America’s Response to the Plague

Sometime in early May, Rachel Maddow described the dramatically different ways people were reacting to the epidemic, particularly referencing news and commentary by reporters and pundits in the mainstream versus those in the conservative news media. She used the terms Earth One and Earth Two to describe the disparity in the ways of viewing and responding to the pandemic. Although this split is present to a certain extent in all the places that the coronavirus has struck, it is predominantly an American phenomenon.

To expand the metaphor: on Earth One, there are people such as the vast majority of those who did not vote for Trump, who pay attention to and take seriously what public health professionals and epidemiologists say and advise.

On Earth One, people are concerned about the health and safety of themselves and others. There is a great deal of fear of be-

Page 78

coming or causing someone else to become a victim of the plague. What anger there is, is directed toward the stupidity and ineptitude of the Trump-led federal government and its bungled response to the virus.

On Earth Two, the primary concern is over restrictions. The predominant effects are anger and outrage. How dare “the government” tell us that there are things we can’t do and things that we must do. In preparation for writing about this, I have been watching Rachel Maddow on CNBC and Tucker Carlson on Fox the same evening. The disparities are truly jarring. Rachel Maddow’s broadcast is full of reporting on the harm the virus is causing, stories of victims and caretakers, and discussion of government responses and policies. Tucker Carlson’s segment is filled with stories of people protesting against restrictions, claiming their constitutional rights are being violated, stories of what are seen as overly restrictive or unnecessary rules, reporting on the economic hardships—which are blamed on the shutdowns and restrictions—and unrealistic happy talk about how we have, or will have, effective treatments and that great progress is being made on developing a vaccine; to say nothing about the claims that this is all somehow a hoax or some sort of anti-Trump conspiracy.

So how do we understand this?

The inhabitants of Earth One seem to be responding and behaving in rational ways; the worst they can be accused of is perhaps being overly cautious or a touch paranoid. Earth Two people seem seriously out of touch with the realities of this viral epidemic. There seems to be a significant amount of denial that seems to be more driven by ideology than by anything resembling objective reality.

The ideological aspects of the Earth Two perspective have a familiar cast: the valorization of “freedom,” negative views of “the government,” loyalty to Trump and the Republican Party, and extreme hostility toward those perceived to be on the other side. There are many possible explanations for the extreme splitting as well as for the seemingly irrational beliefs and behaviors of the Earth Twoers.

Although the apparent lack of concern for the welfare of others suggests that the Earth Two types are perhaps lacking in empathy, how do we then account for the many citizens of Earth Two who are involved in acts of kindness, caring, and charity toward

Page 79

others, including family, friends, neighbors, and their community? Of the many factors involved, I would like to focus briefly on two. The first is somewhat prosaic, but something that is often not given its due. This is simply the reality that people will do whatever they have to first, supply the necessities for what they and their loved ones feel they need to survive, and second, what they feel they need to prosper, or at least not lose what they have.

Throughout history, people have taken huge risks, not uncommonly to their lives, for the sake of financial gain. There are many jobs—in the past mostly done by men—where workers’ lives are at risk. If the job pays well enough, there will be many who will choose to take the gamble and accept the risks in return for financial gain. The motivation can vary, anything from avarice to providing basic necessities for yourself and those for whom you feel responsible. The combination of American individualism—you and you alone are responsible for your well-being—and the sense of independence that makes it shameful to accept help from others, particularly the government, fuels the drive to get back to making money. From the freedom-loving individualistic perspective that is so widespread in this nation, there are many, mostly younger (under 50) people, who would risk getting the virus knowing that there is a chance of getting very sick and dying, but that the mortality risk is small enough (most likely well under 1%) to justify taking the risk in return for the financial rewards.

Then there is the American response. There are several aspects. We can start with the xenophobia: blaming it on others now coalescing on the Chinese. Then there is the arrogance and disdain for foreigners, anyone who is not an American. Other nations have responded largely by imposing strict rules, shutdowns, stay at home orders, and social distancing in response to the clear necessity to do what has always been done when the plague strikes. It’s quite straightforward: prevent those who are sick from coming into contact with those who aren’t.

But there is widespread agreement that rules and restrictions are not the American way. We value our freedom more than others do and we are proud of it. We are not like everyone else, we are exceptional. The recent behavior of some governors, as when they refuse to mandate the necessary restrictions, and at times actively prevent local governments from enacting restrictions when the virus is actively spreading through their states, is a dramatic demonstration that for Earth Twoers “freedom” trumps all. No sacrifice

Page 80

of life or wealth is too great in the defense of “liberty.” Live free or die is being enacted in a very concrete way.

Then there is the grandiosity, so dramatically expressed by Trump, that we are immune. That it’s no big deal and the danger is exaggerated; it couldn’t happen here, and when it did happen, that we have, or will shortly have, effective treatments and a preventative. Although Trump is the cheerleader for the worst of this, these attitudes and behavior resonate with the beliefs of many Americans. There are a lot of Earth Two inhabitants out there.

But now to the second factor, one of considerably greater psychohistorical interest. One of the aspects of Lloyd deMause’s work that I always appreciated is the importance he gave to the human propensity to engage in sacrificial behavior. The arena where this is most often enacted is warfare. Throughout history, in times of war people are called upon to make sacrifices. The most obvious sacrifices are those made by soldiers who are killed or maimed, but civilians suffer as well, particularly in our wars over the last century in which civilian casualties have far outnumbered losses to armed forces personnel in most conflicts. Then there is the tremendous economic sacrifice entailed when war disrupts ordinary economic activity and forces so many to devote themselves to supporting and funding the war effort. Although these sacrifices are destructive and painful to the victims and their loved ones, in times of war they are accepted. They are most often glorified and even sanctified, though there are war industries that may benefit.

There has been much talk of being at war with the evil foreign (Chinese) enemy, the mysterious virus from the East; and where there’s war, there’s sacrifice. What’s different from the usual wartime situations is that instead of the primary human sacrifices being of young men, now it is the old, infirm, and the poor who are being sacrificed.

The sacrifices that are being called for when those who clamor for business to reopen and restrictions to be lifted are not on the same order of magnitude as those that have been asked of people in wartime where we are alleged to be involved in a titanic struggle against the forces of evil—fascism or communism—or to make the world safe for democracy. The Earth Two inhabitants do seem to feel they are in a war, but what they’re fighting for is to not lose the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed. They are fighting for the American dream and the American way, to be able

Page 81

to maintain their level of consumption and the hope that the future will bring even greater wealth, and the freedom to be able to pursue financial gain in any way they can.

Here’s an image that I find particularly bizarre but telling. A recent BBC America news report showed video footage of, somewhere in suburban New York, cars in a mile-long line with an up to five-hour wait time, at a food pantry. Many of the cars were Mercedes, BMWs, and expensive SUVs. Evidently, for many people their values, as expressed in their lifestyle choices, are to spend their money on luxury automobiles rather than have the financial means to carry them through two months of decreased income.

Page 82