Such a scenario (the U.S. “winning” the race and then withholding the vaccine from the rest of the world (or making them pay dearly for it) ludicrous from the aspect of self protection (we can’t seal the borders and prevent anyone from getting in; disease is always going to be just a plane ride away). It’s in our best interests to get worldwide coverage.*
With so many scientists in different countries working on the problem, there are bound to be multiple potential solutions within a relatively narrow time frame (it probably won’t be this year, but eventually). The U.S. couldn’t possibly block or pre-empt all those solutions.
Such musings are yet another manifestation of Trump Derangement Syndrome, a contagious disease for which a vaccine is highly unlikely (hopefully it won’t be necessary after January of 2021).
*not to mention the interests of U.S.-based Big Pharma and the Bill Gates Depopulation Squads, oo.
It was in the US best interests to honor the Paris accord, stay in the Iran deal, not unilaterally pull out of Kurdish Iraq, respond to russian hacking, not voice support for conspiracy theories and snake oil cures for coronavirus etc etc. This government doesn’t care about such things; they don’t care about what is beneficial to their citizens down the line or their international obligations.
As I said in my previous two responses: I don’t know if it is possible / practical for the US to withhold a vaccine. But, this government would absolutely try.
If thinking the president is an idiot and a crook, and the current republican party are a bunch of enablers and grifters…then, yes, I have Trump Derangement Syndrome.
I caught it by listening to the president’s own words and observing his actions.
You are optimistic to think that it would be withheld from countries that do not show proper deference to Trump, I would not be surprised if he withholds it from States that do not treat him with enough “respect”.
There are quite a number of things that would be in our best interest that are not done by this administration. That it would be good for the world and the people of the US is not a compelling enough reason.
This is likely correct. That doesn’t mean that we wouldn’t try. I’m sure we couldn’t block them, but I’m sure we can interfere.
Have you not paid any attention in the last 3 years? Now, whether or not our institutions and norms (AKA, the Deep State) manage to override Trump’s selfishness and greed is a reasonable question, and I would hope so. But they are doing everything in their power to destroy the institutions and norms that you ensure worldwide distribution of a vaccine or effective treatment.
Do you really think that if it was left up to Trump, and Trump alone, as to who would receive vaccines or treatment, he would not want something in return?
It should be the opposite of top secret intelligence. Everybody should be sharing everything openly. Screw the patents, everyone should agree that when the silver bullet is found it’s free to use by anyone. If we all know what each other is doing, perhaps you wouldn’t have multiple teams working on the same thing at once and more paths could be pursued simultaneously.
The vaccine (when its perfected) is a weapon. Even if you gave away the medical version of source code, there are only so many places it can be produced and I have heard that the first generation of the Vaccine will be in the millions total production. Obviously you can build more facilties, train more workers, QA inspectors and the like. But for world wide distribution for 7 billion people, the actual shot could be as much as five years away.
So the first thing is that you dont want China to grab an Alpha release of the vaccine, as going to full production may cause a severe reaction to distribution of the vaccine, if that version was a failed version that kills more people than it cures. Think Anti-vaxxers on steroids.
But yeah, how fast you get your cure might be correlated with your performance in diplomacy in conjunction with American diplomacy. How fast Mexico gets it for free, instead of say Nigeria does not leave much room to wonder about how you can use it to grease some wheels.
Even if Trump was Total Evil (as opposed to the actual version, which is far closer to bumbling idiot), there are enough responsible people cleaning up after him and independent scientists who don’t give a rat’s ass about his opinions to make the vaccine-withholding scenario somewhere between wildly improbable and ludicrously impossible.
That is exactly what I said in my post. That the institutions and norms would likely override Trump’s impulses, or at least, that is what I hope. The question that you quoted, but did not answer, was “if it was left up to Trump, and Trump alone”.
I did not say that Trump was “Total Evil”, that is entirely a fabrication of your own creation. I said that he was selfish and greedy. That he is a bumbling idiot does little to mitigate the damage that his narcissism causes.
Let us say that the US gets a vaccine, and it does not seem as though anyone else will have one for 6 months. Sure, we share it with Canada, and northern Europe. But what about Iran? I think we should, but I cannot see that happening without a great deal of controversy among the MAGA crowds. Will we give the IP to China, with all the contentions we have with them, including the conspiracies that are believed and propagated at the highest level as to China’s culpability in the pandemic?
Will the less fortunate nations on our planet have the same access as well? How hard are we going to work to get this vaccine into Latin and South America? Into Africa or the Middle East?
It is possible, given that their are incompetent and evil people holding positions of power in the world, that someone would try to keep vaccine development secret. But it is not, under any circumstances, a good idea to do that. And even if the government tried to keep an exclusive hold on a vaccine, they would fail. All it takes is one person to risk arrest or whatever other punishment the government is attempting to impose, and the secret would be out. We couldn’t even keep the nuclear bomb secret, and that’s something that the vast majority of rational people would prefer didn’t exist. How hard would it be to keep something secret when the vast majority of people think they have a moral imperative to spread the knowledge?
You do realize that governors feel they have to kiss Trump’s ass to keep from losing out on life-saving equipment and aid, right? And that an independent doctor like Fauci is prevented from testifying before the House because they are too mean?
Anyone using “Trump Derangement Syndrome” to defend him has lost - since the person recommending people take dangerous unproven medication for the virus cares little for the health of America let alone the rest of the world.
I’ll agree with you about the right here in the US, but the UK has no room to talk when it comes to foreign attrocities and greed. They’re just as bad, if not worse, than the US. (If only because they’re an older and much larger nation)
That’s the only thing that gets me – usually the people in other nations who say these things (NOT accusing you, necessarily) often come from countries with a similiar history.
Perhaps you misread my post? I acknowledged exactly this; that the UK also has a sordid history, to say the least.
But anyway, it would be something akin to the tu quoque fallacy (but worse) if we were to suggest that only people coming from a country with a comparatively clean history were allowed to criticize others.
But I think you would agree with me that history is not so relevant as what’s happening now anyway. And the current US administration is right there with the Philippines and Brazil as becoming increasingly fascist every day. Heck Trump’s arguably the inspiration for those leaders.
All of the above. Partly because, as has been said above, our chances of actually getting a vaccine, one that works and doesn’t itself kill people, are massively improved if researchers are freely talking to each other. And partly because:
it really doesn’t work, even aside from all moral issues, to let a disease of this sort run rampant in some parts of the world and think the rest of the world will escape it.
I’m a whole lot more worried right now that Trump will force something untested, or even something that’s known to be hazardous, into general release than I am that China will.
A pandemic in the modern world is a bit like leaves in the autumn. If you cleared only your own garden of leaves then you’ll have a nice clean lawn. But if you refused to lend your rake to your neighbours then it won’t be long before the swirling wind blows the leaves right back in again.
TDS blunts legitimate criticism of Trump by making his critics in general look ridiculous. Anyone who thinks mentioning this problem is “defending” Trump has completely missed the point.
It’s a legitimate concern based on his history that Trump would tout a relatively untried vaccine. On the other hand, he has a history of being suspicious of vaccines* and there are adults in the room and in the scientific community who’d clamp down on premature vaccine release. Presidents in the U.S. really do not have the magical powers some assume.
Beware the hours of darkness when the powers of evil are exalted. :eek:
*Trump might have RFK Jr. whispering in his ear that with general release of a coronavirus vaccine, the entire country could suddenly turn autistic.
In my earlier post I listed out 4 examples of actions taken by the Trump administration where you can be damn sure “adults in the room” would have suggested a different option. (And of course we can list plenty more; Trump is not the topic of this thread so I deliberately just made a single sentence of a few things that came to mind).
The checks and balances have gone and Trump is basically operating with impunity at this point. Especially since the whole GOP party decided to join with him in obstructing justice in the impeachment “trial”.
I am not using “fascist” as a pejorative. The word has a concrete definition and the actions of the current US government are objectively fascist in at least some respects.
e.g. ultranationalism, sowing mistrust of academics, eroding checks on power and moving toward dictatorial powers, racial superiority / nativism, denigration of the press etc. Does any of this sound familiar?
Your main problem is that you confuse Trump’s yapping with significant practical effect.
“Moving toward dictatorial powers” could be applied to multiple Presidents in the past century, particularly in the realm of getting the U.S. into armed conflicts without a congressional war authorization. As for “denigration of the press”, that does sound familiar.
“…is (Trump) the menace, the threat to the very freedom of the press that we’ve come to know and disrespect?”
“Not by a country mile. His predecessor is.”
‘The Obama administration … declared open war on the press in a take-no-prisoners kind of way.’
Michael Enright
“In fact, Barack Obama may be one of the greatest enemies of a free press in American history. Much more than his successor.”
“Donald J. Trump may have made rumblings and grumblings, threatening all kinds of confrontation. But he has never done anything but talk.”
“The Obama administration, on the other hand, declared open war on the press in a take-no-prisoners kind of way.”
“Obama’s justice department tapped reporters’ phones, dragged reporters into court, and prosecuted three times as many cases targeting leakers than all previous administrations combined.”…
“Len Downie of The Post wrote: “The administration’s war on leaks and other efforts to control information are the most aggressive I’ve seen since the Nixon administration.””
Sloppy talk about and bogus characterizations of “fascism” are not so very different from blasting one’s enemies as “Nazis”. It cheapens the term and insults actual victims of fascism.
No, I said explicitly that I don’t give a shit about Trump’s tweets and gave examples of specific actions on his part. You’re choosing to ignore such examples because they don’t fit a narrative that you wish to believe; that Trump is merely a harmless idiot.
And, you’re deflecting: you scoffed at calling the trump administration being fascist but when I indicated ways that it is, your response is a couple op eds about Obama.
Let’s assume they’re both correct, and furthermore that it was all Obama’s doing.
The best we can say is “Ok, Obama’s administration was fascist in at least one way too (if wiretapping and rejecting FOI requests counts as fascist)”
That’s not a refutation.
