Tag Archives: Wuhan Coronavirus

China’s Fatal Dilemma, by Charles Hugh Smith

Even quasi-effective policies in China to combat the coronavirus would enact a heavy economic toll. From Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com:

Ending the limited quarantine and falsely proclaiming China safe for visitors and business travelers will only re-introduce the virus to workplaces and infect foreigners.

China faces an inescapably fatal dilemma: to save its economy from collapse, China’s leadership must end the quarantines soon and declare China “safe for travel and open for business” to the rest of the world.

But since 5+ million people left Wuhan to go home for New Years, dispersing throughout China, the virus has likely spread to small cities, towns and remote villages with few if any coronavirus test kits and few medical facilities to administer the tests multiple times to confirm the diagnosis. (It can take multiple tests to confirm the diagnosis, as the first test can be positive and the second test negative.)

As a result, Chinese authorities cannot possibly know how many people already have the virus in small-town / rural China or how many asymptomatic carriers caught the virus from people who left Wuhan. They also cannot possibly know how many people with symptoms are avoiding the official dragnet by hiding at home.

No data doesn’t mean no virus.

If the virus has already been dispersed throughout China by asymptomatic carriers who left Wuhan without realizing they were infected with the pathogen, then regardless of whatever official assurances may be announced in the coming days/weeks, it won’t be safe for foreigners to travel in China nor will it be safe for Chinese workers to return to factories, markets, etc.

Continue reading

“The Flow Of Each Person Can Be Clearly Seen” – Virus Brings China’s Surveillance State Out Of The Shadows, by Tyler Durden

More truly creepy surveillance “advances” out of China. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

We noted Monday that economic paralysis brought about by the coronavirus had forced Chinese banks to offer billions of dollars in loans to domestic firms to help contain the virus.

Some of the companies listed as potential candidates for funding had technology that would enable China’s surveillance state to track infected people or those who were considered at risk.

Reuters notes an incident where a camera with facial recognition technology tracked a Hangzhou man, who returned home from a business trip in Wenzhou, an area with high confirmed cases.

The man had his license plate flagged and was ordered by authorities to stay home for two weeks. But on the 12th day of self-quarantine, he decided to take a drive, was detected by facial recognition cameras for disobeying the order.

“I was a bit shocked by the ability and efficiency of the mass surveillance network. They can basically trace our movements with AI technology and big data at any time and any place,” the man said.

The virus outbreak has allowed China to supercharge its surveillance state. New software is coming online that can monitor people in the streets and recognize if they have fevers, and or, if they’re wearing masks. If anyone is flagged, authorities will immediately get a notification, and decide on the appropriate action from there.

Mobile apps for smartphones have been developed to allow users to identify if infected people have been around them.

Continue reading→

How Xi Jinping’s “Controlocracy” Lost Control, by Xiao Qiang

Looks like the Chinese government can’t control everything. From Xiao Qiang at project-syndicate.org:

Although the global coronavirus epidemic has only recently made international headlines, some in China have known about it since the beginning of December. Thanks to Chinese President Xi Jinping’s high-tech dictatorship, that information was not made public, and the virus was allowed to take off.

BERKELEY – In his 2016 book The Perfect Dictatorship: China in the 21st Century, Norwegian political scientist Stein Ringen describes contemporary China as a “controlocracy,” arguing that its system of government has been transformed into a new regime radically harder and more ideological than what came before. China’s “controlocracy” now bears primary responsibility for the coronavirus epidemic that is sweeping across that country and the world.

Over the past eight years, the central leadership of the Communist Party of China has taken steps to bolster President Xi Jinping’s personal authority, as well as expanding the CPC’s own powers, at the expense of ministries and local and provincial governments. The central authorities have also waged a sustained crackdown on dissent, which has been felt across all domains of Chinese social and political life.

Under the controlocracy, websites have been shut down; lawyers, activists, and writers have been arrested; and a general chill has descended upon online expression and media reporting. Equally important, the system Xi has installed since 2012 is also driving the direction of new technologies in China. Cloud computing, big data, and artificial intelligence (AI) are all being deployed to strengthen the central government’s control over society.

Continue reading

Controlling the Narrative Is Not the Same as Controlling the Virus, by Charles Hugh Smith

It is a lot easier to shut people up than it is to shut a virus down. From Charles Hugh Smith at oftwominds.com:

Are these claims even remotely plausible for a highly contagious virus that spreads easily between humans while carriers show no symptoms?

It’s clear that the narrative about the coronavirus is being carefully managed globally to minimize the impact on global sentiment and markets. Authorities are well aware of the global economy’s extreme fragility, and so Job One for authorities everywhere is to scrub the news flow of anything that doesn’t support the implicit official narrative:

1. The coronavirus is only an issue in China; it’s contained outside China.

2. The coronavirus will soon be contained in China, and global business will quickly return to normal.

In pushing this narrative, authorities around the world share the same goal: limit the damage to consumer confidence and markets, as the legitimacy of every regime from Beijing to Washington D.C. to Nairobi is based on maintaining these economic fictions:

1. Global growth will continue in an unbroken trend in the decades ahead.

2. This growth benefits everyone, not just elites.

As I’ve noted in previous posts, the critical dynamic here is consumer confidence:consumers cannot be allowed to become hesitant or afraid lest they stop borrowing, borrowing, borrowing, buying, buying, buying and speculating, speculating, speculating.

Continue reading

A Most Convenient Virus, by Dmitry Orlov

Was the Pentagon or CIA responsible for the coronavirus? From Dmitry Orlov at cluborlov.com:

I prefer to write on things I know about, but once in a while an opportunity presents itself for me to comment on some aspect of widespread mistrust and confusion while resting on a solid foundation of my professional curiosity. This is the case of the 2019-nCoV novel coronavirus. A lot of the elements of the coronavirus story just don’t add up, and that’s what I want to explore. At the outset, I want to make it clear that I am no expert on these matters. Is 2019-nCoV a genetically engineered biological weapon or is it a naturally evolved strain of a virus that is endemic in China’s bat population? This we don’t know, but it is interesting to look at the plausibility of each of these scenarios and also to consider whether what we are observing could be a combination of a little of each.

As a biological weapon of mass destruction, 2019-nCoV isn’t particularly good. On the plus side, it is highly contagious and can be spread by infected individuals who are not showing any of the symptoms, such as fever and shortness of breath. On the minus side, the mortality rate is a mere 2.1% and is likely to trend down because this rate does not account for a potentially huge number of young, healthy people who contracted the virus but never developed any symptoms, were never tested for it, and will never know that they had survived it. For a virus to be potent as a bioweapon, its kill ratio needs to be optimized for killing the largest possible number of its victims, but doing so slowly enough so that ththe victims don’t die before they have a chance to spread the infection.

Continue reading

Coronavirus? The Chinese Central Bank Has a “Solution”, by Frank Shostak

Fiat debt, the solution to all the ails the world, including the coronavirus. From Frank Shostak at mises.org:

In response to the economic paralysis brought about by the coronavirus, the Chinese central bank has pumped $243 billion into financial markets. On Monday, February 3, 2020, China’s equity market shed $393 billion of its value.

Most experts are of the view that in order to counter the damage that the coronavirus has inflicted, loose monetary policy is of utmost importance to stabilize the economy. It is believed that the massive monetary pumping will lift overall demand in the economy and in turn will likely move the economy out of the stagnation hole.

According to this way of thinking, consumer confidence, which has weakened as a result of the coronavirus, could be lifted by massive monetary pumping.

Now, even if consumers were to become more confident about economic prospects, how is all this related to the damage that the virus continues to inflict? Would the increase in consumer confidence due to the monetary pumping cause individuals to go back to work?

Continue reading

The coronavirus threatens the Chinese Communist Party’s grip on power, by Cary Huang

Science is the weapon of choice when dealing with something like the coronavirus, and science requires the free flow of information. The free flow of information is anathema to authoritarian and totalitarian regimes. From Cary Huang at scmp.com:

Authoritarianism has made this outbreak worse, not better. The state’s strength in controlling information and suppressing dissent is a weakness in fighting disease

Nature is unpredictable and sometimes vengeful. Different societies and political systems have different ways of managing it.

Viruses and epidemics can occur in any country. But they have become more dangerous and challenging in modern times as globalisation means they spread faster and farther than ever.

Thus the coronavirus, thought to have originated in the mainland Chinese city of Wuhan, is spreading across the world.

As it does so, it tests not only China’s health infrastructure and management. The course of the epidemic and the government’s responses raise profound questions about the capacity and dynamism of China’s system of one-party rule.

For sure, China’s leadership is now doing everything to contain the virus, just as they had done in fights against natural disasters such as the Sichuan Earthquake in 2008. In fact, China’s command-and-control systems might prove more efficient than anything the free democracies could manage when it comes to mobilising resources.

White House Asks Scientists To Investigate Whether 2019-nCoV Was Bio-Engineered, by Tyler Durden

Zero Hedge was banned from Twitter for suggesting the Wuhan coronavirus was a weaponized virus from Wujan’s Institute of Virology. Now that the White House has lent some credence to this theory, will  ZH be allowed back on Twitter? From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

A week ago, we published details that raised questions about the source of the Wuhan novel coronavirus, specifically questioning the official theory for the spread of the Coronavirus epidemic, namely because someone ate bat soup at a Wuhan seafood and animal market as a fabricated farce.

The real reason behind the viral spread, we suggested, was that a weaponized version of the coronavirus (one which may have originally been obtained from Canada), was released by Wuhan’s Institute of Virology (presumably accidentally ), China’s only top, level-4 biohazard lab, which was studying “the world’s most dangerous pathogens.”

Continue reading→

Corona Lockdown Fallout, by Raúl Ilargi Meijer

Updates from the Coronavirus front. From Raúl Ilargi Meijer at theautomaticearth.com:

As I said earlier today, I picked up a whole slew of articles on the “coronavirus” through the day yesterday, collected some more today, and then decided not to put them in my daily Debt Rattle news aggregator today because it would have been too much.

I wasn’t trying to focus on number of deaths or cases, interest in that is overblown by now. What I look for is news about the consequences of the “coronavirus” epidemic. See, most people look at the numbers, think that they are lower than they could be, and lower than in armageddon predictions, so we’ll all be alright.

And I’m not saying that we won’t be, never have, I’m saying the numbers are no longer the main story. The story has changed into the effects of the virus on domestic and international policies, and ultimately -especially- on global trade and travel. And those effects have only just started. Just like I said 2 days ago in The Big Lockdown.

Initially, the effects, the fallout, from the epidemic, will appear minor, companies will be able to switch things a little and do their thing. But at some point that changes. As I saw somebody say earlier, if even just 1% of your car parts are from China, and you can’t get them anymore, you’re not going to be building a car. The vast majority of carmakers use 30% Chinese parts or more.

And then you also have many thousands of cancelled flights, and cruises, and what has a much bigger impact: shipping of goods to, but of course mostly from, China. Chinese ports are already filing up with items like fruits, but that’s nothing yet. If you put half your country on lockdown, who’s going to service incoming and outgoing ships?

Continue reading→

 

The Consequence of Globalism Is World Instability, by Paul Craig Roberts

Interdependence and a connected world aren’t always what they’re cracked up to be. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

If the coronavirus proves to be serious, as it does not appear to be at the present time, many economies could be adversely affected. China is the source of many parts supplied to producers in other countries, and China is the source of the finished products of many US firms such as Apple. If shipments cannot be made, sales and production outside of China are affected. Without revenues, employees cannot be paid. Unlike the financial crisis of 2008, this would be an unemployment crisis and bankruptcy of large manufacturing and marketing corporations.

This is the danger to which globalism makes us vulnerable. If US corporations produced in the US the products that they market in the US and the world, an epidemic in China would affect only their Chinese sales, not threaten the companies’ revenues.

The thoughtless people who constructed “globalism” overlooked that interdependence is dangerous and can have massive unintended consequences. With or without an epidemic, supplies can be cut off for a number of reasons. For example, strikes, political instability, natural catastrophes, sanctions and other hostilities such as wars, and so forth. Clearly, these dangers to the system are not justified by the lower labor cost and consequent capital gains to shareholders and bonuses to corporate executives. Only the one percent benefits from globalism.

Continue reading