Posted in China, misc., UK politics, World Politics

Covid-19, Conspiracy Theories and Cold Wars

Everyone knows a good conspiracy theory, some of them even turn out to be true. But for every true one there are dozens of those that make you think, “How could anyone believe that?” Yet some people really do appear to believe that the Royals are an alien lizard race, or that the planes we saw hitting the World Trade Centre were computer generated graphics. What makes people prone to believing some conspiracy theories while outright rejecting others?

I’m sure there are a myriad of reasons for this, and a psychologist will be much better able to answer than myself. But I have been noticing a trend recently, and I feel the need to say something. Its clear that many people are willing to believe accusations against, and conspiracy theories regarding, foreign governments that they would never believe to be true of their own government.

As China rises in economic, political and military strength they are upsetting the current status quo – US global hegemony. This has led to them being labelled a “threat” by the American political establishment, an accusation picked up and repeated by many in the UK. Not so coincidentally, many stories and articles have been circulating widely, detailing this or that supposed wrongdoing by the “evil” and “corrupt” Chinese government. Similar stories have been doing the rounds about Russia for a while longer. To me these stories look like part of a propaganda war, designed to turn us against these countries and thereby more likely to accept American and British aggression towards them. The same has happened to Yugoslavia, Libya, Iraq, and many more. Why do we keep falling for it?

I’m not the thought police, and I have no interest in filling that role, but I do question why people will believe a story about Russia or China (or any other country) that they would never believe about their own country. Nobody is denying that bad things have happened in Russia or China, so does their prior behaviour explain this apparent bias in what we are prepared to believe? I don’t think so. After all, very bad things have also happened in the USA (the genocide of the indigenous population, for example) and the British Empire was responsible for bloodshed and starvation all over the globe. Yet by and large our population will give the Americans and the Brits the benefit of the doubt.

Where we mentally place the burden of proof tells us a lot about our pre-existing biases. The majority of our population take an “innocent until proven guilty” attitude towards the USA and the UK, but will simultaneously take the opposite “guilty until proven innocent” attitude towards China. We see this in how the media will report on the same issue in different countries.

Take the official numbers of those infected with the Covid virus as an example. We are told that the official numbers in the USA are lower than the actual numbers infected because they’ve been “under-estimated”, but we are told that in China the official numbers are lower than the actual numbers because the Chinese government has been involved in a cover up. When China put Wuhan on lock down to try and contain the virus the move was called “draconian” by the New York Times. When the Italians put large parts of their country on lock down for the same reason, the New York Times called it a “brave” move.

This blatant hypocrisy in how the media reports on issues, as well as the shameless politicising of crises such as the one we are facing, is surely a big part of the explanation of why many will believe any accusation or conspiracy theory levelled against countries such as China. They are involved in a cover up, they are deliberately trying to hurt us, they only send us dodgy medical equipment, they developed the virus as a weapon. Conspiracy theories from the mundane to the outlandish, all believed by otherwise reasonable people.

The virus that causes Covid-19 is a naturally occurring pathogen and a common enemy of humanity, it is not a weapon of any country targeting another. Instead, it is those politicising the pandemic who are weaponizing the virus as part of their information war against China. With the nature of the internet, these smears and accusations quickly take on a life of their own and evolve into crazy conspiracy theories. The powers that be are aware of this and are happy to encourage the spread of these theories and fake news. Collectively we need to be smarter than this.

Details of a telephone conversation between Mike Pompeo (US Secretary of State) and Jens Stoltenberg (NATO Secretary General) reveal that the two emphasised the “importance of countering the spread of disinformation” from China related to the virus. Given that they have both been trying to convince anyone who will listen of a threat from China by making all kinds of false accusations, it is unsurprising that they should seek to exploit the pandemic this way. Unfortunately, given their respective backgrounds, too many people will excuse their attempts to manipulate people’s fears and suffering.

Others will see it for what it is – insensitive and insulting. A callous and cowardly attempt to create threats to justify their own political existence. In being the ones who are actually spreading disinformation they not only underline their own hypocrisy, they also jeopardise the concerted efforts needed to neutralise the threat of the pandemic, and are quite happy to do so at the cost of people’s lives.

Unfortunately, too many people who should know better are all too happy to help spread fake news and conspiracy theories. When it comes to bashing your perceived enemies, the truth and facts can take a hike. Again, we need to be better than this. We need to be smarter than this.

So let me deal with just some of the fake news I’ve seen people who should really know better repeating. Think of the accusation made by Pompeo and Stoltenberg that China is spreading disinformation about the virus. What did the Chinese state say that was untrue? Some would answer this by claiming that China “covered up” the extent of the epidemic in Wuhan in particular.

This fake news story uses the following logic – the numbers of infected people in Wuhan was actually much higher than the official numbers released by the Chinese government. Therefore the Chinese government has been involved in some sort of cover up.

Now there is a sliver of truth to this one. The numbers of infected people in Wuhan is indeed much higher than the official numbers released by the Chinese government. How do I know this? Because the Chinese government told us so. They’re not covering it up!

Remember that Wuhan was extremely hard hit by the virus. The hospitals there simply couldn’t cope. They (famously) very quickly built three new hospitals just to help with the situation, but even that wasn’t enough. There just wasn’t enough room in the hospitals for everyone. So the authorities had to ask people who didn’t have severe symptoms not to come to the hospital, so that only those most in need could get a place in the hospitals. The result of this was that many infected people simply stayed home, suffered through the illness as best they could until they recovered naturally, and were never captured by the official figures because they were never known to the authorities.

This was not a great situation for China to be in, but they had to make tough decisions at the time and this was how they proceeded. Importantly, they were always open and transparent about the situation in Wuhan. Anyone who had actually bothered to listen would know that China was telling us the situation was actually worse than the official figures suggested. Just because the West didn’t care to listen does not make China guilty of a cover up.

There is another angle to the “Chinese cover up story” that has also been doing the rounds. This one centres on the fact that some researchers and doctors were punished for trying to alert people to the existence of the virus back in December. This one certainly doesn’t look good for China, but we should still be careful to be factual in our critiques here. As the Chinese say, we should seek truth from facts.

So what are the facts here, as opposed to the fake news elements? First of all we should bear in mind that China, unlike the West but like other countries in Asia, has very strict “fake news” laws. In other words, deliberately spreading fake news is actually illegal here. Now usually this works quite well, and so the media here can generally be trusted even if you don’t care for their editorial position. This was an example of the law going wrong, but lets try to understand why and where it went wrong.

Chronologically we are still in December 2019. The existence of the virus is not yet known outside of a small number of doctors and researchers in Wuhan. When reports of stories about a scary new virus are reported to a local police station in Wuhan, how is the police officer assigned to the case to ascertain if the fake news laws have been broken? The police officer determined that the doctors and researchers were spreading rumours designed to incite panic, and so punished accordingly. The punishment was that they were ordered to write letters of self criticism and their employers were notified. Some of their employers also dished out their own punishments. Clearly what the officer did was wrong, he did not follow proper procedures, and the investigation into how he handled the matter concludes exactly that.

Does any of this mean the Chinese government was guilty of a cover up? No. The punishments were handed out by a local police station, not by the central government. In fact, when the case became known to the Chinese government they despatched the nation’s top anti-corruption agency to Wuhan to investigate. The central agency concluded that the local police were wrong, ordered that all punishments be removed from the records of the accused, ordered that the police officer and his superiors be reprimanded accordingly, ordered that training on the correct procedures be given to the local police and ordered that the public be fully informed about all details on the matter. Certainly there is room for factual criticism here, but again, lets stick to the facts and avoid the fake news. This is not a cover up.

There is worse fake news out there, being passed off as reliable information. Political figures in both the US and China have accused the other side of developing the virus in a lab as some sort of weapon, and then either deliberately or accidentally releasing it. Certainly comments from Trump claiming that the virus is a biological weapon, and that if China has it then he wants it for America, helps fuel this particular theory. So does the fact that there is a virus lab only 400 meters from the wet market in Wuhan (where the virus spread like wildfire but probably didn’t originate). Likewise so does the fact that the USA had to shut down one of its own virus facilities at Fort Detrick after it emerged that on over 1000 occasions in the last ten years pathogens had gone missing. I could go on, but I won’t.

The virus isn’t a weapon, it wasn’t made in a lab. A team of international researchers (including some from Scotland based at Edinburgh University) have studied the origin of the virus, and been able to show that it evolved naturally. This should really kill the conspiracy theories, but I have a feeling it won’t. (If you want to know how they arrived at this conclusion —– > clicky )

So why do these conspiracy theories and fake news stories persist? Why are they not recognised for what they are and simply ignored? I noted above that much blame lies with how these stories are created by the media and how they are reported depending on the country being reported on. Individually, we also have to take some blame. Too many people seem to have a psychological aversion to facts when looking for a stick to beat their perceived enemies with. Standards of truth and honesty come second to scoring points in never ending online debates. Cognitive biases are certainly at play here. People are naturally inclined to to seek out information that confirms their existing beliefs. So when they run across a theory that supports those beliefs they often unquestioningly just accept it as true. Those who believe that China is some sort of corrupt totalitarian state will be inclined to believe fake news about China without bothering to check the facts. We have to be better than that.

Those who are putting political and ideological differences above saving lives, by not cooperating to combat the pandemic are being inhuman and immoral. We should be careful that we don’t unwittingly help them by spreading their fake news for them. A lie repeated often enough has a way of gaining credibility. As mistrust and tensions between China and the West continue to grow, we are creeping towards a second Cold War. Pompeo and Stoltenberg will be fine with that, it would justify their political existence. Would it really be so great for the rest of us?

Posted in China, misc.

Tomb Sweeping with Covid-19

Tomb Sweeping Festival was a rather different affair this year. While China is officially an atheist country, and the major organised religions only have relatively small numbers of followers here, the majority of the population belong to a patchwork of local folk religions with a strong emphasis on ancestor worship. As such, Qingming (Tomb Sweeping Festival in English) is an important part of their calendar, it is a time for the living to honour the dead.

They honour their ancestors, but it is also a time for families to commemorate the lives of their departed relatives. They visit them in the cemetery, clean their tombs or gravestones, and offer food and symbolic money in a solemn ceremony of remembrance. While there are folk religious elements to this, like lighting a changming lamp or burning paper money to ensure the dead can travel safely to the next world, the way these rituals help the living break free from the shadow of the deceased and come to terms with the reality of death are important, even for the non-religious.

This year, however, many were not able to observe this tradition, even as the country was collectively grieving for all those killed by the Covid-19 pandemic. Out of fear of further outbreaks many cities still have bans on mass gatherings, which includes the crowds normally found in cemeteries during this particular festival.

For many this was the first Qingming since the passing of a relative, Covid-19 related or not. It must have been particularly heartbreaking for them to not be able to take part in their traditional rituals. Even more so for those who lost loved ones to the virus, who due to the infectious nature of the disease didn’t get to say goodbye – no last kisses or clasped hands during the final hours.

All over the country relatives could be seen trying to view their loved ones final resting place from a distance. Many funeral parlours have turned to online services, including virtual reality visits to cemeteries and digital flowers and candles. Many offered to clean tombs and leave flowers for the deceased, free of charge. We can only hope that the cancelling of these rituals and internment services will not leave family members of the deceased unable to come to terms with their loss. Funerals and memorial services are, after all, important for ensuring the mental health of surviving family members.

This year, timed to coincide with Qingming, the government announced a national day of mourning for those lost to the pandemic. At 10:00 on Saturday, Chinese people all over the country observed three minutes of silence, while car horns and air raid sirens wailed in grief. The previous day, the Hubei government had honoured 14 victims of the virus, front line medical workers including the previously reprimanded Li Wenliang, as martyrs.

In China, and all over the world, this loss is being felt collectively. Burials, funerals and other rituals after major disasters are a way to say farewell to the dead, console the living, and heal the wounds of personal and collective pain. They shape our memory of the event into a shared social legacy; they can be a lesson, a warning, and a source of emotional encouragement or spiritual motivation.

These rituals are usually one of two kinds: the personal (things like funerals and tomb sweeping activities) or the public (top down orchestrated public services). Both are needed at times like this. Of course, the Western media propaganda machine never misses an opportunity to spread fake news about China, even during times like this they are up to their usual tricks. I’ve seen the public mourning services being reported as something sinister, designed to further control how the people are able express themselves.

Now in the past the Chinese government might well have put too much emphasis on public mourning at the expense of personal mourning. I have a difficult time believing they did this for sinister or ulterior motives and, regardless, modern China is markedly different from its past. The Communist Party learns and evolves.

Take the Tangshan earthquake as example, which in 1976 killed at least 240,000 people. Immediately after the quake, state media focussed on residents’ “anti-earthquake spirit”. At the time the party viewed traditional rituals and burial services as part of the nation’s feudal past. The dead were buried quickly, often in unmarked graves. Those who lost loved ones in the disaster quietly burned offerings of paper money on silent streets.

Over the years these individual expressions of mourning and memory persisted in the city, especially around Tomb Sweeping Festival and the anniversary of the quake. A business man, sniffing out a way to cash in on the massive loss of life, unveiled a memorial wall on which relatives could carve the names of their deceased – for a price of course. Despite the crassness of the project, and its blatant commercialism, thousands of orders were placed by people looking for a place where they could visit their loved ones, touch their name, or simply cry. Eventually the government ordered the wall torn down and unveiled a free one of its own, a move indicative of the authorities changing attitudes towards personal grief and mourning.

Holding a national day of mourning or building a statue to Li Wenliang (as one Hubei politician has called for) can be a powerful way to remember a disaster. It is also vital to allow traumatised individuals a means to vent their emotions, find hope and preserve personal memories. I want you to know that contrary to what is suggested by Western media, in China these means do exist and are allowed. Take Li Wenliang’s final Weibo post (Weibo is the Chinese equivalent of Twitter). Netizens have turned it into a sort of shrine, a place where they can spill their thoughts. Some thank him, some say they miss him, some tell him Wuhan has finally contained the virus, some talk of bewilderment and some talk of courage.

In the coming months other countries around the globe will be having their own public mourning services, and countless individuals will be processing their own personal grief. Our emotions and memories that we take forward with us from this period are all a part of the collective legacy of this disaster.

Posted in misc., World Politics

Sacco and Vanzetti

(I was browsing some of our old radio broadcasts recently, and the short piece we did on Sacco and Vanzetti stood out as one of my favourites (clicky). It doesn’t read like my style of writing, so I suspect it was written by one of my comrades in Inverclyde SSP, although I genuinely can’t remember who. I’ve reproduced the script here with the music we played on the radio added at the relevant parts. Hope you enjoy! Beinn

In the South Braintree area of Boston in April 1920, five armed robbers got away with $15,000 from a robbery at a shoe factory.  In the process of the robbery they killed two men.

Over 7 years later, on the 23rd of August 1927, Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were executed in the electric chair by the State of Massachusetts. They had 6 years earlier been found guilty of the two murders, a judgment now accepted as being a miscarriage of justice. In truth, it was not the evidence of the case that condemned these two innocent men to die at the hands of the state; it was a combination of their political views and ethnicity.

Both were immigrants in America, both originally from Italy. And both adhered to a brand of left wing politics that advocated relentless opposition to violent and oppressive governments. Then, as now, the government of the USA met those criteria.  All attempts to appeal the conviction were denied, despite serious doubts over the reliability of the evidence and even a confession by another more likely perpetrator. By 1925 the case had generated an international movement, which continued to grow as details of the case against the men and their probable innocence spread. In 1927, protests demanding they be saved from the electric chair were held in every major city in North America and Europe, as well as cities in Japan, Australia, Brazil, Argentina and South Africa.

It would not be until 50 years after their wrongful execution that the American establishment would try to cleanse itself of this injustice, when in 1977 a proclamation was issued that the men had been unfairly convicted and that “any disgrace should be forever removed from their names”.  

Woody Guthrie, I Just Want to Sing Your Name

Nicola Sacco was born in the Italian town of Torremaggiore in April 1891. At age 17 he immigrated to the states where he found work in a shoe factory, got married and started a family.  Bart Vanzetti was also of Italian origin, being born in the town of Villaffalletto on 11th June 1888. When he was 20 he moved to the states where he found work as a fish peddler. Vanzetti was shocked and appalled by the treatment of working class immigrants, and this was instrumental in his becoming involved in left wing politics.  At one gathering of anarchists he met Sacco and the two men became friends, often attending political meetings together.

Like many on the political left, Sacco and Vanzetti were opposed to the First World War, and in 1917 when America entered the war they fled to Mexico to avoid conscription. It was a principled decision, one firmly rooted in their opposition to the imperial war in Europe, but it would be twisted by the prosecution into evidence of their cowardice and lack of patriotism.

The America that Sacco and Vanzetti lived in was changing rapidly. Both men had been able to move to the States due to that countries Open Door policy, which had been designed to make immigration to the States as easy as possible. In the lead up to the First World War, however, there was a shift in American public opinion towards the newcomers. Clear anti-immigration sentiments, and at times explicit xenophobia, started to become commonplace, especially among the more affluent classes.  Catholics and Jews in particular would feel the brunt of this rising resentment.

Racial persecution only intensified when America became gripped by the Red Scare. The collapse of the Russian Empire and the rise of the Soviet Union worried many of the moneyed classes in America. Anti-communist paranoia and hatred was often directed towards immigrants, especially those from an Eastern or Southern European origin.

The America that Sacco and Vanzetti inhabited was therefore one which hated the two men, on account of both their ethnicity and their politics.

In court Sacco claimed: “I know the sentence will be between two classes, the oppressed class and the rich class, and there will be always collision between one and the other. We fraternise the people with books, with literature. You persecute the people, tyrannize them and kill them. We try to educate the people always. You try to put a path between us and some other nationality, to hate each other. That is why I am here today on this bench, for having been of the oppressed class. Well, you are the oppressor.”

Sacco and Vanzetti, by Woody Guthrie and David Rovics

At trial, the main evidence used against the men was that they were both carrying a gun when arrested. It was argued at the time, and even as recently as the 1980’s, that ballistics could trace the fatal shots to Sacco’s gun, although it has been agreed by experts that the evidence was so badly handled and tampered with that no judgment of any type can be made based on it. For example, the barrel on the gun had been changed at least once since it was confiscated, and as it is the barrel that leaves the tell tale evidence on a bullet it is therefore impossible to say whether or not this was the gun that fired the fatal shots.

Throughout the trial it became evident that the establishment were going to find the men guilty no matter what. Judge Thayer has been roundly criticised for showing blatant bias and prejudice against the two. At one point Sacco was asked to try on a cap which had been found at the crime scene, a cap  which eye witnesses said had been worn by the murderer but fell off as he made his escape. Those present at the court agreed that the cap was far too small for Sacco, but the prosecution lawyer continued to refer to it as “Sacco’s cap” for the remainder of the trial anyway, and was allowed to do so by Judge Thayer. During questioning it was clear that the two men didn’t fully understand many of the questions put to them, which led to them giving contradictory answers at times. Judge Thayer was well aware that the two men had only a limited grasp of English, but decided to let them incriminate themselves.

Eugene Lyons (a journalist who worked on the case) wrote in his book, The Life and Death of Sacco and Vanzetti, “It was not a frame-up in the ordinary sense of the word. It was a far more terrible conspiracy: the almost automatic clicking of the machinery of government spelling out death for two men with the utmost serenity. No more laws were stretched or violated than in most other criminal cases. No more stool-pigeons were used. No more prosecution tricks were played. Only in this case every trick worked with a deadly precision. The rigid mechanism of legal procedure was at its most unbending. The human beings who operated the mechanism were guided by dim, vague, deep-seated motives of fear and self-interest. It was a frame-up implicit in the social structure. It was a perfect example of the functioning of class justice, in which every judge, juror, police officer, editor, governor and college president played his appointed role easily and without undue violence to his conscience. A few even played it with an exalted sense of their own patriotism and nobility.”

By the summer of 1927 it became clear that Sacco and Vanzetti would be executed. Vanzetti commented to a journalist: “If it had not been for this thing, I might have lived out my life talking at street corners to scorning men. I might have died, unmarked, unknown, a failure. Now we are not a failure. This is our career and our triumph. Never in our full life can we hope to do such work for tolerance, for justice, for man’s understanding of man, as now we do by accident. Our words – our lives – our pains – nothing! The taking of our lives – lives of a good shoemaker and a poor fish peddler – all! That last moment belong to us – that agony is our triumph.”

Here’s To You, by Testo Joan Baez

Posted in misc.

On Depression and Trains

My neighbour, not a close friend but someone I know well enough to talk to when we meet in the street, has a small dog with an interesting interpretation of the world. I recall this dog, not in terms of its breed or size or general temperament. Why I mention this dog at all is due to a not so obvious similarity I have detected between this dog’s interpretation of the world and those in the medical profession’s attempts to treat my problems.

My problems are in my head, that is to say they are mental health problems. There is not really a conspiracy against me. There are not people stealing thoughts out of my head. My episodes of rage and anxiety and depression are not responses to environmental stimuli, but rather a sign that something is amiss inside my brain.

The little dog’s problems, on the other hand, are all those fucking trains that keep coming to the bottom of his garden all day long. Now this garden belongs to this dog, he left his scent everywhere so these fucking trains should know to stay away. But the fuckers keep coming back. So he keeps chasing them away. When a train comes he runs to the bottom of his garden and barks as loud as he can. This obviously scares the trains because they keep going right passed his garden. The wee dog knows that he can chase the trains away, he has observed the evidence. A train comes, he chases it, the train goes away.

My doctor knows that she can chase away my problems, she has observed the evidence. When I feel down she prescribes me drugs. My symptoms recede. The wonder drug has worked! The drugs are reduced and she congratulates herself for chasing away my demons. But the fucking trains keep coming back. Fucking bastards! He’ll catch one one day you know! So she increases the drugs to chase it all away, and it all seems to go away, so she was right again. And so I’m not on the higher dose any more, and then I am cos I have the demons to chase away again. And so on and on forever. The drugs keep chasing away the demons and the wee dog keeps chasing away the trains.

Actually, let me start again.

I have a mental health problem.

You can’t see it but it’s real and at times it’s debilitating.

It’s an extremely difficult thing to tell people. I just spent most of this piece talking about a dog chasing a train, rather than just say I suffer from depression. That’s what the stigma does, it makes you want to hide it, keep it hidden, an embarrassing secret to be kept from the world. Everyone must think you’re normal. To have depression is not to be normal. Or to be more correct, it’s to be treated by others as if you are not normal. So you don’t talk about it.