https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2020/03/emperor-xi-has-no-clothes/
China’s celebrated billionaire property-developer Ren Chiqiang did not hold back in his response the teleconferenced speech by President-for-life Xi Jinping’s on February 23, 2020, about the status of COVID-19:
I saw not an emperor standing there exhibiting his ‘new clothes’ but a clown prince who stripped naked and insisted on being emperor.
This is part of a diabolical pattern. The late Dr Li Wenliang was arrested in Wuhan in December last year after alerting people on his microblog to the danger of the novel coronavirus. Dr Li’s crime, according to Communist Party of China (CCP), was spreading rumours to fellow medical practitioners. In reality, of course, Li was being truthful, not only about a new viral respiratory illness, but also the People’s Republic of China: “I think a healthy society should not just have one voice.”
How we respond to the pandemic of 2020 tell us a lot about our long-held biases. The subject of our fury turns out to be, more often than not, what we already believed is wrong with the world. Gail Collins, an opinion columnist for the New York Times, decided on February 26 that her readers should call Covid-19 “the Trump virus”. A more helpful suggestion, perhaps, might be to rename Collins’s four-year case of Trump Derangement Virus (TDV). Elizabeth Lopatto, also suffering from TDV, had this to say in The Verge on March 12: “The best thing he can do for the country, to speed its response to the novel coronavirus, is to resign and let someone capable take over.” Peter Wehner, a day later in The Atlantic, announced the potential good news about the COVID-19 that those who have contracted TDV are so desperate to hear: “The Trump Presidency Is Over.”
For the rest of us, though, potential good news would be more along the lines of a medical cure. Various solutions have already been mooted, although the general availability of a single-purpose vaccine might be as much as 18 months away. That said, at his March 19 White House briefing, President Trump touted a promising, if not scientifically verified, medicine usually used in the treatment of malaria and strong cases of arthritis: “Now, a drug called chloroquine…Hydroxychloroquine. So chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine. Now, this is a common malaria drug…But the nice part is, it’s been around for a long time, so we know that if it – if things don’t go as planned, it’s not going to kill anybody.” Scientists and scientific journals were quick to note that hydroxychloroquine has not been subjected to “thorough rigorous clinical trials” with regards to COVID-19, even if anecdotal evidence points to its effectiveness as a cure and, conceivably, a preventive measure. Trump, pointedly, made his comment in the context of his support for the Right to Try Act, passed into law in May 2018. This law empowers patients in desperate straits and “unable to participate in a clinical trial” the right to “access certain unapproved treatments”. The widespread distribution of hydroxychloroquine, if properly monitored, is actually “beyond” – Trump’s word – the Right to Try Act, because chloroquine has been available for almost eighty years. There is the added factor that the supervised distribution of hydroxychloroquine, or a comparable undocumented treatment for COVID-19 such as HIV medication Kaletra, could in itself serve as a clinical trial.