Group items tagged

Xinjiang, a region in China, is experiencing a heavy lockdown enforced by officials sealing doors to prevent people from leaving their homes. Many residents of the region believe that the policies regarding the lockdown and testing are poorly made and that the forceful lockdown is too severe a measure to take in the context of containing coronavirus cases. However, when people spoke out on social media, the posts were quickly taken down.

I found it especially interesting and shocking when the the article stated that some residents were "cuffed to window bars and balcony railings outside their homes, a punishment for violating home quarantine rules". Although a lockdown/quarantining should be taken very seriously, it seem that the Chinese government is using extreme and harsh measures while also silencing peoples voices.

This is a super interesting article. I thought that California policies were strict before reading this. I think that the extreme response might be necessary in some cases, but it seems that this level of response was unnecessary considering there were very few cases in the region.

Though any short-term relief to the environment provided by the pandemic won't have any meaningful impact in mitigating climate change, I still believe that the 'nature is healing' narrative was helpful in allowing people to see the benefits of slowing down and being more conscientious, and how that can benefit the environment.

This was a really interesting article because it both proved and disproved some of the environmental news we were told at the beginning of the pandemic. I think it would be interesting to compare the greenhouse gas emissions of countries during the pandemic that were tough on lockdowns versus those that were not and see if there is any correlation.

Instead of requiring strict social distancing measures and lockdowns like the United States, France and many other European countries have encouraged citizens to go back to their normal lives. The countries are confident that with widespread testing, medical infrastructure, and mask availability, they will be able to control a surge in cases and limit hospitalizations. This move is still controversial, as many think that letting the virus "run its course" would disproportionately impact immunocompromised and the elderly. Yet, the majority of recent cases have been in young people, likely due to their increased socialization. I think this is interesting and possibly a more practical COVID response than lockdowns, which people rarely follow. I wonder if an approach like this could work in the United States, but the pandemic response remains highly political here.

I feel like this strategy used in Europe is much more likely to succeed than if it was used in the US, as I agree with you that in Europe the coronavirus response is less of a political issue and more of a health crisis. Therefore, in Europe, people more vulnerable to the virus are more likely to stay home and carry out social distancing protocol for their own and others' safety than the US, where coronavirus safety guidelines are sometimes seen as an encroachment on people's individual freedoms. In the US it is much more unclear as to whether this kind of approach would really work, not only because of the pandemic response being politicized but also because of many refusing to wear a mask and US covid-19 testing issues.

France and Germany are preparing for the second wave of the Coronavirus as winter approaches. Both countries are considering a new lockdown procedure but are facing flashback form protestors who feel their rights are infringed upon. Many countries are worried about the economic downfall of the virus; however, France and Germany are prioritizing the well being of their people.

It's interesting that other people around the world feel being forced to wear a mask violates their rights. Many think that the issue is unique to the United States, and do not know that there is similar sentiment in other countries, albeit not to the same extent.

Russia is hitting its highest daily cases of COVID since the beginning of the pandemic despite being the first to authorize a vaccine. They have plentiful supplies but like the U.S., they are suffering from vaccine hesitancy. Putin is ordering a one-week lockdown starting October 30th.

On second thought (in response to my initial comment on "Amnesty International to close Hong Kong offices this year"), I think that maybe a decrease in freedom can also lead to an increase in equality (in this case fewer virus cases) in a non-economic situation. Although, this lockdown in Russia is in a way economic because poorer people will suffer more and have a harder time making money.

I was surprised to hear that Russia had such low vaccination rates since they were the first to authorize the vaccine. The article says that public attitudes are "lax", especially with conflicting signals from authorities, and I wonder if these lax views on vaccination relate in any way to nationalism or to their views on freedom vs. equality.

Northern Ireland has reported 222 corona virus cases. The Health Minister Robin Swann claims that the health department is being updated, and Irish police (gardai) presence will be increased to enforce new regulations.

This is interesting especially because most of Europe is slowly opening back up. I wonder if Ireland is in lockdown and if their policies will change after this increase in Coronavirus cases?

Coronavirus cases in the UK have surged to numbers even higher than the initial spike in May. Efforts to help the economy and keep the country open have made citizens at greater risk, and experts urge more restrictions and a potential second lockdown.

I think it's a bit of a dilemma, whether it is the right choice to impose another national shutdown after seeing such a severe economic consequence after the first one and a loss of almost 700,000 jobs, or to forgo the consequences and enact the shutdown anyway to prevent the further spread of the virus. Restrictions are probably the only in-between that might work or at least do less damage.

Yemen (on April 29th of this year) had an outbreak of 5 COVID cases, and an immediate 2-week lockdown was imposed. Though that number seems quite small, the health system was quickly overrun. This is because Yemen's health department has been "devastated by war," and though Saudi Arabia declared a unilateral cease-fire on April 9th, airstrikes by a Saudi-led coalition increased 30% from April 22nd - 29th. Even pre-COVID, Yemen had a cholera outbreak in January, quickly exacerbate by torrential rains and putting 5 million children under the age of 5 at risk.

A coronavirus outbreak in Yemen poses a dire threat that will add to the conditions that have been increased by the war. Yemen's health care system has been devastated by the war and is in no means able to handle a pandemic. Moreover, the increase in airstrikes lead by Saudi Arabia, despite a cease-fire, can and will increase the spread of the virus. Humanitarian efforts will decrease as a result and the already wrecked healthcare system will suffer more. It is clear the U.S and other members of the UN security council need to put pressure on Saudi Arabia to implement a cease fire.

I think that it's also important to mention that the United States is complicit in the crisis in Yemen. We not only provide support to Saudi Arabia but sell them weapons, most importantly bombs, that are used against Yemeni civilians. A bipartisan bill to end US involvement in the war passed the Senate last year, but was vetoed by President Trump. Not many people seem to know about our role in the war, and that needs to change.

I'm very curious to see how this situation plays out: how much governmental control will people put up with. Do you think there could be another lockdown if the strain is virus resistant? Or do you think this could be runious to current political regimes?

While developed, western countries are trying to eradicate the actual virus, lockdown measures and global trade disruptions is more dangerous to less developed countries

good find, Cole! I really appreciate that you are looking further than US news outlets!

As many take to the streets in China to protest covid restrictions, the people's dissatisfaction with freedom of expression and democracy resurface. While the effort is valiant and Chinese politicians have made certain promises to satisfy protesters, it remains unclear whether these protest will have any long-term difference. Protests in Hong Kong in 2019 were seemingly larger and had a large impact in the moment, but after the movement was suppressed, the communist party silenced those behind them. Given this past, will these protests create any real change?

I don't any change will come. The government has all the resources needed to prevent the protests and could simply slowly deploy vaccines and lessen the restrictions to stop the protests. The protests haven't been advocating for much change in the structure of Chinese society, so the government still maintains all the power.

And now the Chinese government has softened a bit to accommodate the protestors' demands for vaccines--maybe even fewer lockdowns; but not for free speech. Let's see how that goes with the protestors; will they be appeased? See https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/01/world/asia/china-covid-protests-restrictions.html