Is Covid-19 a Virus of Selfishness?

If so, social responsibility may be the cure

Ilive in a modest townhouse apartment in an affluent suburb in Melbourne, Australia. A few weeks ago, I witnessed a spat between two of my neighbours. An older woman was photographing a garbage bin that was piled high with rubbish so that the lid didn't close completely. She was ranting, “This is unacceptable! I’m going to call the council!” while snapping away on her phone. A middle aged man was shaking his head as he walked back inside.

“No, surely not”, I thought. Surely, this woman is not carrying on about a slightly overflowing bin that’s being collected the very next day. Alas… she was. To provide additional context, the US Covid-19 death toll was at around 120,000 on this day. I wanted to scream at this woman, “Have you been watching the news? Do you have any idea what is going on in the world?” But I exercised restraint.

The picture I have just painted is one of privilege. A very first world problem, yet this woman’s biggest problem on this particular day. There is every possibility that my neighbour does not watch world news and has absolutely no idea how many Americans have died from Covid-19. There is every possibility that she believes the pandemic is a storm in a teacup. Or just someone else’s problem.

One of the reasons I didn’t approach the woman, aside from rising above my initial desire to give her both barrels, was that (as an older citizen) she is in the high risk category. I did not want to place her at unecessary risk of catching Covid-19. Because, unless I have been tested (which I haven’t), I cannot be certain that I don’t have the virus.

A few days ago, I had a conversation with an older gentleman in my street. It takes approximately 30 seconds to determine an Australian’s political leaning when the conversation turns that way. It’s around this time that the talking points begin to emerge. My neighbour stated that Victorian Premier, Daniel Andrews, is doing a terrible job. “Actually, I think he’s doing a reasonable job,” I replied politely (in my head: “Ahh, you’ve been watching Sky News. The worst thing Dan Andrews has done is tow the federal line on elimination vs. suppression”). The rest of the conversation went something like this:

Boomer: “I went to the supermarket today.”

Me: “Did you wear a mask?”

Boomer: “Na, I don’t wanna wear a mask, they’re uncomfortable”

Me: “Well, it’s not really about you, it’s about protecting other people.”

…Uncomfortable silence…

Now, I’m definitely no saint. In fact, I can be a real bitch. But Covid-19 has made me very conscious of social responsibility. Native Americans speak of a virus that invades human minds. It’s a virus of selfishness, a psychic pathogen that leads humanity to feed upon itself. They call this virus Wetiko. According to Paul Levy, author of “Dispelling Wetiko”, humans are increasingly demonstrating the existence of a virus of selfishness. Wetiko represents a collective psychosis from which we all need to awaken.

The concept of Wetiko is closely aligned with Carl Jung’s concept of the Shadow, an archetype that represents the darker aspects of human nature that most of us prefer to keep hidden and unconscious. Jung also talked about the collective unconscious, a unifiying thread that binds all of humanity, for better or worse. If Covid-19 is indeed representative of Wetiko, of the Shadow, a collective unconscious thread that is binding us through greed, power, selfishness, jealousy, etc., then social responsibility may just be the cure.

Selfishness is not a modern evil. It’s an old illness we still haven’t managed to eradicate.

My neighbours are not bad people. But they are being selfish. They are being manipulated by leaders who are hungry for power, greedy to the point of convincing the public that the economy is more valuable than human life. Here we are in Melbourne, Australia, in the second wave of the pandemic. The elimination vs. suppression debate is back on the table and we are no further along than we were three months ago when the Group of Eight (comprised of the country’s leading academics) released its Roadmap to Recovery Report.

Most states and territories in Australia have effectively achieved elimination of Covid-19, despite the National Cabinet’s position of an “aggressive suppression strategy”. Although it recently reported its first case in 65 days, Tasmania is in an enviable position thanks to its moat that it is not afraid to use. Premier, Peter Gutwein, tells me that Tasmania “will keep marching to the beat of our own drum”. After months of mixed messaging, it appears that Victoria may finally follow suit, with the mandating of masks in public (the first state to do so), commencing July 23rd, and the looming possibility of Stage 4 restrictions (also not implemented in any other Australian state).

However, throughout the pandemic, the Federal Government has consistently maintained that masks are “not necessary” and that “wearing a mask doesn't protect you”. As an aside, it was explained that masks are to protect others. That is, the main message from the Federal Government has been: DON’T BOTHER WEARING MASKS, THEY WON’T PROTECT YOU! That's right, only bleeding hearts worried about protecting others would bother wearing a mask. But if you’re looking out for #1, then just don't bother…

It’s important to note that the wearing of such a mask does not protect you from an infection, but if you are displaying respiratory symptoms then it is, at best, a measure that prevents you transferring it to others — Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison.

Other talking points have included:

• Wearing a mask offers a false sense of security.
• If you are healthy and not infectious, you don’t need to wear a mask.
• Wearing a mask can be uncomfortable, itchy, and claustrophobic.

In response to the above mentioned points, wearing a mask is not the be all and end all, but should be part of an array of socially responsible measures, such as maintaining social distance. In the climate of a global pandemic, does anyone really know if they are “healthy?” This argument rests upon the premise that one has taken a Covid-19 test, and effectively quarantined until receiving a negative result before entering the public without a mask. Yes, wearing a mask is uncomfortable. But so is killing Grandpa.

Whether this messaging has occurred in response to #toiletpapergate and the government’s desire not to witness a bunch of dickheads rushing out and buying a lifetime’s supply of masks, thereby limiting the amount available for essential workers (arguably the most valid and least likely motive for the Federal Government); their desire to downplay the severity of the pandemic in order to reboot the economy (more likely); or our evangelical PM’s lack of inclination to eliminate the virus, from which he will be spared (conspiratorial, I know, but in my view the most terrifyingly likely explanation). Either way, the research is in: wearing masks in public drastically reduces the spread of the virus.

A main argument in favour of opening up the economy despite the public health risk of Covid-19 is that the majority of deaths occur in older people. So, like, we can’t just shut down the entire economy to save Grandma because she’s old and she’s had a good life and all. Think of it as “economic patriotism”. Uh, yeah… The curious thing is, a large number of people towing this line and spouting this talking point (even implicitly, through supporting the governments who endorse it) are… older people! The severity of cognitive dissonance is as dire as the virus itself. I’m sure Pop has always wanted to be a martyr. He just needs a little push.

A recent study in the US investigated the effects of coronavirus media coverage and misinformation. With right-wing Fox News (the big brother of Australia’s Sky News) the most watched cable network in the US (with half its audience aged >65 years), the researchers analysed the effects of watching top broadcasters Sean Hannity vs. Tucker Carlson. Although both right-wing mouth pieces, Carlson warned of the severity of the pandemic, whereas Hannity downplayed Covid-19, initially comparing it to the common flu and calling it a Democratic “hoax”. The study found that Hannity viewers were about 30% more likely to contract Covid-19 and 21% more likely to die.

My home town of Malvern is largely populated by a particular variety of right-wing supporter. The type who accuses one of self-promotion and taking advantage of a crisis when one tries to educate fellow parents about the potential dangers of an unknown pathogen. The type who unashamedly shows their hand by accusing one of being “left wing” at the same time as accusing one of attempting to “conquer and divide”. The type who refuses to wear a mask and follow the rules out of a sense of self-righteous entitlement and arrogant selfishness. The type who perpetuates a hierarchical status quo by refusing to step up and protect those who are caring for our children, our elderly and most vulnerable, our front line workers. Just because the rules have been laid out by opposition state leaders. This variety of right-wing supporter is the most dangerous. For they refuse to be held accountable for their bad behaviour. They project. They behave like victims. They behave like bullies. They behave as obnoxiously as a three year old. But, unfortunately, they are adults with money and power. And they value saving the economy above saving lives. As if that’s a good thing.

The lives vs. economy debate has been hijacked, with attempts to argue that a decimated economy will destroy lives. It’s the “lives vs. livelihoods” debate. Yes ok, in a round about way, if governments fails to act swiftly enough and financially support their citizens. But the virus will ACTUALLY kill people. If we have the option to act swiftly and minimise loss of life, shouldn’t we take it, regardless of the material loss? Isn’t that the essense of humanity?

During the first round of elimination vs. suppression debate in Australia, I wrote to a bunch of politicians. One of the first responses I received was from New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern. I asked her to appeal to the Australian Government to pursue elimination. She responded, “Please be assured your comments have been noted”. I received Jacinda’s response before that of my local MP, Katie Allen, who informed me that, “Covid has indirect health effects through the economy… There is some early and alarming information that suggests that the suicide rate is rising”. This was an attempt to argue for the suppression strategy, to which I responded, “Do you think perhaps people are committing suicide because the Government has not provided sufficient financial security?” To which Katie’s response was… Nothing…

It should be noted that the Group of Eight’s Roadmap to Recovery Report suggested that the elimination strategy predicted better overall outcomes with regards to (1) saving lives, (2) psychological well-being, (3) and economic recovery. It also offers the greatest protection for Australia’s most vulnerable populations, such as Indigenous, disabled, and the elderly. To suggest that the suppression strategy is better for any of the above mentioned variables is disingenuous and represents short-term gain at best. To suggest that the Federal Government can’t afford to strive for elimination either (1) debunks the Liberal Party’s own favourite talking point about being the best managers of the economy, or (2) is a lie.

You’re talking about hundreds of thousands of more people unemployed for a start, and other businesses closed and livelihoods destroyed, and then you’ve got to weight that up against what it actually achieves. — Scott Morrison

What it actually achieves it saving lives. And New Zealand did it. If the US is Australia’s troubled big brother, New Zealand is our much cooler cousin. The Australian Federal Government is eerily adopting consistent terminology as it swings from one global emergency to the next. The Australian approach to the climate emergency is “resilience and adaptation”, the implication being that if one is not able to adapt to the impending apocalypse (rather than actually doing anything to address and minimise it), one is not resilient enough (religious undertones much?). This is gaslighting at its finest.

Now, we have adopted the “controlled adaptation” (aka suppression) approach towards Covid-19. The term “suppression” is more telling of the government’s approach. But what exactly are they suppressing? The virus? Free speech? Civil rights? Is the suppression strategy actually just a means to keep the public in a “constant state of duress”, a strategy used to abuse Indigenous Australians since colonisation? Don’t they know that generational suppression inevitably leads to, oh, I don’t know… uprising? Civil rights movements? Revolution?

So yeah, it is a legitimate concern that the Government is trying to suppress our civil rights by capitalising on a global crisis. We should be mindful of the legitimacy (or at least necessity) of tracking apps, and infringements upon our freedom of speech and basic human rights. Personally, I have not downloaded the CovidSafe app and I’m honestly not sure how I feel about a vaccine. I feel conflicted about the #BlackLivesMater protests as I have advocated for strict lockdowns.

But mandating masks does not fall under these categories. Mandating masks is a response to the evolving scientific research designed to keep us safe. Masks are also symbolic of social responsibility, a cultural virtue understood within Asian cultures. A demonstration of a commitment to collective, rather than individual, safety. The main issue here is the fact that the Government needs to mandate this socially responsible practice due to the public paranoia about its legitimacy.

The public’s eagerness to plunge down every available conspiracy theory rabbit hole is a symptom of complete and utter lack of trust in Government and those in power. Combined with lack of ability or inclination to conduct one’s own research. Jumping down a rabbit hole can be fun in an Alice in Wonderland kinda way. But you need to be able to climb back out.

The Australian protests have included a bizarre cocktail of anti-lockdown, anti-vaxxers, anti-5G, and #BlackLivesMatter activists. I absolutely support the latter movement and I’m keen to explore conspiracy theories, in the interests of understanding their origins and legitimacy. A historic time of global unrest seems like a prime opportunity to do so. Hell, I’m happy to endorse some if they resonate (i.e., our raving Pentecostal PM is a delusonal religious fanatic who wants to lead us all into the apocalypse).

In addition to 5G, other Covid-19 conspiracy theories that flooded in to fill the information vacuum in the early stages of the pandemic, and have spread and mutated as rampantly as the virus itself include:

• It’s an elaborate hoax.
• It’s a man-made virus created in a Wuhan lab.
• It was created by Jews to collapse the economy.
• QAnon theories that Covid-19 is a Chinese bioweapon, released jointly by China and the Democrats to jeopardise Trump’s re-election.
• Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the WHO are part of a cabal who created Covid-19 to control the world through a vaccine as part of a mass depopulation project.
• The vaccine will have a tracking microchip.
• Hollywood Liberal elites (e.g. Tom Hanks) are catching Covid-19 by taking Andrenochrome, a drug made from human brain cells obtained by torturing children and manufactured by Hilary Clinton in a pizza shop, as part of a satanic child sex trafficking cabal. Oh, and Celine Dion is a high priestess from the Church of Satan.

OMG. This is the effect of cabin fever. Boundary dissolution. Altered sense of reality. Magical thinking. Religious delusion. A slow descent — or, for some, a deep dive — into madness…

Ok, now let’s climb back out of that rabbit hole and take a look at New Zealand. Jacinda Ardern implemented a strict Stage 4 lockdown straight up, to which the public largely responded favourably, they have eliminated the virus, are now enjoying Level 1 restrictions (elimination does not mean eradication and they must still remain on high alert), and Jacinda’s popularity is soaring. They didn’t need to mandate masks, because Jacinda led the nation swiftly through the pandemic by openly placing lives before the economy.

Here’s a revelation: Kiwis trust their leaders! And the results speak for themselves. Perhaps Kiwis are less likely to tangle themselves in a web of unsubstantiated viral conspiracy theories because they simply have a greater degree of national trust and solidarity. They have a treaty with their First Nations people. Perhaps Kiwis are just healthier on every level — physically, emotionally, and spiritually. As opposed to the US, currently spiralling head first into a collective psychosis, whose cartoon President is permanently steeped in conspiracy theory “Deep State” propaganda.

Another question raised in response to the elimination vs. suppression debate is that of international travel. Putting aside the fact that Mother Nature is undoubtedly enjoying this international time out, the concept of “travel bubbles” has been floated throughout the pandemic, whereby countries and states who have achieved an acceptable level of elimination could travel among themselves. Can you imagine a scenario whereby all the areas who have demonstrated social responsibility, and well, a sense of HUMANITY, are able to travel among themselves, a sweet kind of karma for all the selfish countries who prioritised the economy over lives? Akin to the Paris Agreement concept of naming and shaming those nations who continue climate shitfuckery.

I have a deep and gnawing feeling that this pandemic is unearthing everything that is wrong with the core of every nation infected. Sure, New Zealand isn’t perfect. I’m sure some shit is being unearthed there as well. But, well… USA? Not looking like #1 in any kind of good way. Just sayin’… At this point, it’s really less about how the virus actually originated, and more about how we deal with it. And Jacinda has performed a Masterclass. Trump’s performance? Well…Hmmm… So far, Australia is somewhere in between. Sure, our numbers look more like New Zealand’s. Our state leaders are beginning to step up. But, our federal leaders sound more like the Trump Administration. With this in mind, how far behind the US are we really?

Scott Morrison needs “to be more Jacinda Ardern and less Donald Trump” — Australian Greens Leader, Adam Bandt

The elimination vs. suppression debate has materialised into the lives vs. economy debate, which has materialised into a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions. The Australian Government’s adoption of suppression says a lot, especially as elimination is tantalisingly within our grasp. It materialises the issues that make Australia the biggest climate villains on the world stage. It highlights that the Australian Federal Government: (1) has little regard for scientific research (the Go8 report clearly outlines the benefits of the elimination approach across several variables), (2) does not care about human life (the Go8 report clearly states that the elimination approach will save more lives), (3) is lying (they have explicitly stated that saving lives is the top priority), and (4) is utterly stupid and/or corrupt (the Go8 report clearly states that the elimination approach predicts better economic outcomes!). So… why? Short term gain? Vested interests?

The fact that we are even debating the value of Granny’s life over that of material wealth illustrates just how much we have deviated from cultures who value and respect their elders and the vast and irreplacable cultural wealth they possess. Remote Indigenous Australian communities have shut out the public to protect their elders. Yet, as Covid-19 runs rampant through aged care facilities across the world, it’s business as usual.

So, some may think that the concept of Wetiko, Indigenous wisdom, archetypal imagery, etc. is just a lot of hippy woo woo. But, um, take a look around guys. Do you have a better explanation? Aside from 5G, Bill Gates, or a Democratic cabal? No, really, I’d love to hear it. If I am right, and social responsibility is the antidote to this virus of selfishness, this symptom of a collective psychosis, then isn’t it worth just not being a selfish dickhead to test it out? ‘Cos, I hate to tell ya, but like the climate emergency, Covid-19 is just a symptom. There’s plenty more to come.

Believing that Covid-19 is a hoax and dismissing the scientific evidence is akin to climate denial. To be sure, it is beneficial to unearth all of these conspiracy theories and explore their legitimacy. It may be perceived as a global cleanse. But getting stuck down rabbit holes is not conducive to collective healing power. It creates an echo chamber of paranoia, defensiveness, and self-preservation. A collective state of selfishness within a dog eat dog world. Just the kind of environment within which populist authoritarian governments thrive.

We need to begin a process of collective transformation. Stat. We can begin by transforming into citizens who don’t argue about overflowing bins with our neighbours, and who wear masks in order to protect one another. Because the more we fight against not being selfish dickheads, the harder the transformation is going to be. Again, just sayin’…