The COVID-19 outbreak: How has political ideology effected the response of governments?

The Coronovirus - or more specifically, the disease it initiates, Covid-19 - broke out in the Hubei province of China in mid November 2019, and for two months was centred around the city of Wuhan. It has since become a global pandemic, the like of which has not been seen since the Spannish ‘flu of 1918-19. As of 5 April 2020, there are 1,245,741 cases and it has claimed the lives of 67,928 people.

There have been frightening epidemics in our past, the most serious being the AIDS pandemic of the 1980s. But most of the outbreaks – such as CJD and SARS – have been more limited in scale. For most societies the only way to prevent contagion has been self-isolation – something that was not attempted in the era of the Spanish ‘flu due to ignorance of virology. It is the first time in history that most of the human race has been put under the same emergency restraints.

Governments are obviously our main tool in dealing with the situation, and they come with a variety of ideological agendas, principles, attitudes and needs. They have to make the difficult decisions, not all of which – or possibly, not many of which – will please their citizens, or lead to the optimal outcome. Leftist governments are broadly more likely to look after the mass of people, whilst the Right is generally less expensive for taxpayers.

Economic theory plays a great role: While socialists maintain that wealth, health and comfort can be produced by government intervention to make the majority relatively more well off; neo-liberalism lets market forces take control beyond guarding the often greater freedoms of a small minority who it maintains we all depend on for mere survival. That is not to say that right-wingers are all miserly – the traditionalist decency of a conservative, or the socialist tendencies of a national-socialist, may see fit to intervene helpfully at times, albeit possibly in a discriminatory fashion. Likewise, some left-wingers are content to leave economics to market forces, merely with some restraining factors that make the market inefficient according to fundamentalist free marketeers.

For most people, politics and economics can not operate in a normal fashion during a global pandemic that threatens to cull a portion of the human race. Only the most ardent neo-liberal would not veer towards more government intervention under such circumstances. But the capacities of governments in such an emergency is dependent on how wisely they have practised the above theories. A state that has liquidised its infrastructure can do little, as can a state that has exhausted itself pleasing its population.

There are lots of factors other than politics that effect how well a country can cope. Obviously the resources it can bring to bear are highly dependent on its collective wealth. Larger countries can shut down regions to slow the spread of the contagion and save relatively more people. More authoritarian regimes will find it easier to limit movement and freedoms. In far eastern cultures it is normal to obey authority, in America it is culturally fashionable to try and ignore it.

In the table below Coronavirus statistics are given for selected countries along with their relative wealth and political attitudes. It is an unscientific selection of states, most of which the British media has shown a recent interest in, but others have been added due to their geographic or political situation. They are listed in the order they announced their first Covid-19 cases – these were mostly from late January 2020 through to early March. The Coronovirus figures were current on 4 April, while the financial statistics were published by the UN in 2019:

Country: GDP per Cases Deaths Tests Party Politics:

capita per per per in

(US$): 1 million: 1 million: 1 million: Power:

China 10,098 57 2 ? Communist, authoritarian & centrist

South Korea 31,430 198 3 8,875 Democrats, centre to centre left

USA 65,111 931 25 4,740 Republicans, nationalist & right wing

Australia 53,825 223 1 11,653 Liberals, National Party, centre right

Germany 46,563 1,147 17 10,962 CDU. SDP, CSU, centrist, centre left, cons.

Italy 32,946 2,061 254 10,870 Democrats, S5M centre left,national-socialist

Russia 11,162 32 0.3 4,379 Russia Party authoritarian & right wing

UK 41,030 617 64 2,698 Conservatives nationalist & right wing

Iran 5,506 720 45 2,214 Moderation&Dev. Islamic, centrist

Denmark 59,795 704 28 7,055 Social Democrats leftist

Hungary 17,463 70 3 2,011 Fidesz nationalist & far right

Ghana 2,223 7 0.2 0 National Democratic Party centre left

Portugal 23,030 1,032 26 7,952 Socialist Party centre left

China:

Ruling Party: Communist Politics: Authoritarian & centrist

The Chinese response to coronavirus has included the strict lockdown of Wuhan and surrounding areas for more than a month, which featured mass monitoring of citizens. Punishments and rewards were offered to encourage obedience. Across the country 800 million people were ordered to isolate themselves at home. Conditions have been relaxed as the virus seems to be abating, but lockdown continues in Hubei province.

Chinese public health-care consists of both public and private institutions. Around 95% of the population has at least basic health insurance and the government hopes to have everybody covered by 2020. The hospitals were struggling with demand before the outbreak, and various temporary field-hospitals have had to be set up. All the same, some citizens have been left waiting for a week or more before they can get treatment for the virus.

The World Health Organisation has said that ‘In the face of a previously unknown virus, China has rolled out perhaps the most ambitious, agile, and aggressive disease containment effort in history.’ The victory is due to an efficient lockdown and quarantine procedure.

As it is such a poor country it is perhaps unsurprising that there has been little attempt to save the peoples’ economic livelihood – despite China’s claim to be ‘communist’. But the country’s reaction has been truly impressive.

CNBC 25 Febuary, The Guardian 16 March

South Korea:

Ruling Party: Democratic Party Politics: Centrist to centre left

In Korea there have been no lockdowns, and travel is only restricted from Hubei province in China. Instead the government strategy has been one of aggressive testing, tracking the paths of those with the virus, and transparency in the media. It has worked very well.

South Korea has an impressive universal healthcare system – though those on the peripheries of society sometimes fall through the net due to insurance complications. But all who have tested positive for Covid-19, or are showing symptoms, have their hospital fees waived.

The South Koreans are confident that their government can tackle the crisis efficiently, and there have been little economic consequences due to the lack of any lockdown.

The Independent 19 March

USA:

Ruling Party: Republican Politics: Nationalist & right wing

The USA is predicted to become the centre of the global pandemic in the coming month. The federal government has banned travel from China and the EU, although not the UK – it has offered very little help to the chronically strained health system. The American lockdowns are not enforced by federal authorities, with emphasis put on individual responsibility. The brunt of the crisis is being taken up by the state governors, who have shut down non-essential businesses and banned public gatherings. President Trump plans to put an end to the lockdowns to save the economy - one Texas official is quoted as stating ‘Older people would rather die than let Covid-19 harm US economy.’

Nearly 10% of US citizens are without medical insurance, and it is up to state governors whether they get help or not – some of the poorer states can barely afford it - and doctors and nurses beg for protective equipment online. Government, health officials and the media have informed the nation that more people die of seasonal flu than coronavirus. Donald Trump has asserted that the virus is ‘Chinese’.

New York State, with the most confirmed cases in America, has won praise for its efforts in fighting the virus, and is currently scouring the world for ventilators, masks and gowns. Andrew Cuomo, the state governor, has vehemently criticised and complained to the federal government.

The Independent 19 March, The Guardian 24 March

Australia:

Ruling Parties: Liberals, National Party Politics: Centre right, centre right

- coalition

Australia has closed all pubs, restaurants and sporting facilities but has left some elements of the lockdown up to state authorities. Out of the countries selected it has been one of the most successful in terms of testing, and although its medical facilities have been stretched they have not been over-stretched. Having had relatively few fatalities, the government now believes it is ‘flattening the curve’.

Australia’s healthcare system involves public and private running in tandem. All citizens are eligible for medicare, which provides public treatment at little or no cost. Wealthier Australians can pay for private insurance and use the more luxurious private system – they are subject to an extra tax if they don’t. In recent years the private systems have been under strain financially, and since the federal government banned all elective surgery in late March parts of it are in danger of going into liquidation and making medical staff redundant at a time of medical crisis. As the centre right has traditionally supported the private system by reducing the public one to a safety-net, this may affect the electoral chances of the centre right government.

In Australia recipients of the sick payment – who have been broadened to include those who cannot work from home and are not essential – usually have to wait at least a week before they receive help. Under the emergency conditions this wait has been waived apart from for those who have large assets. Critics complain that the federal government should roll out a salary compensation scheme like the UK, but prime minister Morrison has said that the system deals with the problem as it is – despite sick payments being significantly less than most people’s wages. Suggestions have been made to use the Disaster Relief Fund to compensate struggling businesses.

The Guardian 12 March, The Guardian 28 March, The Guardian 5 April, Vox.com

Germany:

Ruling Parties: Christian Democrats, Social Democrats, Politics: Centrist, centre left,

Christian Social Union – coalition conservative

Germany has a high rate of Covid-19 infection – it is second only to Italy in terms of cases per million - but its mortality rates are extremely low. This has been put down to widespread testing of suspected cases, whilst countries like the UK and Italy are only attempting to test symptomatic cases. The government is expecting to partially lift the lockdown at the end of April.

Over the last twenty years the German health-care system has been progressively modernised by both the Christian and Social Democrats, which means it is doing relatively well in terms of medical professionals, hospital beds, masks and ventilators. Whilst the country can carry out about 500,000 tests per week, the UK can manage just over 70,000 per week.

Germany has been largely relying on old laws to deal with the crisis. Emergency powers due to an epidemic are dealt with in a 1968 law, allowing intervention by the federal government and the states to assist each other in terms of policing and medicine. In 2008 the government assisted 1.5 million workers by subsidising employers to keep people employed in the face of the credit crunch, and it is doing the same again. Labour law keeps the workforce generally well protected.

DW 19 March, Personnel Today 20 March, CNBC 3 April

Italy:

Ruling Parties: Democratic Party, Italia Viva, Politics: Centre left, centre left,

S5M - coalition national -socialist

Italy appeared well prepared when the first three cases of coronavirus – two of them Chinese tourists – were reported on 31 January. They were isolated in hospitals, and travel bans to and from China were put in place. But since then, along with Spain, Italy has become the most badly hit country in the global pandemic.

Unbeknownst to the authorities, a case later known by the media as ‘Patient One’, had been miss-diagnosed around mid-January and allowed to spread the virus, before being belatedly tested. The outbreaks in the north were at first erroneously linked to the three known cases. Various towns and cities were put on lockdown, but the government exempted the industrial heartland around Milan. The pandemic spread anyway.

Hospitals have become clogged up, especially in Lombardy, and there is a shortage of masks and ventilators. Doctors have complained about being forced into decisions not to treat elderly and disabled victims, and to concentrate on healthier, more economically viable cases.

More recently Italy has implemented a national lockdown and travel ban of a severity unknown in other western states: Leaving home for reasons other than work, health or emergency has been banned. All public business, entertainment and religious premises have been closed except for groceries and pharmacies.

Whilst some have been working from home, many Italian workers can only perform their jobs in factories, supermarkets and steel mills. In mid-March there were a series of national strikes over their safety. Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte negotiated a safety protocol, and tweeted ‘...Italy does not stop.’ But since the national lockdown workers have been sent home on paid leave.

The Five Star Movement – euro-sceptic, anti-immigration and environmentalist – is left wing in terms of economics. As part of the government coalition it has been cohabiting with the centre left relatively well in the coronavirus crisis, although frictions have occurred previously over the S5M Foreign Department’s treatment of immigrants.

The Guardian 10 March, Politico 15 March, EuObserver 5 April

Russia:

Ruling Party: Russia Party Politics: Authoritarian & right wing

Earlier this year a facial recognition system covering the whole of Moscow was unveiled provoking an unusual amount of opposition – campaigners filed lawsuits against the government for infringement of privacy. But the onset of Covid-19 has made the system popular in some quarters. Punishment for breaking containment laws are severe – a five year prison sentence for spreading false information about coronavirus has been deemed necessary and a seven year sentence for breaking lockdown regulations. Most of the actual restrictions have been left to the regional governments, although the nationwide ‘non-working week’ has been extended until the end of April.

Russia is an outlier when it comes to the global pandemic, with relatively few cases reported, but authorities are beginning to suspect that many sick people have remained isolated at home and not asked for medical help. Between January 2019 and January 2020 admissions to hospital for pneumonia increased by 30% - critics have questioned whether the Russian government is massaging the figures to prevent panic.

It has yet to be seen how the Russian healthcare system will deal with the onset of mass Covid-19 cases if or when it begins. Vladimir Putin has sent medical aid to the USA in a public relations move that may look stupid if things get bad.

The Guardian 24 March, CNN 29 March, The Moscow Times 4 April

United Kingdom:

Ruling Party: Conservatives Politics: Nationalist & right wing.

The UK government at first reacted to Covid-19 with only a partial lockdown, offering advice to only go out when necessary. But a week into the crisis it closed all pubs, restaurants, cafes, shops apart from groceries and most schooling. There is a chronic shortage of ventilators and hospital beds. Testing the symptomatic has proved difficult, efforts to fully test and track these cases have been abandoned.

Due to cutbacks and privatisations, and the loss of many medical staff due to Brexit, the NHS had been in almost permanent crisis before the outbreak. Government incompetence has compounded the situation: ventilators were not ordered from UK suppliers whilst they were being exported to other countries; co-operation with the EU was flatly turned down for ideological reasons.

Government officials have mooted the idea of ending lockdown to safe-guard the economy, suggesting a ‘herd immunity’ theory may come in to play. Boris Johnson, the prime minister, has officially neither accepted nor discarded these ideas. Policy directives have asserted that those over eighty years of age and those with comorbid diagnoses should not be admitted to hospital if tested positive for Covid-19. In this selection, the UK is second only to Italy in terms of fatalities per million people, and is likely to catch up.

All private employees and the self-employed have been offered 80% of their wages by the government should they be temporarily laid off due to coronavirus. But many people’s wages are very variable over time, a method of setting a level of payment has not yet been reached, and the money is not yet forthcoming. Furthermore the scheme is dependent on employers to receive and distribute the money – if an employer goes bust there is no special remuneration for the redundant workers. Many workers have no rights to sick pay or redundancy awards in the UK.

The Guardian 24 March, The Guardian 31 March

Iran:

Ruling Party: Moderation and Development Politics: Centrist with Islamic democracy

Iran is the major epicentre of the outbreak in the Middle East. It has not implemented a full lockdown, although shops, shrines and schools along with other public spaces have been closed. It has banned journeys out of towns and cities, but to a certain extent this has been ignored: The Nowruz festival celebrates the Persian New Year and lasts until 3 April, people usually flock to tourist destinations such as the Caspian Sea, and continued to do so despite the restrictions. The government was severely criticised for not closing the shrine in Qom earlier - the holy city at the centre of the outbreak.

US sanctions on the banking sector against Iran have made it difficult for the government to purchase medical equipment – America has been accused of ‘weaponising Coronavirus’. But despite its poverty Iran has a reasonably good healthcare system and testing is catching up with the incidences of illness.

Iran is not a democracy in the western sense, but it does have some democratic attributes to its constitution – the government is jointly appointed by the Ayatollah and an elected President. Health insurance, tax and utility payments have been postponed for the next three months by President Rouhani, whilst the 3 million poorest Iranians will get cash payments and others will get low interest loans.

BBC News 27 March, Aljazeera 4 April

Denmark

Ruling Party: Social Democrats Politics: Leftist

Danish restrictions for lockdown are more or less the same as the British, but in most other respects the two countries differ wildly. Denmark has so far been lucky in that few of its coronavirus cases have needed hospitalisation – there is currently no overload of the healthcare system. A shortage in ventilators is being solved through the government co-operating with manufacturers to produce as many as possible. The national government has taken control of the medical supply chain, which is usually run by the provinces. Testing has so far been erratic, and Denmark is expecting its system to become stretched.

The Danish health system is almost completely government owned and government funded - the Danes are reportedly happy with it. An at-home monitoring system had been set up pre-pandemic with which patients can monitor their own vital signs and video-call doctors from home.

Although Denmark officially does not have Universal Basic Income it has a welfare system that is more or less analogous – nobody need go without their food, shelter and fuel needs taken care of. Due to the pandemic the government has promised to pay 75% of the wages of laid off workers, whilst the employers pay the rest and keep the workers on their books in exchange for a reduction in employees’ future holidays. The position of the self-employed is somewhat more ambiguous, and they may have to rely on welfare.

The World 17 March, The Guardian 18 March, EuObserver 23 March, Danish Medicines Agency 1 April, Internations.org

Hungary:

Ruling Party: Fidesz Politics: Nationalist & right wing

The government has vacated all hospital buildings and built container hospitals in preparation for the outbreak. Troops are on the streets to enforce lockdown regulations and have been drafted in to work in strategic industries. On 13 March the Prime Minister Viktor Orban said there was no reason to suspend teaching in schools, and that teachers who did not turn up for work would have their wages docked. There was such a public uproar that his Fidesz party and the official opposition parties – who operate in an unofficial union with Fidesz – persuaded him to change his mind: Schools have been closed and digital teaching rolled out.

The first coronavirus case in the country was that of an Iranian student – Orban used the opportunity to state that ‘migration is responsible for the spread of the epidemic’. He has extended the ‘crisis due to migration’ for the eighth time since 2015. 13 Iranian students were forcibly detained for deportation, and while quarantined they apparently threw chairs about and wanted to leave the building. They later reported that the hygienic conditions were disgusting and they were not told of the medical status of those in the same room.

Over the last ten years the most of the media in Hungary has either been taken over by or become allied to the government - independent journalism still exists but has become difficult. Although Hungary still technically has multi-party elections, most other parties are loyal to the Fidesz government which has remained in control since the early 2000’s.

Moves have been made to limit important businesses’ exposure to any recession though as yet no special help has been offered to laid off workers. Shops are half empty and Hungary has yet to suffer the full brunt of the pandemic.

EuObserver 20 March

Ghana

Ruling Party: National Democratic Party Politics: Centre left

Ghana is an extremely poor country whose neighbours have been hit badly by the coronovirus. President Akufo-Addo has set aside $100 million to enhance Ghanan preparations, is using the military to implement lockdown and has set up a hundred bed facility in a remote area to quarantine suspected cases. Normal hospital admissions do not usually get beds, and as of 5 of April there have been 215 confirmed cases.

Three cities were put into lockdown which provoked their citizens to move out en mass, causing fears of further contagion. The lockdown has now been extended nationwide and the borders have been closed.

BBC New Pidgen 12 March, BBC News 30 March

Portugal:

Ruling Party: Socialists Politics: Centre left

Portugal reacted much earlier to the pandemic than most European countries. In some cases it brought in elements of the lockdown a fortnight earlier in the relative spread of the virus. By the time the government closed schools there had still been no fatalities in the country.

The health services have never-the-less struggled to cope with the load. Similarly to many places Portugal has suffered from a lack of ventilators. Private companies have donated equipment to hospitals and a group of software designers voluntarily set up a system to connect medical facilities with broken ventilators with engineers who can fix them.

A measure to temporarily suspend jobs without redundancy has led to 552,000 workers being laid off. The economy is struggling, despite only a small growth in the unemployment figures and a multi-billion euro stimulus package. Although Portugal’s experience of the pandemic has not been severe, the recession caused by it most likely will be.

Reuters 24 March, The Portugal News 27 March, Reuters 4 April

* * *

In the following table the statistical chance of an individual dying if infected with Covid-19 is compared with the wealth and politics of each of the selected states. Hungary, Ghana and Russia have been omitted because the virus had yet to spread fully across those countries at the time these statistics were collected. They are in the order of the most dangerous states - if all governments invested proportionately in efficient health systems the poorest states should be at the top and the richest at the bottom:

Country: GDP per Fatalities as Politics:

capita % of those

(US$): infected:

Italy 32,946 12.3% centre left, national-socialist

UK 41,030 10.4% nationalist & right wing

Iran 5,506 6.3% centrist with Islamic democracy

Denmark 59,795 4% leftist

China 10,098 3.5% authoritarian & centrist

USA 65,111 2.5% nationalist & right wing

Portugal 23,030 2.5% centre left

South Korea 31,430 1.5% centre to centre left

Germany 46,563 1.4% centrist, centre left, conservative

Australia 53,825 0.4% centre right

The table may be a little unfair on the most developed countries, given they tend to have an older population and people with underlying health problems are more likely to survive normally.

In terms of preventing fatalities the UK is doing terribly in proportion to its wealth. The Americans are doing better than the British – those with medical insurance may have access to very good quality treatment – but they should be much further down the table due to their enormous wealth. Italy and South Korea taken in isolation tend to prove political ideology has little to do with it: They have similar levels of wealth and are both left leaning, yet the results are very different in both tables. Despite the Danes confidence in their public run health service, they are doing badly compared to the relatively impoverished Portuguese.

* * *

Most of the governments that are doing well in the fight against the Coronavirus are left leaning. Italy and Ghana are the major exceptions – the Italians have perhaps suffered from a lack of luck as well as not taking the problem seriously enough to begin with, while Ghana suffers due to incredible poverty.

Out of the countries selected Australia has the only right leaning government that is getting anywhere – and doing extremely well in escaping fatalities - but there are doubts towards its commitment to its people’s livelihoods. Out of the centrists, China and Germany have done well, but Iran – which could also be described as very conservative in outlook – doesn’t seem to be taking things seriously enough. The German (centrist), Korean (centre-left) and Danish (leftist) governments are the most confident in dealing with the crisis.

Out of the more authoritarian governments, the Russians, Hungarians and Iranians have all attempted to use the pandemic to progress their own political agenda’s – President Trump has done this as well. China – the least democratic country in the selection - is less guilty of this. We can expect political parties in more liberal countries to follow suit, although hopefully only when the emergency is over.

It is unsurprising that all health services are stretched. What is surprising is that the governments of the USA and the UK are doing so badly considering how well off those countries are – governments of some poorer countries, such as Portugal, are doing comparatively much better. Germany, Denmark and Australia are wealthy sates that have invested wisely in their health systems.

With health systems under strain, difficult decisions have to be made, and it is perhaps logical that eugenic theories have resurfaced. It has definitely been noticed in the response of America, Britain and Italy, and is perhaps widespread in poorer countries who have more of an excuse. In a world where it is medically possible to live to a ripe old age and cure or treat many problems that would have once killed us off or totally incapacitated us, is it right that the elderly and the disabled should be considered more expendable than the rest?

There is much debate everywhere over how important economics are compared to surviving Covid-19: Poverty is as much a killer as disease. Nearly all governments are making some attempt to ensure people can survive financially during the lockdown – how easy survival will be afterwards is an unknown quantity. Its is only in the USA and the UK that it has been suggested that the people in general should be fully exposed to the virus to ensure economic well-being. Both of these governments are right wing and neo-liberal, and perhaps prioritise the financial health of the ‘one percent’ above the lives of people in general. Doing an experiment with ‘herd immunity’ would not save the economy, as far more would become infected and dependent on overstretched health services, and many would continue with self-isolation when they could.

Nobody is ever going to cope well in an unexpected global pandemic. How well lockdown procedures are implemented has more to do with the planning skills of the government than their political ideology. However, wealthier countries do not have much of an excuse for the low levels of success in some of them. A Health service that has had sufficient investment to cope in normal times can cope at a stretch in these ones – as proved by the Germans, Australians and others. Everybody wants health services that can cope, but it is sometimes difficult to get people to invest in them. Most efficient health services are paid for via an insurance scheme, although in many states the premiums are paid partially or in full by the government. These services can be a mixture of public and private, or almost totally public. To be non- partisan about it, left and right wing politicians can compete to decide how much importance to give the public/private elements relatively, whilst the whole remains to some extent at the same standard. These schemes are employed in most of Europe, and Australia. It should be food for thought for the British and Americans.