7 ms·

Sweden doesn't "manage" Covid-19 according to the expectations of whoever wrote this article (no lockdowns, no masks, no "social distancing" rules, etc.). Is S

Sweden doesn't "manage" Covid-19 according to the expectations of whoever wrote this article (no lockdowns, no masks, no "social distancing" rules, etc.). Is Sweden "threatening the world" as well? Or is this the usual political narrative the left-wing press uses to bash right-wing politicians?

arez 6y ago
it's not, everyone can see that the current situation in brazil is far worse then in sweden. Sweden didn't had 200m people the last time I checked
- giacaglia 6y ago
  Yet, São Paulo, the worst state in Brazil in covid cases and hospitalizations, has the hardest lockdown
  - tamcap 6y ago
    Lockdown depends on two core factors. Social contract (compliance) and enforcement. SP is currently lacking both.
    - giacaglia 6y ago
      It is not. I was there two weeks ago Your argument is so bad. If that is the case, then alcohol prohibition was successful only if people complied to it. The same with the war on drugs
Sporktacular 6y ago
Sweden isn't likely big enough to produce mutations. But sure, The Economist is left wing now. Almost the definition of whataboutism.
- bauerd 6y ago
  Mutations are a matter of chance
  - christophilus 6y ago
    My guess is they’re saying if you have a population of 20, you have 20 chances of mutation. If you have a population of 200M, you have 200M chances of mutation. Size matters.
    - moralsupply 6y ago
      Following that logic China and India should be a lot more problematic than Brazil. As a matter of fact, both of those countries "mismanage" Covid-19 as well.
      - tsimionescu 6y ago
        Isn't Covid19 almost entirely eradicated in China? India is indeed struggling. They had the good fortune of being hit later than other countries,but they will likely be hit worse. Of course, when articles critical of India will appear, you'll probably again complain that they are left-wing propaganda against Modi.
  - tekstar 6y ago
    Yes, and that chance is a diceroll on every infection, so the more infections, the more times you're rolling that die..
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    Yes, and for a fixed mutation chance, the bigger the population, the greater the likelihood that a mutation will happen. Say a mutation has a 1 in 1000 chance of happening. For a disease that infects 1000 people, you would expect 1 person to end up with some mutation. If the same disease infects 1,000,000 people, you would expect 1000 mutations to occur.
JacobSuperslav 6y ago
I think it's fair to say that right wing politicians are inherently harmful to society in a global sense given that they primarily care about their own tribe.
- krona 6y ago
  Compared to what?
  - unixhero 6y ago
    Compared to non right wing non populist mad men who want to see existing society and institutions crash and burn. Such as Bolsonaro, such as Trump.
    - krona 6y ago
      Are you saying there aren't any left-wing populists, or that left-wing populists are good?
      - pmiller2 6y ago
        They appear to be saying that left-wing populists are less harmful than right wing politicians.
      - unixhero 6y ago
        You are inferring. I am saying precisely what I am saying. Nothing more. Dictators and right wing populists are bad at solving humanitarian crises and pandemics which require care, because it is not possible for these leaders to project the strong man image they cling to. Just look at Bolsonaro and Trump's absymal performances in keeping the covid virus at bay, thus allowing the pandemic to flourish. This is by the way factual, objective truths not my point of view.
- jacob2484 6y ago
  That's not "fair to say". That's your opinion. You can argue that Texas is "right wing" and yet people keep flocking there - wanting less government ("aka California") in their is inherently harmful?
makomk 6y ago
There's definitely an element of truth to that. For example, Italy's mismanagement of Covid-19 probably did immense damage to the world - early on the European outbreaks were basically a gradient radiating outwards from there, there's some evidence that even the US's outbreak came from Italy, and it seems they somehow managed to report zero cases right up until the point a significant proportion of their population was infected which would require really, spectacularly screwing up their testing program - but that narrative never made an appearance in the media because it'd make it harder to blame right-wing politicians in countries like the UK and US which the media dislikes. Instead, the narrative around Italy is that actually, it was the other countries like the UK and the US which screwed up worst because they should've learned from Italy, as though there was something meaningful that could be learned from a country that collected so little useful data. On the other hand, Bolsonaro was really pally with Trump and gets the full blame for everything. I wouldn't even be surprised if there was some mutation during the first Italian outbreak which made Covid-19 more of a danger; there's not really any way we could tell. (This also basically completely doomed contact tracing in every other western country, because they had no reason to be looking for cases related to people who'd travelled from Italy until it was far too late to start. It's probably not a coincidence that all the countries which made it vaguely work were ones that were close to China rather than Europe.)
- pharmakom 6y ago
  There was so much to learn. When the hospitals in northern Italy were being overwhelmed the UK prime minister was telling us to wash our hands more but continue business as usual. This probably cost UK around 50k deaths.
- mrkramer 6y ago
  How do you define mismanagement when state and politicians can lie? I doubt COVID-19 stats are 100% reliable and true in any country in the world starting with China. 5 000 people died in China of COVID-19 I mean c'mon.
tsimionescu 6y ago
Yes, Sweden is quite infamous for its own mismanagement of Covid19, it has been attacked for this everywhere in the press often. However, Sweden is a tiny country with a very good hospital system and a relatively wealthy and healthy population, which has compensated somewhat for the incompetence of its government (they still have several times more dead people on their hands than most comparable countries). Brazil is a huge country in every sense of the word, with a much poorer population, a much worse hospital system, a much kore important role in the world economy, and so it is perfectly poised to become a breeding ground and reservoir for many new strains of Covid19. And you must be laughably far right to call The Economist left wing. Marine Le Pen would call it a right wing paper.
- moralsupply 6y ago
  > And you must be laughably far right to call The Economist left wing. Marine Le Pen would call it a right wing paper. Did you read the article? It doesn't follow a "right wing" tone.
  - pmiller2 6y ago
    The article is also not "left wing," either. It's nonpartisan in tone.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    Yes, it is a completely non-partisan article. It doesn't even mention Bolsanaro's political affiliation, it just accuses him of coming up with quack cures and dirrctly opposing efforts to contain the pandemic. It reads like a completely business-like, dispassionate take on the situation in Brazil, appearing in one of the most respected and well-known right-wing newspapers in the US.
- pseudo0 6y ago
  > And you must be laughably far right to call The Economist left wing. Marine Le Pen would call it a right wing paper. I'd consider The Economist neoliberal rather than right-wing, as they have a pretty clear editorial bias in favor of free trade and globalization, but also tend to lean left on social issues. That puts the magazine opposite Le Pen on most issues, given her nationalist positions. Trying to lump them together as "right-wing" is incredibly reductionist. You can go back and read The Economist's opinion of Le Pen if you'd like, and it's distinctly not charitable. https://www.economist.com/1843/2016/03/02/marine-le-pen-letrangere https://www.economist.com/1843/2016/03/02/marine-le-pen-letr...
dang 6y ago
Please don't take HN threads into political or ideological flamewars. We're trying to avoid the inner circles of internet hell here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: since this account has been repeatedly breaking the site guidelines, including using this site primarily for flamewars and ideological battle, I've banned it. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with. It will eventually get your main account banned as well.

arez 6y ago

it's not, everyone can see that the current situation in brazil is far worse then in sweden. Sweden didn't had 200m people the last time I checked

giacaglia 6y ago
Yet, São Paulo, the worst state in Brazil in covid cases and hospitalizations, has the hardest lockdown
- tamcap 6y ago
  Lockdown depends on two core factors. Social contract (compliance) and enforcement. SP is currently lacking both.
  - giacaglia 6y ago
    It is not. I was there two weeks ago Your argument is so bad. If that is the case, then alcohol prohibition was successful only if people complied to it. The same with the war on drugs

Sporktacular 6y ago

Sweden isn't likely big enough to produce mutations. But sure, The Economist is left wing now. Almost the definition of whataboutism.

bauerd 6y ago
Mutations are a matter of chance
- christophilus 6y ago
  My guess is they’re saying if you have a population of 20, you have 20 chances of mutation. If you have a population of 200M, you have 200M chances of mutation. Size matters.
  - moralsupply 6y ago
    Following that logic China and India should be a lot more problematic than Brazil. As a matter of fact, both of those countries "mismanage" Covid-19 as well.
    - tsimionescu 6y ago
      Isn't Covid19 almost entirely eradicated in China? India is indeed struggling. They had the good fortune of being hit later than other countries,but they will likely be hit worse. Of course, when articles critical of India will appear, you'll probably again complain that they are left-wing propaganda against Modi.
- tekstar 6y ago
  Yes, and that chance is a diceroll on every infection, so the more infections, the more times you're rolling that die..
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  Yes, and for a fixed mutation chance, the bigger the population, the greater the likelihood that a mutation will happen. Say a mutation has a 1 in 1000 chance of happening. For a disease that infects 1000 people, you would expect 1 person to end up with some mutation. If the same disease infects 1,000,000 people, you would expect 1000 mutations to occur.

JacobSuperslav 6y ago

I think it's fair to say that right wing politicians are inherently harmful to society in a global sense given that they primarily care about their own tribe.

krona 6y ago
Compared to what?
- unixhero 6y ago
  Compared to non right wing non populist mad men who want to see existing society and institutions crash and burn. Such as Bolsonaro, such as Trump.
  - krona 6y ago
    Are you saying there aren't any left-wing populists, or that left-wing populists are good?
    - pmiller2 6y ago
      They appear to be saying that left-wing populists are less harmful than right wing politicians.
    - unixhero 6y ago
      You are inferring. I am saying precisely what I am saying. Nothing more. Dictators and right wing populists are bad at solving humanitarian crises and pandemics which require care, because it is not possible for these leaders to project the strong man image they cling to. Just look at Bolsonaro and Trump's absymal performances in keeping the covid virus at bay, thus allowing the pandemic to flourish. This is by the way factual, objective truths not my point of view.
jacob2484 6y ago
That's not "fair to say". That's your opinion. You can argue that Texas is "right wing" and yet people keep flocking there - wanting less government ("aka California") in their is inherently harmful?

makomk 6y ago

There's definitely an element of truth to that. For example, Italy's mismanagement of Covid-19 probably did immense damage to the world - early on the European outbreaks were basically a gradient radiating outwards from there, there's some evidence that even the US's outbreak came from Italy, and it seems they somehow managed to report zero cases right up until the point a significant proportion of their population was infected which would require really, spectacularly screwing up their testing program - but that narrative never made an appearance in the media because it'd make it harder to blame right-wing politicians in countries like the UK and US which the media dislikes. Instead, the narrative around Italy is that actually, it was the other countries like the UK and the US which screwed up worst because they should've learned from Italy, as though there was something meaningful that could be learned from a country that collected so little useful data. On the other hand, Bolsonaro was really pally with Trump and gets the full blame for everything. I wouldn't even be surprised if there was some mutation during the first Italian outbreak which made Covid-19 more of a danger; there's not really any way we could tell. (This also basically completely doomed contact tracing in every other western country, because they had no reason to be looking for cases related to people who'd travelled from Italy until it was far too late to start. It's probably not a coincidence that all the countries which made it vaguely work were ones that were close to China rather than Europe.)

pharmakom 6y ago
There was so much to learn. When the hospitals in northern Italy were being overwhelmed the UK prime minister was telling us to wash our hands more but continue business as usual. This probably cost UK around 50k deaths.
mrkramer 6y ago
How do you define mismanagement when state and politicians can lie? I doubt COVID-19 stats are 100% reliable and true in any country in the world starting with China. 5 000 people died in China of COVID-19 I mean c'mon.

tsimionescu 6y ago

Yes, Sweden is quite infamous for its own mismanagement of Covid19, it has been attacked for this everywhere in the press often. However, Sweden is a tiny country with a very good hospital system and a relatively wealthy and healthy population, which has compensated somewhat for the incompetence of its government (they still have several times more dead people on their hands than most comparable countries). Brazil is a huge country in every sense of the word, with a much poorer population, a much worse hospital system, a much kore important role in the world economy, and so it is perfectly poised to become a breeding ground and reservoir for many new strains of Covid19. And you must be laughably far right to call The Economist left wing. Marine Le Pen would call it a right wing paper.

moralsupply 6y ago
> And you must be laughably far right to call The Economist left wing. Marine Le Pen would call it a right wing paper. Did you read the article? It doesn't follow a "right wing" tone.
- pmiller2 6y ago
  The article is also not "left wing," either. It's nonpartisan in tone.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  Yes, it is a completely non-partisan article. It doesn't even mention Bolsanaro's political affiliation, it just accuses him of coming up with quack cures and dirrctly opposing efforts to contain the pandemic. It reads like a completely business-like, dispassionate take on the situation in Brazil, appearing in one of the most respected and well-known right-wing newspapers in the US.
pseudo0 6y ago
> And you must be laughably far right to call The Economist left wing. Marine Le Pen would call it a right wing paper. I'd consider The Economist neoliberal rather than right-wing, as they have a pretty clear editorial bias in favor of free trade and globalization, but also tend to lean left on social issues. That puts the magazine opposite Le Pen on most issues, given her nationalist positions. Trying to lump them together as "right-wing" is incredibly reductionist. You can go back and read The Economist's opinion of Le Pen if you'd like, and it's distinctly not charitable. https://www.economist.com/1843/2016/03/02/marine-le-pen-letrangere https://www.economist.com/1843/2016/03/02/marine-le-pen-letr...

dang 6y ago

Please don't take HN threads into political or ideological flamewars. We're trying to avoid the inner circles of internet hell here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: since this account has been repeatedly breaking the site guidelines, including using this site primarily for flamewars and ideological battle, I've banned it. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with. It will eventually get your main account banned as well.