This is interesting for two reasons.

(i) A successful future is possible
(ii) This is how it might look

Too much commentary has focused on disaster being inevitable (catastrophism) versus the capacity for policy making to change outcomes (agency). https://twitter.com/rodneyatwigram/status/1322775408446644226

But if the correct answer (and it is) is yes ‘we can then’ the question is ‘why are we not?’

Why has the UK / Europe failed twice with all the terrible consequences failure entails?

It is an unfortunate irony that the second wave had been visible from space for quite some time (in theory and then evidenced and then crashing upon us) before governments began to take the necessary steps (all loudly trumpeted by public health and epidemiology specialists).

Let’s take the UK as an example. It is positively farcical. There is nowhere for policymakers to hide. The government’s own advisory body recommended the course of action that is now (broadly speaking) being employed 6 weeks later and too late.

I tend to think of this as a political problem when, of course, it’s much more complicated. If I was to think about it as a social / behavioral problem then I would think more about all of those micro decisions individuals makes that contribute to the next wave it not.

(A related digression - eat out to help out really was the most extraordinarily bad policy - a virus accelerator)

Returning to the political problem (and after all ‘we’ voted for the politicians), the fundamental problem has been not recognising (until absolutely forced) that the pandemic represents a severe break from normality.

Political business as usual simply doesn’t work. It’s wholly inadequate to the scale and systemic nature of the problem. Wherever you look. Party politics doesn’t work. Focus group policies don’t work. Ideology doesn’t work. Comms doesn’t work.

And much of this makes everything worse. Why are journalists being briefed in advance of very important announcements? Or the decision not to extend the Brexit trans period. A decision taken for political / ideological reasons that will have painful / disastrous consequences.

This is not to say that it’s impossible to refind normal. That normal is lost to us forever. That is just catastrophism. But for the moment, for the remaining duration of the pandemic, there is no normal, no business as usual.

I don’t think this is especially controversial. I think everyone knows this is true. Although it is pretty evident that for many people (if not everyone) the transition to this non normal state is very painful and challenging.

So why don’t governments get it?

Because this is a radical situation. It requires radicalism to effect better outcomes - political radicalism (consensus politics), economic radicalism (expansion of the state) and even illiberal radicalism (curtailing individual rights).

And governments (perhaps especially those with large majorities) are the most resolute defenders of their own order. Even if that order has been blown away by the viral waves.

The resolution or not of this conflict - between governments as defenders of the lost normal and the inalterable reality of the virus - will determine the scale of the economic and human cost in the months ahead. /ends