Archive for the ‘Culture Wars’ Category

Whos enforcing mask rules? Often retail workers, and theyre getting hurt. – Boston.com

The exchange was tense between the customer and Jesse, a Trader Joes employee sporting a white face mask and a flowery Hawaiian shirt.

Why arent you wearing the mask? Jesse asked the customer on a recent day at a store in Rancho Palos Verdes, California. I am not here to question what you believe in. These are the rules. I am just asking you kindly to wear the mask.

The customer, Genevieve Peters, who was recording the entire exchange, refused. We are in America here, she said, land of the free. Then she turned her camera on other shoppers, who were less than amused: Look at all of these sheep that are here, all wearing this mask that is actually dangerous for them.

Jesse, identified only by his first name in the video, telephoned police, who did not arrive. Finally, when Peters left the store, others customers burst into applause.

As more parts of the country reopen businesses, many retail workers have reluctantly turned into de facto enforcers of public health guidelines, confronting customers who refuse to wear masks or to maintain a wide distance from others. The risk of a violent reaction now hangs over jobs already fraught with health perils.

A Target employee in Van Nuys, California, ended up with a broken left arm after helping to remove two customers who refused to wear masks.

A cashier told a man refusing to wear a mask that he could not buy a pack of cigars at a convenience store in Perkasie, Pennsylvania. He punched her three times in the face.

In San Antonio, a man who was told he could not board a public bus without a mask shot a passenger, police said. The victim was hospitalized, and the gunman was arrested.

And in a confrontation that turned deadly, the security guard at a Family Dollar store in Flint, Michigan, was shot and killed after insisting that a customer put on a mask.

Meegan Holland, spokeswoman for the Michigan Retailers Association, said stores were caught in the middle. People can get belligerent when being asked to do something that they do not want to do, she said.

Masks have been recommended by public health officials as a key way to diminish the spread of the coronavirus, with at least a dozen states requiring them and many others issuing a hodgepodge of county or municipal orders.

They have also turned into a flashpoint in the countrys culture wars, with some defending their right to not wear one.

We have individual rights; we dont have community rights, said Peters, 56, the customer at the Trader Joes store, in an interview this week.

Public health experts said this argument was misguided.

I never had a right to do something that could injure the health of my neighbors, said Wendy Parmet, director of the Center for Health Policy and Law at Northeastern University.

Mask opponents generally overlook the fact that such regulations are meant to protect other people, not the person wearing the mask, she added.

Americans are navigating a patchwork of conflicting national and local guidance on masks. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, initially downplayed the efficacy of masks but now recommends them.

And they have become a ready symbol for those dubious about giving government officials wide powers for an extended period.

Retailers find the confrontations over masks a minefield.

It is a very hot-button issue, said Kenya Friend-Daniel, a spokeswoman for Trader Joes. The company declined to allow Jesse, the employee involved in the confrontation, to be interviewed.

We do not want to put our crew members in the position to have to enforce something like that, she said, noting that customers overwhelmingly wear masks.

In all its 505 stores, Trader Joes has put up signs recommending that customers wear masks, not least to protect its employees, Friend-Daniel said.

Refusing is not grounds alone for being ejected from a store, she said, even where wearing masks in public is the law, but creating a disturbance that bothers other customers is.

Target, in places where masks are the law, has stationed security employees outside its stores to remind customers to wear them, said Jake Anderson, a spokesman.

Stores are not the only businesses involved. Uber announced that starting Monday, drivers and riders must wear masks, and those who refuse can be kicked off the platform.

Smaller retailers feel especially vulnerable to balancing the need for safety and the need to revive their bottom line.

In Charleston, South Carolina, at M. Dumas & Sons, a 103-year-old mens clothing store, employees wear masks in line with a city requirement while customers are offered them at the front door.

Gary Flynn, the owner, estimated that 50% of his customers would walk away if required to wear a mask.

I want whatever I can get right now, he said, with business inching up but still only 25% of what it was a year ago.

He acknowledged that his workers were putting themselves in harms way to generate sales. So its a slippery slope, and its a moral challenge every day to try to figure out whats the right thing to do, he said.

Farther up King Street, Las Olas Swimwear boutique was doing brisk business in bathing suits, for beach-starved customers, as well as face masks. The store has sold more than 500 masks produced by a New York swimwear supplier.

Daniel James, the owner, stated unequivocally that he would fire any employee not wearing a face mask but said masks were voluntary for customers.

In Michigan, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer made masks mandatory in late April and allowed stores to bar customers who refused. But she did not criminalize such refusals, so police have only intervened when confrontations turned violent.

In Illinois, Rob Karr, president of the Illinois Retail Merchants Association, compiled a list of episodes that took place in the first 48 hours after masks became mandatory May 1.

One customer threatened to get a gun from his car to shoot the worker insisting that he wear a mask. Several employees were hit, while others were verbally abused. Sometimes customers fought each other. The list has only grown longer.

Some police departments refused to respond when stores asked for help, Karr said, while various retailers were fined $750 for not enforcing the ban.

In Warwick, Rhode Island, a police union initially announced on its Facebook page that it would not enforce Gov. Gina Raimondos mandatory mask order, calling it overreaching and bound to destroy the bridge of trust built with the community. The police chief then issued a statement saying the department would act.

Lawrence Gostin, the Georgetown University professor who wrote the draft public health law adopted by many states, suggested that in the absence of national guidelines, retailers should develop one policy for all their stores and stick with it, whether it has the backing of state law or not; that way the rules would be clear for all customers.

Some experts also suggested it was overkill to involve police in the general enforcement of public health measures.

The issue should be treated like wearing seat belts or not smoking in public, which eventually became habits, Parmet suggested, but such consensus must develop much more quickly given the danger from COVID-19.

In Hawaii, that consensus is emerging because neighbors are confronting anti-maskers themselves, said Tina Yamaki, president of the Retail Merchants of Hawaii.

It is the other customers in the stores that are shaming them to put it back on or commenting, she said.

Yamaki compared the mask dilemma to trying to ensure that a young child keeps wearing a hat: One minute it is on, and the next minute, after you look away, it disappears.

We cannot be policing that all the time, she said of the masks. We are not that type of law enforcement.

Correction:An earlier version of this article misstated the surname of a woman who was part of a tense exchange in a Trader Joes store. She isGenevieve Peters, not Powers.

Sign up and receive coronavirus news and breaking updates, from our newsroom to your inbox.

Here is the original post:
Whos enforcing mask rules? Often retail workers, and theyre getting hurt. - Boston.com

A TikTok backlash in India has ruined the apps rating – TrustedReviews

TikTok has seen its Play Store rating plummet to two stars as a flurry of low reviews landed over the past 24 hours. Despite reviews citing issues with the apps algorithm and content, the real reason for the poor rating is linked to culture wars, fanboys and disturbing viral videos. Settle in, because the story of TikToks sudden fall from grace isnt a short one.

Theres an ongoing battle between TikTok and YouTube in India, which allegedly started when influencer Amir Siddiqui posted a video on TikTok saying that the platform was was better than YouTube. Amir has since deleted the video, but it sparked a war between the platforms fans, which eventually resulted in a YouTube influencer putting out a roast in response.

Related: TikTok scoops up the man behind Disney Plus

Enter the ring: CarryMinati. On May 8, Carry published a video called YouTube vs TikTok: The End that royally took the mick out of Amir Siddiqi. It was wildly popular, becoming the most-liked video in India, but the platform pulled it down.

Its not clear why YouTube decided that the video violated its community rules, but the most popular theory is that the video constituted cyber-bullying and harassment. Republic World has also reported that the video contained homophobic slurs, so it could have also been pulled for this reason.

Either way, it wasnt a popular move among Carrys fans. Their response? Take out a bit of their anger on the TikTok app rating. The app was already suffering because of the ongoing culture war between the platforms, but now Carrys fans started to increase their attempts to get the TikTok rating down.

But the controversy doesnt end there. Another influencer has also has a role to play in this debacle: Faizal Siddiqui.

Recognised that name? Faizal is the brother of Amir, who (arguably) started the war between YouTube and TikTok. Faizal is pretty popular in his own right on TikTok or at least he was until he posted a recent controversial video on the platform.

Related: How to delete a TikTok account

That video shows Faizal pretending to confront a woman who has betrayed him. He throws a glass of clear liquid at the woman, whose face is then shown behind a splattering of make-up that looks a lot like acid scars.

Theres been a huge backlash against this, and public figures have condemned the video, saying it glorifies acid attacks. TikTok reacted by banning Faizal from the platform, stating that he had violated multiple community guidelines.

But the online community in India still werent satisfied, citing previous examples of poor taste videos that had been posted on the app. This is where the latest flurry of bad reviews comes in, with multiple citizens leaving bad reviews and encouraging others to do so.

We wont know how this affects user figures for a while, as negative reviews dont reflect these statistics. And its not clear if the sudden influx of poor reviews is directly related to the tasteless video, or if CarryMinati loyalists have co-opted the movement.

What is clear is that India has grown a sudden distaste for the platform and the shine has certainly been taken off TikTok because of this latest storm. Weve reached out to the company for comment and will update this piece with the response.

Senior staff writer

Ruth started her career at Metro newspaper, working as a staff writer for the features section. After a brief stint working on a new channel for VICE UK, she joined the Trusted Reviews team in 2019 as

Unlike other sites, we thoroughly review everything we recommend, using industry standard tests to evaluate products. Well always tell you what we find. We may get a commission if you buy via our price links.Tell us what you think email the Editor

More:
A TikTok backlash in India has ruined the apps rating - TrustedReviews

Culture Wars: Where Are We Now? | The American Conservative

Many of the cultural skirmishes Mr. Hunter started writing about in the 1990s remain at the center of politics, including abortion, campus speech codes, multiculturalism, and religions place in public life. And as he warned they might, the disputes have grown more vituperativethrough Clinton hatred, through Bush hatred, through Obama hatred and through every Supreme Court opening.

Thats because culture is not a marginal concern, as many educated people profess to believeeven as they often espouse their own dogmatic cultural positions. Rather, culture is about systems of meaning that help make sense of the world, Mr. Hunter says, why things are good, true and beautiful, or why things are not. Why things are right and wrong. Culture provides the moral foundation of a political order.

Amen to that. When people complain about the culture wars as a phony conflict ginned up by their opponents, it almost always means that they wish their opponents would just shut up and agree with them. Liberal Thomas Franks book Whats The Matter With Kansas? wondered why it was that ordinary Kansans voted for Republicans and against their perceived economic interest. His thesis was that they were being baited by fake culture war issues. This is only true if you believe that economics ought to matter more than culture, and/or if you believe that there are no good-faith reasons to hold conservative views on culture war issues. Frankly, whether they are on the left or the right, I admire someone whose cultural values matter more to them than material advantage.

In this interview, Hunter says that conservatives may have a culture war advantage in government, but have badly lost elsewhere. To use a Marxist term, liberals control the major means of cultural production (the news and entertainment industries, the academy, etc.).

Because liberals control the credentialing institutions of our society, he says, those who want to get to a middle or upper middle class life are going to have to kowtow to liberal culture a culture that likes to think of itself as open, but which is as closed as any other. Hunter:So the Harvard Law School prides itself on its diversity, but its a diversity in which basically everyone views the world the exact same way.

Heres the key insight: Hunter believes that the total dominance progressives have in the culture-making institutions of our society means that their vision is going to win in the long run. One last bit from the Journal piece:

Yet he doubts that reason and science are any better suited than fundamentalist religion to provide a stable basis for morality, even if the West continues to secularize. One challenge of the Enlightenment he says, is that reason gave us the power to doubt and to question everything, including reason itself. That throws us back upon our own subjectivity. ... You have your truth, I have mine.

This is important for a couple of reasons.

First, the victory of progressives in the culture war will not bring peace, because it cannot bring peace. Religious and moral conservatives may well be sidelined in defeat, but that only means that the culture war will rage on other fronts. As Hunter avers, there is no way to settle these issues absent a shared source of cultural authority. Dont forget Ross Douthats warning: if you dont like the Religious Right, wait until you see the Post-Religious Right.

Second, its important that conservatives understand that because politics is downstream from culture, we are going to lose in politics, eventually. You only have to look at the polls on what Millennials believe and dont believe to see that. And if orthodox Christian beliefs are a barrier to full participation in the middle and upper middle class, then a lot of people are going to cast them aside.

We conservative Christians ought to be preparing ourselves and our children for this eventuality. When being a Christian costs us something in terms of social access, professional success, and economic prosperity, then we are going to see far fewer Christians. If there are far fewer Christians, the plausibility of the Christian faith is going to be much less. This is going to have a substantial impact on the ability of Christian parents to pass the faith along to their children. Whether we consciously retreat from the public square or not, we are going to be moved out.

And we are going to be moved out because a lot of the younger generation of Christians is going to be doing the pushing. As Daniel Cox pointed out:

Nearly half (48 percent) of white evangelical Protestants under 30 say that their church should adjust traditional beliefs and practices or adopt modern beliefs and practices.

As for young Catholics, huge numbers of them are leaving the church entirely, and those who remain disagree with their church strongly on issues where church teaching conflicts with the Sexual Revolution.

This is the world we are in now, and the world shortly to come, as I argue in The Benedict Option. A lot of Christians living inside Christian bubbles dont want to see it. Heres an extreme, but popular, example. Recently I became aware of the Trump prophecy, something that a Florida firefighter said God told him in 2011. Theres a feature film about it coming out this fall, produced in part with Liberty University. Below is the alleged prophecy:

Full Text of Mark Taylors April 28,2011Trump Prophecy:

The Spirit of God says Ive chosen this man Donald Trump for such a time as this. For as Benjamin Netanyahu is to Israel, so shall this man be to the United States of America, for I will use this man to bring honor, respect and restoration to America. America will be respected once again as the most powerful, prosperous nation on Earth other than Israel. The dollar will be the strongest it has ever been in the history of the United States and will once again be the currency by which all others are judged. The Spirit of God says the enemy will quake and shake, and fear this man I have anointed. They will even quake and shake when he announces he is running for President. It will be like the shot heard across the world. Then you will say what shall we do now? This man knows all our tricks and schemes. Weve been robbing America for decades. What should we do to stop this? The Spirit says, ha, no one shall stop this that I have started, for the enemy has stolen from America for decades and it stops now. For I will use this man to reap the harvest that the United States has sown for and plunder from the enemy what he has stolen, and return it back sevenfold to the United States. The enemy will say, Israel, Israel, what about Israel? Israel will be protected by America once again. The Spirit says yes, America will once again stand hand in hand with Israel and the two shall be as one, for the ties between Israel and America will be stronger than ever and Israel will flourish like never before. The Spirit of God says I will protect America and Israel, for this next President will be a man of his word. When he speaks the world will listen and know that there is something greater in him than all the others before him. This mans word is his bond and the world and America will know this, and the enemy will fear this, for this man will be fearless. The Spirit says when the financial harvest begins so shall the parallel in the spiritual for America. The Spirit of God says in this next election they will spend billions to keep this president out. It will be like money down the toilet. Let them waste their money, for where it comes from is being used by evil forces at work, but they will not succeed. This next election will be a clean sweep for the man that I have chosen. They will say things about this man, the enemy, but it will not affect him and they will say it rolls off of him like a duck. For even as the feathers of a duck protect it, so shall my feathers protect this next president. Even mainstream news media will be captivated by this man and the abilities that I gift to him and they will even begin to agree with him, says the Spirit.

The self-deceiving triumphalist fantasy here Donald Trump as secular savior and sower of the seeds of Christian revival is gobsmacking. That so many Christians are eager to believe this is a sign of how desperate our position has become. According to this prophecy, having voted for Trump, America will be great again, rich again, powerful again, and will experience a spiritual revival.

It is easier for a lot of Christians to believe this Big Rock Candy #MAGA nonsense, this dream of restoration, than it is to prepare themselves and their children for the realities of life in exile.

James Davison Hunter published a book back in 2010, To Change The World, in which he considers how Christians can live faithfully in a post-Christian world. The book was quite good in its diagnosis of the problem, but failed to provide any clear prescription. This is understandable; its very hard to figure out how to do this. The point is, though, that we had better get serious, real fast, about trying.

UPDATE: Reader Michael GC:

I came across this quote from James Davison Hunter the other day in an article discussing the ramifications of the pending Masterpiece Cakeshop Supreme Court decision, and found it so notable that I saved it:

The capacity of a social group or movement to make its particular preferences and practices seem natural is the key to its control; these particularities become standard throughout society while shrouded in a cloak of neutrality.

The key to its control. The standard of marriage is now such that two men wanting a wedding cake is so natural that why would anyone in their right mind even pause to think twice about it? Just make the cake and shut up! Whats wrong with you anyway?

For us donkeys on this Animal Farm who are stubborn about relinquishing their memories to fall for the favored lie of the moment, time for decision will be upon us. Do we say what we know and lose status or play along for our livelihood and our childrens well-being? There is another option, the Benedict one. It has to be; otherwise, even when we win, well lose. Consider the Boy Scouts of America (now just Scouts, BSA). They won their case legally but surrendered to the culture, regardless.

More:
Culture Wars: Where Are We Now? | The American Conservative

Trump, coronavirus, and the partisan culture war over masks – Vox.com

Wearing a mask is one of the easiest ways to contribute to the fight against coronavirus.

Infected people wearing masks are less likely to spray virus-containing droplets onto others, which means that universal mask-wearing should, in theory, make everyone safer. Theres some evidence from across the world that suggests the widespread use of masks has played a role in reducing coronavirus transmission. Studies on mask-wearing generally support it, finding that masks generally provide at least some protection. At worst, masks are a low-cost intervention that might help at the margins.

But in recent weeks, mask-wearing in the United States has become another flashpoint in the partisan culture wars.

President Trump refuses to wear a mask in public appearances including one at a factory that produces masks or in his office, despite a recent outbreak among the White House staff. Vice President Mike Pence opted not to wear one when he visited the Mayo Clinic, a prominent medical facility in Minnesota thats treating coronavirus patients. Many Republicans in Congress have opted not to wear masks on the House and Senate floors, despite several members of their caucus testing positive for the illness earlier this spring.

People tend to take signals from their political leadership, and rank-and-file Republicans appear to have gotten the message. New research from three political scientists Syracuses Shana Gadarian, UC-Irvines Sara Goodman, and Cornells Tom Pepinsky analyzed polling data on over 2,400 Americans attitudes and self-reported behaviors during the pandemic. They find that, after controlling for a full set of confounding variables, partisanship is a fairly strong predictor of ones likelihood of wearing a mask.

Democrats are more than 20 percentage points more likely than Republicans to (75% versus 53%) to report wearing masks in public, Pepinsky writes in a blog post summarizing their findings. Mask-wearing levels are consistently lower across the board in states that voted strongly for Trump.

Why would Republicans treat masks as a partisan issue?

A series of tweets from R.R. Reno, the editor of the conservative religious magazine First Things, is clarifying: In a diatribe that went viral on Tuesday night for all the wrong reasons, Reno praised Trump for failing to wear a mask when meeting a group of World War II veterans and went on to describe the very idea of masks as a kind of surrender:

Reno has written a lot of goofy stuff during the coronavirus epidemic. But what hes saying here tells us a lot about the rights approach to coronavirus more broadly.

The first thing that leaps out is that the anti-mask crusade reflects a particular vision of masculinity. Renos reframing of an obvious public health measure as a kind of cowardice, something tough World War II veterans would never do, is a thinly veiled way of calling protective masks unmanly. As my colleague Anna North argues, this strain of anxious masculinity is a consistent theme in anti-mask arguments on the right.

The second is the argument that mask-wearing is a form of political correctness. Renos reasoning is incoherent if youre willing to visit your mother, presumably you should take mask-wearing even more seriously but it illustrates the category of thinking hes relying on here. The question in his mind is not does wearing a mask contribute to public health, but rather what does wearing a mask say about where I stand in the culture war. He sees the issue not through the lens of substance, but of symbolism.

When you look at the broader Republican response to masks through the lens of Renos thinking, it starts to make a lot more sense. This is a political movement that has been built to wage a culture war; it has no greater objective than owning the libs. And the best way to own them is to defeat them in combat over identity: gender, race, sexuality, and the like.

The war on masks is a way of taking a public health crisis a situation that demands political unity and best practices in governance and reshaping it into a culture war competition. The question is not are we doing a good job handling this so much as whose team do you want to be on, the namby-pamby liberals or the strong fearless conservatives?

It is difficult for members of the modern organized conservative movement to see political issues outside the lenses of partisanship and the culture wars. At a time when unity on public health matters is paramount, on issues ranging from masks to testing to the timing of reopening, this is dangerous.

Support Voxs explanatory journalism

Every day at Vox, we aim to answer your most important questions and provide you, and our audience around the world, with information that has the power to save lives. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower you through understanding. Voxs work is reaching more people than ever, but our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources particularly during a pandemic and an economic downturn. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will enable our staff to continue to offer free articles, videos, and podcasts at the quality and volume that this moment requires. Please consider making a contribution to Vox today.

Read this article:
Trump, coronavirus, and the partisan culture war over masks - Vox.com

Did the Coronavirus Kill Ideology in Australia? – The New York Times

HOBART, Australia Until four months ago few leaders seemed more influenced even inspired by President Trumps worldview than Australias prime minister, Scott Morrison.

Mr. Morrisons government was climate-denying, globalism-bashing and displayed an increasingly authoritarian bent. His rhetoric, even if it lacked the sriracha of Trumpetry, riffed on Trumpian themes.

And given a good crisis, Mr. Morrisons administration seemed as determined as the White House to miss no opportunity to make matters worse as it did with its grossly inept response to Australias summer of apocalyptic wild fires.

Having seen this almost impossibly low bar set for government action, many Australians have felt relief tinged with astonishment knowing that their country is today among the worlds most successful in dealing with the coronavirus epidemic. By some measures, it nearly rivals South Korea and has done better than Singapore and Germany.

As of Monday morning, Australia, with its 25.5 million people, had recorded a total of 7,054 infections and 99 deaths, according to Worldometers. Thats 277 infections and four deaths for every million people. In the United States, the per capita figures were 4,619 infections and 275 deaths per million by Monday; in Britain, 3,592 infections and 511 deaths per million.

What happened?

According to Mr. Morrisons treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, the former prime minister John Howard, the eminence grise of Australian conservatism and its many culture wars, counseled Mr. Morrison and Mr. Frydenberg that theres no ideological constraints at times like this. Mr. Frydenberg added, Thats the advice we have taken. Mr. Morrison went so far as to declare: Today is not about ideologies. We checked those at the door.

Mr. Howard spoke from experience. A fiercely right-wing prime minister, when confronted in 1996 with the horror of 35 people being shot dead at Port Arthur, in Tasmania, he moved decisively to enact strong gun-control laws. No mass shootings occurred in the next 20 years, according to a 2016 report, and the decline in firearm deaths accelerated. There have been only two mass shootings since, one of seven people and one of four.

Following Mr. Morrisons own Damascene moment, things once deemed fantastical became commonplace. Scientists, whom Mr. Morrisons party has derided for over a decade, were respectfully asked for their views about the novel coronavirus and, more remarkable still, these views were acted on and amplified. Mr. Morrison dismissed the idea of trying to build herd immunity among the population, calling it a death sentence.

A national cabinet was formed in which the states premiers (the equivalent of governors) from both the left and the right regularly met by video to plot the course of the nation through the crisis. In this way and others, a government that has been sectarian and divisive became inclusive.

The stimulus plan was designed after negotiations with various civil society groups, including the trade unions. There are no blue teams or red teams, Mr. Morrison said in early April. There are no more unions or bosses. There are just Australians now; thats all that matters.

He thanked Sally McManus, the first woman to head Australias trade union movement a socialist and feminist, a bte noire of the right and to the left of the Labor Party mainstream, Ms. McManus is an activist who allies her politics with the likes of Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn.

It was a moment of grace, and as surreal as if Mr. Trump sought the counsel of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and then praised her.

As a consequence of the stimulus, the Australian economy is not expected to plumb the catastrophic depths foreseen for the United States or Europe. The unemployment rate rose to 6.2 percent in April. The Reserve Bank of Australia has predicted that it will peak at 10 percent in June and slowly decline to 6.5 percent by June 2022. While these sad statistics hide a larger tragedy, they still are preferable to those in the United States, where unemployment hit 14.7 percent last month and, according to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, may have reached 25 percent.

Australians trust in their government has soared from record lows in December: Ninety-three percent of respondents in a recent poll by the Lowy Institute said they believed it had handled Covid-19 very or fairly well. Peter Doherty, a leading Australian immunologist and Nobel laureate who on Twitter rails against neoliberal idiocy and Mr. Trump, spoke for many Australians when he said recently that Mr. Morrison had, in dealing with the pandemic, basically done the right thing.

And yet Australias success has received little global attention.

New Zealands prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, struts the world stage, leading in scores of stories about countries that are succeeding against the coronavirus, exuding charisma, but charisma excludes Mr. Morrison, who seems condemned to watch from the wings.

Could it be that Australias record somehow embarrasses commentators of both the left and the right? The left, because the Australian government is in every other respect Trumpian in its male-led, climate-denying, nationalist tub-thumping and authoritarian sentiments; the right because a conservative government has succeeded only by very publicly abandoning ideology. And if ideology, and the culture wars, are nothing when everything is at stake, the inevitable question arises: Did they ever mean anything at all?

Now, with the beginning of a return to normalcy, the strange miracle of this Australian consensus already is starting to vanish, with old habits renascent.

Even so, these remarkable few months will remain a rebuke to the murderous madness of ruling through division, a testament of hope to all that can be achieved when ideology is ditched.

Presented with growing doubts about democracys ability to deal with the pandemic on the one hand, and the seeming ability of a totalitarian China to address the crisis on the other, Australia unexpectedly, if only briefly, returned to its best traditions of communality and fairness.

While the world searches for a vaccine for the virus, the vaccine for its coming crises not least among them climate change is perhaps hiding in plain sight: unite, listen and act with all, for all, rather than special interests. Perhaps this is the future, the only future, and not just for Australia, but for any democracy seeking to hold through this new, terrifying age.

Richard Flanagan won the Man Booker Prize for The Narrow Road to the Deep North and is the author, most recently, of the novel First Person.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. Wed like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And heres our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

View original post here:
Did the Coronavirus Kill Ideology in Australia? - The New York Times