Coronavirus
- This topic has 1,592 replies, 41 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Capitalism is an Incubator for Pandemics: Socialism is the Solution
An interesting article that expresses much of our own ideas.
“COVID-19 highlights the need for socialism to face epidemics like these. And by socialism, we don’t mean Medicare for All or New Deal liberalism. Medicare for All is not enough to face pandemics like the coronavirus. We mean a society in which human needs govern production, not the drive for profit. It’s a society without capitalists, where production and reproduction is democratically planned by the working class and oppressed. In this kind of society, we would be able to respond to the COVID-19 infinitely better than in capitalism.”
“In a socialist society, both prevention and responses to outbreaks of illness would change drastically. Supplies such as hand soap, hand sanitizer, and surface sanitizing wipes or sprays are in extremely high demand at this time. We are already seeing shortages of key supplies around the world. The need for profit maximization under capitalism has led companies to drastically raise their prices in this time of high demand. For example, the Washington Post has reported drastic increases in prices of products such as Purell Hand Sanitizer. Under capitalism, scarcity leads to greater profit…A central aspect of socialism is a democratically run planned economy: an economy in which all resources are allocated according to need, instead of ability to pay. Need is decided democratically by both producers and consumers. With the means of production under workers’ control, we would be able to quickly increase production of these products in an emergency.”
“Capitalism has led to a globalized system of production containing industries at disparate ends of the globe that truly depend on each other to function. This allows for a capitalist’s exploitation of a worker in a factory in China producing iPhones that goes unnoticed by an Apple customer here in the U.S.. It also allows corporations to drive down costs in one area of the world that may have weaker protections for workers. While this is beneficial for capitalists, outbreaks of illnesses such as COVID-19 highlight clear weaknesses in this system…Socialism cannot exist in only one country, so a global planned economy would be key in these moments. If one country is experiencing a shortage, others would have to make up for it. This is key for reigning in global epidemics like the coronavirus: it will only be stopped if we stop it everywhere. In a global planned economy, this would be a much easier task.”
“Under socialism, the increased mechanization of production and the elimination of unnecessary jobs — goodbye advertising industry! goodbye health insurance industry! — would already drastically reduce the number of hours that we would need to work. We would be spending vast hours of the day making art or hanging out with friends and family. During disease outbreaks, we would be able to stay home at the first sign of a cold, in addition to getting tested right away. In a planned economy, we could allocate resources where they are most needed, and take into account a decrease in the workforce due to illness.”
“Companies such as Gilead Sciences, Moderna Therapeutics, and GlaxoSmithKline all have various therapies in development. Each company’s interest in maximizing profits around their particular COVID-19 therapy has kept them from being able to pool their resources and data to develop therapies in the most expeditious manner possible. The state of COVID-19 research exposes the lies about capitalism “stimulating innovation.”… Expropriation of the capitalists would mean the public would no longer have to subsidize private corporate profits.”
“Under socialism, the entire healthcare industry would be run democratically by doctors, nurses, employees, and patients. This would be drastically different from the current system in which wealthy capitalists make the major decisions in hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, device manufacturing firms, and insurance companies (the key players that make up the “medical industrial complex”).”
“Capitalism created the conditions of the epidemic. Capitalist “solutions” are insufficient and exacerbate the crisis, meaning more sickness and more death. Capitalism has been an incubator for the continual spread of the coronavirus. Health care under this system will always be woefully inadequate in addressing epidemics. The coronavirus highlights the fact that we must move to a more social analysis of health and well-being. We are all connected to each other, to nature, and to the environment around us. Socialism will restructure society based on those relationships.
At the same time, socialism is not a utopia. There will likely be epidemics or pandemics in socialism as well. However, a socialist society — one in which all production is organized in a planned economy under workers’ control — would best be able to allocate resources and put the creative and scientific energy of people to the task.”Nevertheless the article is still wedded to the belief that nationalisation is progressive.
Dengue has increased to 66% in Argentina, the most affected ones are the poor peoples from Buenos Aires, therefore, the Stock Exchange is not going to collapse.
This article says that there are 1,000 cases of Dengue in Argentina in 14 provinces, but there are 9 cases of Coronavirus
The President of the USA was in contact with one minister from Brasil which has Coronavirus, therefore, the president must be tested too, and the whole white house must be placed in quarantine
One reason for the panic is that we have no natural immunity to COVID-19
The best information now available suggests a fatality rate of around 0.7 per cent
To me what this highlights is that if those in power really thought the climate change was an emergency, urgent action could be taken despite the economic consequences as we now see in many nations lock-downs and travel bans.
The fact that nothing like government responses to coronavirus is happening signifies that Greta’s and the greens’ message that we are on a cusp of an environmental emergency is not getting through, and governments are needlessly procrastinating over taking action.
At what point will climate change result in similar intervention from the State?
There is a Chinese doctor who tested the first Corona Vaccine on herself
What is this dengue thing that we are all going to get rather the Coronavirus? What precautions do I have to take to stop getting it ?
https://www.cdc.gov/features/avoid-dengue/index.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6335707/
Denque is a disease transmitted by Mosquitoes bite, the best prevention is wearing long sleeve pants and shirts, or using repellents, it is more frequently propagated in the Caribbean, South America, Asia and Africa, and place where the rivers have been polluted
The relevance of Dengue fever, an illness with no cure nor vaccine just palliative treatment, is it is spreading to previously non-affected regions due to climate change but reaction is not as urgent despite some frightening stats.
https://www.climate-change-guide.com/dengue-fever.html
Where I lived in Kerala, there was no species of malaria carrying mosquitoes but Dengue infected ones were prevalent. And many were active day-time.
The good news was that unlike malaria mosquitoes that are numerously different types, Dengue mosquitos tend to be specific species so can ultimately be tackled by genetic targeting to make them extinct.
Another illness I read is on the spread is Lyme Disease, caused by tick bites and that too is being driven by climate change.
There was a vaccine available for it until 2002, when the manufacturer, facing criticism that the effect wore off over time, discontinued production. Scientists are again researching a vaccine
Reason for the lack of panic, is that it is neither is transmitted person to person.
So there’s no chance of me or any member of the working class in Britain catching it? On the other hand, there is a high chance of thousands here getting the Coronavirus and, as the prime minister has just announced, hundreds dying from it. As a pro-working class party we can’t complain that too much is being done to deal with it compared to what is being done about dengue fever. That won’t wash and can’t be our position. That’s irrelevant to the immediate threat to workers here.
We are not reformist but we must want as much to be done as it takes to protect the health and life of workers. Also the loss of earnings by those who can’t afford to take time off sick. I think that something along those lines would be a much more credible approach.
“no chance of me or any member of the working class in Britain catching it”
Little Englander 😛
Marcos and I fully acknowledge we are part of the world socialist movement and recognise global threats
“we must want as much to be done as it takes to protect the health and life of workers. Also the loss of earnings by those who can’t afford to take time off sick.”
I’ve said as much to Robbo, having talked with a direct victim of her precarious employment.
It isn’t coronavirus that is the real threat but it is the vulnerability of the poor, the inadequate health and social services.
But i still have never really got an answer to Robbo’s question…why this concern of capitalists to Covid-19, that it is rushing themselves into a recession when the death toll is far less than ordinary flu, wars and conflicts and many other social ills where the actual death toll is ignored.
I simply cannot believe it is the capitalist’s humanitarian concern for the relatively few victims.
Is it, as some say and as being frequently revealed with increasing numbers of the elite falling victime, the same mind-set that brought improved sanitation and treated water supplies and ending adulteration of food – that the capitalists are also part of the public and suffer equally?
The rich can retreat to their bunkers but you and I can’t
Even bunkers are not safe for the capitalist class, it was proven in Iraq when the USA penetrated the walls of the bunkers with depleted uranium. I know that this disease is becoming a pandemic because it is affecting the rich class and the lack of health service that is affecting the poor
Alan, Have I denied what you have said?
That document says that there are a few hundred cases in the UK all acquired by travellers from areas where it is endemic. So not a problem for workers here. Unlike the Coronavirus which is an immediate current threat to the health and life of workers here.
Incidentally dengue fever is a threat to some workers in the US as parts of the US are “tropical”:
https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0005744
In fact dengue fever is not the only Neglected Tropical Disease (NTD) threatening workers in those parts of the USA. I can see therefore why in the US the amount of money devoted to dealing with these diseases compared with that being made available for combatting Coronavirus might be an issue. It not in the UK or indeed the rest of Europe.
Raising it here could even be counterproductive as, given nationalist sentiments, some politicians will be tempted to call for money to be diverted from the budget to deal with NTDs in other parts of the world to helping workers here.
I don’t think that the government is prioritising the problem here because it affects the rich. I think it is to do with its effect on production as, with so many workers off sick, this will fall and the flow of profits be interrupted. A confirmation as to who the real “wealth producers” are. They will also be concerned with whether the health care system can cope with a huge unexpected increase in sick workers and the cost of dealing with this.
What will also be revealing is, as Alan has raised, how capitalism deals with this global problem compared with how it is dealing with the threat of global overwarming. Will it be each state for itself here too? Or will the existence of a World Health Organisation be of some use?
ALB, I am still very puzzled.
From what I read, for the vast majority of working age adults, Covid19 can be symptomless and at most a minor illness. Those at risk are the frail elderly and already chronically sick (you and I are probably in the former category) – non-productive sections of the population.
So when you say, “…I think it is to do with its effect on production as, with so many workers off sick, this will fall and the flow of profits be interrupted…They will also be concerned with whether the health care system can cope with a huge unexpected increase in sick workers and the cost of dealing with this.” i’m not sure that applies.
Just to repeat, it is not a debilitating illness for most healthy fit workers. Why should they care about its spread when it is there own actions such as self-imposed quarantine, lock-downs and ending travel which are impacting upon the profits, not the actual illness, nor the potential sick rate.
The healthcare consequences is a real concern for it adds to the already existing burden for looking after the aged and dependent which cannot be dealt with at the present time.
I’m surprised that the right-wing has not already said it is nature’s way of culling those who are drain on resources.
I am, as I said, truly mystified by the reactions of the ruling class and cannot think of any reason except mass hysteria.
Can it be they have now got an irrational fear of contamination from the “masses” and as Marcos says, there is no place for them to hide in their mansions.
It is almost like all those Zombie movies and we are walking dead to them.
When will they begin treat us like lepers were in the past, we have to ring our bell and call out “Unclean…Unclean”
When this pandemic exhausts itself, and herd immunity to the coronavirus is established, and all the panic fades away as we return to normalcy, will ordinary people learn that drastic government legislation that reduces the corporations profits can be passed to protect people.
And when, in the future, similar action is called for and it is opposed, will our fellow-workers recognise it is being done for the benefit of vested interests and not the well-being of the majority?
Perhaps we will all become aware of what community really means and that share prices on the stock-market does not reflect the real welfare of the people.
It might be as you suggest ALB, a silver-lining.
But the more I read the less I see that we have global cooperation to tackle it but individual nations taken un-coordinated action without consultation.
WHO’s role appears to be collating data. It is not being used to apply its recommended policies and best practice.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.