-grabs. The timing of last weeks high-level purge by Saudi Arabias crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, and a constitutional coup by Russias president, Vladimir Putin, may be coincidental. Or maybe not.

In Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu is manoeuvring to stay on as prime minister, despite his corruption trial and his lack of a parliamentary majority, in the face of what he now deems an exceptional national threat. Its conceivable Trump could use new clashes with militia in Iraq to revive his Iran vendetta and distract attention from his viral incompetence.

The crisis also raises the danger of governments taking so-called temporary emergency powers and imposing sweeping, illiberal constraints on citizens, journalists and social media that subsequently become permanent. Thats what happened after the 9/11 convulsion, when the US and allies decided to largely ignore international human rights protections in the name of fighting terrorism.

Looked at globally, the politicians performance to date has been mostly unimpressive. Yet the fundamental question raised by the pandemic is not one solely for them. It concerns each individual, community, and nation. Will the challenges posed by the virus be allowed to drive us further apart or used to help bring us closer together? The answer hangs in the balance. It could go either way.

Read the original:

Covid-19 is exposing the frailty in autocrats and democrats alike - The Guardian