The New York Times. April 04, 2020

THE NEW YORK TIMES OP-EDSATURDAY, APRIL 4, 2020 N A23

JAN. 19, 2025:

When Covid-19 first emerged as a

health crisis in China five years ago, ob-

servers noted that authoritarian regimes

— with their hostility toward whistle-

blowers, their manipulation of data, their

fear of the free flow of information — facili-

tate the spread of disease.

Within a few months, it became clear

that the flip side of that proposition was

also true: Disease facilitates the spread of

authoritarianism.

In Hungary, the virus was the pretext

for Prime Minister Viktor Orban to estab-

lish a dictatorship on the model of Vladi-

mir Putin’s Russia. In the Philippines,

President Rodrigo Duterte used the pan-

demic to issue shoot-to-kill orders against

political protesters. In Israel, the govern-

ment’s decision to use cellphone data to

track the movements of infected individu-

als quickly became a model and alibi for

other states to pick up the practice, with

no scruples about the data they collected.

It didn’t stop there. The pandemic pro-

vided a ready-made excuse for democrat-

ic governments around the world to ob-

struct opposition parties, ban public as-

semblies, suppress voting, quarantine cit-

ies, close borders, limit trade, strong-arm

businesses, impose travel restrictions and

censor hostile media outlets in the name of

combating “false information.”

Remarkably, the tactics met with com-

paratively little resistance, partly because

they were advertised as only temporary,

and partly because the concerns of civil

libertarians paled next to calls to “flatten

the curve.” But as the lockdowns of 2020

were extended from spring to summer

and then to early fall, a process of normal-

ization began to take hold.

In the U.S., Joe Biden accepted the

Democratic nomination from his Dela-

ware home after it became clear that hold-

ing a convention would pose unacceptable

health risks. Effectively barred from cam-

paigning by restrictions on public rallies

(as well as fear among his aides that the

77-year old nominee might contract the vi-

rus), he sought to mount a virtual cam-

paign against an incumbent who wielded

the emergency powers of government to

aid his re-election. Donald Trump handily

won again in November. As civil liberties

receded, big government grew. Unprece-

dented unemployment meant unprece-

dented increases in Medicaid rolls, jobless

benefits, housing assistance and food

stamps. It was left to Trump to preside

over an expansion of the welfare state the

likes of which Bernie Sanders could only

have dreamed about a year earlier.

Nor did things change much after the

lockdowns were lifted, as people remained

reluctant to venture into restaurants,

shops and planes — and less able to afford

them. Millions of business failures and

personal bankruptcies translated to tens

of millions of loan and mortgage delin-

quencies, which in turn caused a financial

crisis. Dozens of banks had to be national-

ized outright, while the government took

stakes in every industry it rescued. By the

time a safe vaccine was finally available,

the damage had been done.

The developing world experienced the

crisis far more severely. “Flattening the

curve” made little sense in countries

whose medical systems were already

overwhelmed and underequipped long

before Covid-19 came around. Stay-at-

home and social distancing orders were

treated as a cruel and unenforceable joke

in densely populated cities like Lagos,

Cairo, Jakarta and São Paulo. People faced

with hunger if they didn’t get to their jobs

were prepared to take their chances with

the coronavirus.

The result was a frightful fatality rate,

not much mitigated by the fact that poorer

countries have younger populations.

Then there were effects of the global de-

pression on the world’s most vulnerable

economies. The destruction of the

maquiladora industries in Mexico quickly

led to the abrupt collapse of state author-

ity along the border, a vacuum immedi-

ately filled by the cartels. By 2023 Trump

had finally built his wall, backed by bipar-

tisan congressional support.

At the outset of the crisis it may have

seemed that progressive parties stood to

benefit politically. The opposite proved

true. Environmental concerns seemed

like idle luxuries when gas was cheap and

CO2 emissions plummeted along with eco-

nomic activity. Demands for gun control

and criminal-sentencing reform fell flat in

the face of increasing levels of crime.

Trump’s repeated calls for getting Amer-

ica “back to work” resonated with rural

and suburban voters, who thought they

had less to fear from the virus and tended

to measure personal risk differently than

urban elites.

A bellicose spirit also took hold. Eco-

nomically damaged regimes — China,

Russia and Iran especially — looked to off-

set domestic discontents with foreign ad-

ventures. Military enlistments rose ev-

erywhere, partly as a form of employ-

ment, partly out of a sense of fear. Among

the paradoxes of the Covid-19 crisis was

that it brought the world together as never

before in a common experience of lock-

downs and self-isolations — while frag-

menting it as never before into wary

states and nervous neighbors.

Not everything was bleak. Adults read

more books, paid closer attention to their

spouses and children, called their aging

parents more often, made more careful

choices with their money, thought more

deeply about what they really wanted in

life. In time, that kind of spiritual deep-

ening will surely pay its own dividends.

For now, however, America awaits the

inauguration of its 46th president, Mi-

chael Richard Pence. 0

BRET STEPHENS

A Look Back

From 2025

Covid-19 changes

almost everything.

W

HILE the coronavirus pan-

demic is affecting us all dif-

ferently depending on

where we live, our financial

situation and our basic health, one univer-

sal is the difficulty in finding toilet paper.

Panic buying of toilet paper has spread

around the globe as rapidly as the virus,

even though there have been no disrup-

tions in supply and the symptoms of

Covid-19 are primarily respiratory, not

gastrointestinal. In many stores, you can

still readily find food, but nothing to wipe

yourself once it’s fully digested.

This is all the more puzzling when you

consider that toilet paper is an antiquated

technology that infectious disease and

colorectal specialists say is neither effi-

cient nor hygienic. Indeed, it dates back at

least as far as the sixth century, when a

Chinese scholar wrote that he “dared not”

use paper from certain classical texts for

“toilet purposes.”

Before paper was invented, or readily

available, people used leaves, seashells,

fur pelts and corn cobs. The ancient

Greeks and Romans used small ceramic

disks and also sponges on the ends of

sticks, which were then plunged into a

bucket of vinegar or salt water for the next

person to use. We know this thanks to Phi-

lippe Charlier, a forensic anthropologist

and archaeologist at the Musée du Quai

Branly in Paris.

Dr. Charlier’s specialty is microscopi-

cally analyzing coprolite, fossilized feces.

“It’s not sexy,” he said, “but when you

study poo from 2000 B.C. you can get a lot

of information about alimentation, diges-

tion, health, genetics and migration of

populations.” You also find out what peo-

ple used to clean their posteriors. Archae-

ologists examining coprolite from this

year centuries hence might be perplexed

to find remnants of magazines and news-

papers, which people have reportedly

been using during the toilet paper short-

age.

Most toilet paper historians (there are

more than you would think) credit Seth

Wheeler with inventing modern toilet pa-

per, perforated and on a roll, an idea he

patented in 1891. The diagram on the pat-

ent application should put to rest any ar-

guments about how to load the roll: The

flap comes over the top and down the

front. While manufacturers might have

added dyes, prints, perfumes and sooth-

ing aloe, toilet paper has remained pretty

much the same ever since.

That is, unless you count the introduc-

tion of wet wipes. Originally intended for

babies, they are now marketed ag-

gressively to adults with gender-specific

brands like Dude-Wipes and Queen V.

Sales reached $1.1 billion worldwide last

year, up 35 percent from five years ago, ac-

cording to Euromonitor International.

The result is that the wipes coalesce with

grease in sewer systems to form block-

ages the size of airliners.

All this when experts agree that rinsing

yourself with water is infinitely more sani-

tary and environmentally sound. Dr. H.

Randolph Bailey, a colorectal surgeon at

the University of Texas McGovern Medi-

cal School in Houston, recommends bidets

or toilet attachments, such as the Washlet

or Tushy.

“A lot of people who come to see me

have fairly significant irritation of their

bottoms,” he said. “Most of the time it has

to do with overzealous cleaning” — wiping

too vigorously with toilet paper or using

wipes, which often contain harsh fra-

grances and chemicals. Moreover, he said,

you’re just never going to get as clean as

rinsing with water. Cleanliness matters,

since you can get seriously ill from dis-

eases transmitted via feces. Cholera, hep-

atitis and E. coli and urinary tract infec-

tions are prime examples. Studies have

found coronavirus in feces, as well.

But while most households in Japan

have high-tech toilets capable of cleansing

users with precisely directed tempera-

ture-controlled streams of water, the rest

of the world has been slow to follow.

Blame prudishness, in part: Bidets,

once ubiquitous in France, became associ-

ated with hedonism and licentiousness.

Marie Antoinette had a red-trimmed bidet

in her prison cell while awaiting the guillo-

tine. And during World War II, American

soldiers first saw bidets in French broth-

els. An often-told joke was that an Ameri-

can tourist in Paris assumed the bidet in

her hotel room was for washing babies in,

until the maid told her, “No, madame, this

is to wash the babies out.”

But even in France, toilet paper has tak-

en over. “Now, when constructing a new

flat, nobody puts a bidet in it,” Dr. Charlier

said. Maybe, he mused, “there are also

psychological reasons we do not em-

brace” the technology.

Which brings us back to the panic buy-

ing of toilet paper. Psychologists say it’s

more than a little Freudian, what with the

anal personality being tied to a need for

order, hoarding and fear of contamination.

“The characteristics align with obsessive-

compulsive tendencies, which get trig-

gered when people feel threatened,” said

Nick Haslam, the author of “Psychology in

the Bathroom.”

Many people are low-level paper hoard-

ers even in the best of times, piling

months-old magazines on coffee tables.

The pandemic may have just kicked this

tendency into high gear, and people are

latching onto toilet paper because it’s as-

sociated with controlling filth and disease.

It could also be that, having given up so

much of our freedom, some feel, albeit

subconsciously, that going without toilet

paper would be an indignity too far — a

“Mad Max” descent into the realm of the

uncivilized. And so, stockpiling of

Charmin and Angel Soft will likely contin-

ue, even though there are far better ways

to clean ourselves and despite warnings

that we’re flushing away our forests. No

one wants to get caught without a roll

within reach. 0

SETH WHEELER

You Don’t Need

That Toilet Paper

Rinsing with water is

more sanitary and

environmentally sound.

KATE MURPHYis the author of “You’re Not

Listening.”

Kate Murphy

O

N MONDAY, Capt. Brett

Crozier, the commander of the

aircraft carrier Theodore

Roosevelt, sent a letter to the

Navy pleading for permission to unload

his crew, including scores of sailors sick-

ened with Covid-19, in Guam, where it

was docked. The Pentagon had been

dragging its feet, and the situation on the

ship was growing dire.

“We are not at war,” he wrote. “Sailors

do not need to die. If we do not act now,

we are failing to properly take care of our

most trusted asset — our sailors.”

After the letter was leaked to The San

Francisco Chronicle, the Navy relented.

But on Thursday, it relieved Captain

Crozier of his command.

Captain Crozier joins a growing list of

heroic men and women who have risked

their careers over the last few weeks to

speak out about life-threatening failures

to treat the victims of this terrible pan-

demic. Many of them are doctors and

nurses, and many of them, like Captain

Crozier, have been punished. All of them

deserve our deepest gratitude.

In removing Captain Crozier, the Navy

said that his letter was a gross error that

could incite panic among his crew. But

it’s hard to know what else he could have

done — the situation on the Theodore

Roosevelt was dire.

Ships at sea, whether Navy carriers or

cruise ships, are hotbeds for this disease.

Social distancing is nearly impossible:

The sailors are practically on top of one

another all day, in crowded messes, in

cramped sleeping quarters and on group

watches.

It is thought that a sailor caught the vi-

rus while on shore leave in Vietnam.

Once on board, the virus took its now pre-

dictable course: First a sailor or two,

then dozens, and all of a sudden more

than 100 were sick.

Captain Crozier received orders to

take the ship to Guam, but he was not

given permission to offload most of the

sailors. The virus was threatening to

overwhelm the small medical crew

aboard. There was not much time before

sailors might start dying.

The captain felt he had to act immedi-

ately if he was to save his sailors. He

chose to write a strong letter, which he

distributed to a number of people within

the Navy, demanding immediate re-

moval from the ship of as many sailors as

possible. Perhaps this was not the best

move for his career, but it got results.

The letter, once leaked, quickly re-

appeared in papers nationwide. The im-

mediate public pressure forced the Navy

to relent, and it started arranging to get

as many of the crew members as possi-

ble off the ship and into hotels in Guam.

Captain Crozier, however, paid a big

price. The acting secretary of the Navy,

Thomas Modly, summarily fired the cap-

tain, not for leaking the letter (for which

he said he had no proof ), but for showing

“extremely poor judgment.” Many dis-

agree, believing that Captain Crozier

showed excellent judgment. He left the

ship Thursday night to a rousing hero’s

send-off.

I suppose it is too much to hope that

the Navy, if only for its own benefit, will

see its way to reverse this unfortunate

decision. But it is probably too late to

save Captain Crozier’s career.

As a great-grandson of the man whose

name graced Captain Crozier’s former

ship, I often wonder, in situations like

this, what Theodore Roosevelt would

have done. In this case, though, I know

exactly what he would have done. In

1898, he found himself in almost the ex-

act same position.

Before his rise to national politics,

Roosevelt commanded the Rough Rid-

ers, a volunteer cavalry regiment, in the

invasion of Cuba during the Spanish-

American War. The Battle of San Juan

Hill had been fought and won, and the

war was basically over. However, the sol-

diers, still deployed in Cuba, faced a far

worse enemy: yellow fever and malaria.

As was usual in the days before mod-

ern medicine, far more soldiers died of

disease than of enemy action. The battle-

field commanders, including Roosevelt,

wanted to bring the soldiers home. But

the leadership in Washington — in par-

ticular Russell Alger, the secretary of

war — refused, fearing a political back-

lash. A standoff ensued.

The career Army officers, who did not

want to risk their jobs by being too out-

spoken, were stymied. Roosevelt, as a

short-term volunteer, had less to lose. So,

with the tacit approval of his fellow com-

manders, he wrote a fiery open letter and

released it to the press.

The letter, known as the “round robin,”

was printed in virtually every newspa-

per in the country, creating an uproar de-

manding that the soldiers be brought

home immediately. Alger relented, and

the troops were sent to quarantine on the

end of Long Island, at Montauk Point.

Though hundreds of men died of disease

in Cuba, Roosevelt’s actions probably

saved countless more.

He did, however, pay a price. Alger

was furious with Roosevelt, and shot

down his nomination to receive a Medal

of Honor (Roosevelt eventually received

the medal, posthumously, in 2001). Of

course, Roosevelt came out the winner.

Who today remembers Russell Alger?

In this era when so many seem to place

expediency over honor, it is heartening

that so many others are showing great

courage, some even risking their lives.

Theodore Roosevelt, in his time, chose

the honorable course. Captain Crozier

has done the same. 0

Captain Crozier Is a Hero

Theodore Roosevelt,

my great-grandfather,

would agree.

TWEED ROOSEVELT is the chairman of the

Theodore Roosevelt Institute at Long

Island University.

Tweed Roosevelt

W

HEN Nashville’s mayor,
Jon Cooper, closed non-
essential businesses here,
it was a blow to companies
and shops still reeling from the tornado
that tore through Middle Tennessee on
Super Tuesday. A one-two punch like that
— a natural disaster followed by a lethal
pandemic — will almost certainly force
some of them to close for good.
But it had to be done. Nashville’s
courts and schools were already closed,
but the crowds on Lower Broadway, the
heart of Nashville’s tourist district,
showed no sign of dissipating. “Down-
town Nashville is undefeated,” tweeted a
visitor posting a video of music fans
crowded onto a dance floor. Even after
the Nashville Board of Health voted
unanimously to shut the honky-tonks
down, several bar owners said they
would not comply unless ordered to do so
by the governor of Tennessee.
Such orders have been slow in coming
here, and in nearly every other state in
the American South. Gov. Bill Lee of Ten-
nessee was slow to close public schools,
slow to suspend church services, slow to
shutter restaurants and gyms. Mayors
begging for a statewide directive got
none. In a conference call on March 16,
Mr. Lee told local leaders that mandates
weren’t necessary to enforce social-dis-
tancing guidelines. “We’re not issuing or-
ders, we’re issuing guidance and strong
suggestions,” he said. “Tennesseans fol-
low suggestions.”
As it turns out, they don’t. Nashville,
which closed nonessential businesses on
March 22, has received hundreds of re-
ports of violations since.
Joelle Herr, owner of The Bookshop in
East Nashville, which closed more than
two weeks ago, wrote on Facebook about
her “fury, despair and helplessness” at
watching other businesses carry on as if
nothing had changed. “It’s frustrating
when you feel like you’re one of only a
few doing the right thing, and those do-
ing the wrong thing are the ones with the
greater impact — an impact that is going
to be devastating.”
On March 30, when Mr. Lee issued an
executive order shutting down non-
essential businesses, he stopped short of
requiring Tennesseans to stay home. “It
is deeply important that we protect per-
sonal liberties,” he said, ignoring tens of
thousands of health professionals who
argued that nothing less than a stay-at-
home order would save this state from
disaster. And not just thisstate.
Out of fear of what Tennessee’s delays
might mean for their own populations,
Fort Campbell, an Army base that strad-
dles the Tennessee-Kentucky border, re-
stricted travel to Nashville. And Andy
Beshear, the Democratic governor of
Kentucky, urged his citizens not to enter
Tennessee. “We have taken very ag-

gressive steps to try to stop or limit the
spread of the coronavirus to try to pro-
tect our people,” Mr. Beshear said. “But
our neighbors from the south, in many in-
stances, are not. If you ultimately go
down over that border and go to a restau-
rant or something that’s not open in Ken-
tucky, what you do is you bring the coro-
navirus back here.”
Kentucky, which not only elected a
Democratic governor but also expanded
Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act,
is an outlier in the South. Most Southern
states, like Tennessee, did not expand
Medicaid, and in those states a perfect
storm has gathered force. What does it
mean to live though a pandemic in a
place with a high number of uninsured
citizens, where many counties don’t have
a single hospital and where the governor
delayed requiring folks to stay home?
Across the South, we are about to find
out.
Finally, on April 2, Mr. Lee acknowl-
edged epidemiological reality and issued
a stay-at-home order. The rest of the red-
state governors will also capitulate to re-
ality before this is all over. But the time
for decisive action has long since passed,
and their delays, like the president’s, will
end up costing thousands of lives.
Viruses are not partisan. Science itself
is not partisan. Nevertheless, Covid-19
has become a partisan issue here in the
South because our governors have fol-
lowed the lead of both the president, who
spent crucial early weeks denying the se-
verity of the crisis, and Fox News, which
downplayed concerns about the pan-
demic as Democratic hysteria. That’s
why every governor who has issued a be-
lated shelter-in-place order is a Republi-
can.
In that March 16 conference call, Mr.
Lee offered some advice: “I want to en-
courage you to pray. I want you to pray
for your citizens that are affected by eco-
nomic downturns, by the sickness
sweeping through the state.”
I, too, pray for my fellow Tennesseans.
I pray for the success of researchers rac-
ing for a vaccine, and for the safety of ev-
ery medical team working to save lives.
But I also pray for our leaders to lead, to
put the safety of their citizens above par-
tisan pandering. And when the entire
medical community is begging for help,
the answer isn’t prayer alone. It’s also ac-
tion. 0

A Perfect

Storm Over

The South

A failure to act that will

cost thousands of lives.

MARGARET RENKLis a contributing opin-
ion writer and the author of “Late Migra-
tions: A Natural History of Love and
Loss.”

Margaret Renkl
NASHVILLE