3 ms·

>In my recollection, the very first "politicization" I heard of Covid's origins were politicians insisting that the virus was man-made. I'd like to see some ev

>In my recollection, the very first "politicization" I heard of Covid's origins were politicians insisting that the virus was man-made. I'd like to see some evidence that politicians insisted it was man-made instead of trusting your recollection. If the virus had lab origins in a lab specifically performing "gain of function" research, that's quite a coincidence that might even suggest those politicians were correct (although I would concede it may have certainly been irresponsible). Additionally, I expect polemics and politicization from politicians. It is their nature. But I'm not supposed to get it from the media, from the CDC, from the technocrats, and from the "fact checkers". But their rhetoric was political and their actions to shut down and shout down wrongthink was wrong (and now can be seen as having specious justification). > I don't remember any member of the media establishment calling it the China virus. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g Another commenter already explained this, but these types of videos that are deliberately designed to obfuscate what actually happened are bullshit. Yes, the media called it the "Wuhan coronavirus" early on before it was an actual pandemic because the virus primarily only existed in Wuhan at that point. Furthermore, the now well-known name of Covid-19 was not as prevalent then, and your average listener would understand "coronavirus" more than a new technical name at that point. This is very different than, after the pandemic had already been widespread, specifically crossing out "Coronavirus" to call it "Chinese virus", as Trump did. Look, there are plenty of things that the media at large deservedly gets criticized for, but trying to pretend calling it the Wuhan coronavirus early on in the pandemic is the same thing as specifically emphasizing it as "the Chinese virus" 6 months later is just lying.
- trentnix 5y ago
  > Look, there are plenty of things that the media at large deservedly gets criticized for, but trying to pretend calling it the Wuhan coronavirus early on in the pandemic is the same thing as specifically emphasizing it as "the Chinese virus" 6 months later is just lying. Your argument explicitly depends on the context and it depends on the criticism. The context wasn't "6 months later". It was days later. And the criticism was that it is racist. That it is xenophobic. That it is intended to humiliate and threaten people of Chinese descent. A much more plausible explanation would have been that Trump and his insistence on calling it the "China virus" was an attempt to deflect any political blame for his administration's policies to try and contain the virus. A more plausible explanation was that Trump was being unnecessarily coarse. Or unnecessarily provocative. But no, he was accused of racism and xenophobia. But even before the phrasing of "China virus" was a thing, Trump was criticized for shutting down travel from China as being racist. In hindsight it turns out to have been a very shrewd, life-saving move. But instead of giving credit where credit's due and recognizing the wisdom of shutting down travel, suddenly the phrasing was racist and xenophobic. The accusations were the same, but the goalposts were moved. That the same people (the media) lobbing the accusations of racism and xenophobia were only days earlier using the same language is clear hypocrisy. Since racism is wrongthink and wrongthink doesn't merit being discredited, it's easy to see why it's thrown around so casually. It requires no justification and is a cheap way to generate outrage. And that makes it a useful political tool. We now know that many of these same people (the media along with their cohorts in government and the socials) shut down reasonable discussion regarding the origins of the virus while simultaneously using accusations of racism and xenophobia. And that's potentially scandalous and should be deeply embarrassing.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eZtCq1aj2g Another commenter already explained this, but these types of videos that are deliberately designed to obfuscate what actually happened are bullshit. Yes, the media called it the "Wuhan coronavirus" early on before it was an actual pandemic because the virus primarily only existed in Wuhan at that point. Furthermore, the now well-known name of Covid-19 was not as prevalent then, and your average listener would understand "coronavirus" more than a new technical name at that point. This is very different than, after the pandemic had already been widespread, specifically crossing out "Coronavirus" to call it "Chinese virus", as Trump did. Look, there are plenty of things that the media at large deservedly gets criticized for, but trying to pretend calling it the Wuhan coronavirus early on in the pandemic is the same thing as specifically emphasizing it as "the Chinese virus" 6 months later is just lying.

trentnix 5y ago
> Look, there are plenty of things that the media at large deservedly gets criticized for, but trying to pretend calling it the Wuhan coronavirus early on in the pandemic is the same thing as specifically emphasizing it as "the Chinese virus" 6 months later is just lying. Your argument explicitly depends on the context and it depends on the criticism. The context wasn't "6 months later". It was days later. And the criticism was that it is racist. That it is xenophobic. That it is intended to humiliate and threaten people of Chinese descent. A much more plausible explanation would have been that Trump and his insistence on calling it the "China virus" was an attempt to deflect any political blame for his administration's policies to try and contain the virus. A more plausible explanation was that Trump was being unnecessarily coarse. Or unnecessarily provocative. But no, he was accused of racism and xenophobia. But even before the phrasing of "China virus" was a thing, Trump was criticized for shutting down travel from China as being racist. In hindsight it turns out to have been a very shrewd, life-saving move. But instead of giving credit where credit's due and recognizing the wisdom of shutting down travel, suddenly the phrasing was racist and xenophobic. The accusations were the same, but the goalposts were moved. That the same people (the media) lobbing the accusations of racism and xenophobia were only days earlier using the same language is clear hypocrisy. Since racism is wrongthink and wrongthink doesn't merit being discredited, it's easy to see why it's thrown around so casually. It requires no justification and is a cheap way to generate outrage. And that makes it a useful political tool. We now know that many of these same people (the media along with their cohorts in government and the socials) shut down reasonable discussion regarding the origins of the virus while simultaneously using accusations of racism and xenophobia. And that's potentially scandalous and should be deeply embarrassing.