Article Review: How China’s Authoritarian System Made the Pandemic Worse
Name
Institution
Article Review: How China’s Authoritarian System Made the Pandemic Worse
“How China’s Authoritarian System Made the Pandemic Worse,” is an article by the Washington Post editorial board that scrutinizes China’s response to the Coronavirus pandemic. The authors argue that the plague exposed the weaknesses in leadership and governance. For China, this weakness lies in the system. The board writes that the closed, authoritarian Chinese government on more than one occasion engaged in deceit and cover-ups, which contributed immensely to the spread of the virus (How China’s strict system made the pandemic worse, 2020). The editorial board concludes that, while it is mostly biased to accuse China of intentionally unleashing the virus based on the currently available burden of proof, it is accurate to say that China’s system and its deceptive measures worsened the situation. The appropriate remedy would be increased transparency and full disclosure.
The authors make their case by citing incidents that showed repeated attempts by the Chinese authorities to conceal the truth. First, they cite what they call the “first cover-up.” The newspaper claims that despite the existence of an incorruptible infectious disease reporting system that collects and sends the information straight to authorities in Beijing, the government denied knowledge of such a disease. Furthermore, when cases of a pneumonia-like infection multiplied in Wuhan province in December 2019, the system apparently “broke down.” As if this was not enough, officials in Wuhan attempted to suppress information. Doctors who tried to raise a concern about the mysterious illness were reprimanded for allegedly engaging in rumormongering. These officials further instructed hospitals not to issue any public statements.
Further, arguments are part and parcel of human life. At one time or the other, individuals, specifically, authors, may have to argue their stance and may choose to do so in various fashions—the authors of this article leverage logical argumentation to prove their conclusion. Logical arguments stem from a logic process and provide a basis through which most viable theories are built on. In the article, the goal of the authors is to prove whether China’s system and the deception by the Chinese officials helped fuel the pandemic. This could only be achieved by tabling facts, and showing incidents that showed China lied, and how those lies impacted the spread of the virus. Therefore, the authors shared instances that proved that China was not transparent regarding the disease. For example, the editorial team uses two incidents that occurred on January 14 and January 15 that show that the Asian nation was not being truthful. On the former date, the head of China’s National Health Commission termed the arising situation as “severe and complex” and that “clustered cases suggest that human-to-human transmission is possible.” The official is further quoted saying that “the risk of transmission and spread is high. All localities must prepare for and respond to a pandemic.” Interestingly, the next day (January 15), in an interview with the state television, China’s head of disease control emergency center told the public that “the risk of sustained human-to-human transmission is low.” This showed that the Chinese system opted for deceit and cover-up at the expense of public health.
Lastly, I am inclined to believe that the article’s position is reasonable. This is primarily because the inference is strongly backed by sufficient evidence. Additionally, the claim is logical and is supported by ideas and examples clearly depicting the role played by the Chinese system of governance in the global spread of the pandemic.