When so many practise individualism and spurn collaboration, prospect for global anti-virus campaign dim 

In a recent letter to the editor of the Ottawa Citizen, D. J. Phillips disagreed that everyone should be compelled to wear a face-mask.

“It is your right to wear a face-mask,” Phillips conceded. ”However, it is not your right to inflict your preference on anyone else. If you feel better, use one, but don’t push your fears on people that are very comfortable not wearing one.”

He (or she) completely disregarded the fact that, by refusing to wear a mask in public, he exposes people nearby to the expulsion of his possibly virus-tainted breath. It’s the fastest way to spread the virus and increase the extent of its infections and fatalities.

I don’t think that Phillips’ insensitive views are shared by most Canadians, who are dutifully donning face masks when visiting stores and parks, and also self-distancing. But clearly thousands of people – primarily those in their 20s, 30s and 40s – are blatantly mingling without any effort to protect others from contamination.

The situation in the United States, of course, is far worse. The premature reactivation of the country’s economy, along with the baneful reopening of public markets and beaches, has predictably led to a massive resurgence of Covid-19 in most states.

The motivation for this recklessness has several causes. The main one is the big corporations’ desperate urge to reopen the country’s mills, factories, farms, mines, parks, bars, and other sectors of its lagging economy. The decline of profits incurred from the pandemic was motivation enough for them, as was the concurrent drastic rise in unemployment. But the undue haste in trying to regain economic normality in the middle of a still widespread pandemic is having the horrendously opposite effect.

Then there is President Trump’s obsession with the looming federal election. With polls now exposing a slump in his popularity, he is almost entirely fixated on winning another term in office. So he brushes aside, minimizes, and even denies the mounting peril of a reactivated pandemic. His priority now is to smear the Democrats, belittle Joe Biden, and rally the Republicans in Congress behind his re-election campaign. To him, nothing else matters, not even the renewed pandemic upsurge. It’s a narcissistic, self-indulgent decision that will likely squash any chance he may have otherwise had to win re-election.

The most deadly aspect of the pandemic’s expansion, however, is the refusal of so many people to accept and use the essential protective measures. They regard self-distancing and the wearing of face-masks as arbitrary impositions on their basic freedom. They are to be seen in droves at parties and other gatherings, maskless and crammed close together.

Individualism trumps co-operation

This irresponsible behavior is the direct result of an economic and cultural ideology that ranks individualism above collaboration. Capitalism is built on the foundation of competition. The greatest fortunes are made and the strongest power wielded by those who are the most ruthless in the inequitable capitalist “winner take all” system.

The virulent flaws of unfair and uncontrolled capitalism have been vividly exposed by the coronavirus assault. Kevin Baker deplored them in his column in the July issue of Harper’s magazine.

“The challenges we will have to face,” he writes, “cannot be met by a society so divided, so given over to the wealthiest and most powerful. Everything that supposedly elevated the United States above the rest of the world – meager unions, low taxes, inadequate consumer protection, a dearth of government regulations, a flimsy social safety net, a complete lack of central planning – has instead mired us in a crisis that much of the world is already climbing out of.”

Baker was describing the many detrimental effects of capitalism in the United States, but we Canadians shouldn’t exempt our country from a similar lack of teamwork. It’s not nearly as disruptive as it is in the U.S., but discord among provinces, and between provinces and the federal government, are far from rare – and certainly not during a pandemic.

Worldwide anti-virus effort needed

If there was ever a time when collaboration was most urgently needed, it is not just between cities, states or provinces, or adjacent countries. The Covid-19’s expanse is world-wide, so the battle to overcome it should also be worldwide. Admittedly, there has been some helpful provision of masks, ventilators, and other medical aids between countries, and under the aegis of the World Health Organization. But the extent of true partnership in confronting and containing the pandemic has been minimal.

It’s the result of a global miscarriage that can be traced back to the primordial division of the human race into tribes, clans, classes, races, colours, castes and breeds, and later into the citizens of 180 different countries and thousands of cities, towns and hamlets. Later still, they subdivided into families, social groups, and eventually into the believers of different religious.

This vast fragmentation of the human race spawned racism, conflict, and fierce economic and political rivalry. Eventually, such constant discord led to the outbreak of warfare on a colossal and often worldwide scale.

No other species has developed within its cohorts such an extensive dislike – even hatred – of those who do not share their looks, beliefs, or heritage.

It is hardly surprising, then, that humanity is so ill-fitted for a world-wide crusade that has to be a true collaboration if it is to be successful. If thousands of us balk at even wearing face-masks, the prospect of mobilizing political and business leaders around the world for this mission is far from promising.

The grim reality is that the dominance of individualism over co-operation still prevails in the minds and creeds of the humans who control our governments, banks and corporations. Their greed pre-empts our need.

*     *     *

In closing on this rather doleful note, I refer readers to a book titled The World Without Us, written 13 years ago by Alan Weisman. It relates what our world would look like after global warming, over-population, and the man-made extinction of hundreds of animals, fish and birds leads also to the extinction of humankind.

It is not, however, a book that is entirely devoid of hope. There was still time, at least 17 years ago, to avert such a catastrophe, so the book’s many admirers at that time – including the New York Times, Washington Post, Boston Globe – and in Canada the Globe and Mail, Ottawa Citizen and Windsor Star – did not stint in their praise. Especially after the book won the Best Book of the Year award by Time and Entertainment Weekly.

I doubt whether Weisman would retain even a smidgeon of such optimism if he were to rewrite or update his book today. But it’s still well worth reading. Despite its somber tone, reviewers called it “compulsively readable,” “Weisman’s research is prodigious and impressive,” “A curiously refreshing vision of the apocalypse,” and “It should be broadly read and discussed.”

I haven’t inquired whether Weisman’s book is still available, but it was such a huge bestseller that I’m sure it can be obtained from Amazon – perhaps even from your local library if it’s still not closed by the pandemic.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s