A Tale of Two Systems: who fares better?

The emergence of the coronavirus highlights the fragility of our systems. As we create more cooperation and interdependence, fragility increases. At the same time, our systems have protective characteristics. In this, I am interested to watch the approach of autocratic versus democratic systems.

The Chinese system has exercised autocratic power in addressing its virus exposure. At first, it began with denial and forcibly shut down addressing the virus. As the Chinese leadership saw the rapid emergence, it vigorously enforced a quarantine - effectively creating the "social distance" required for addressing a contagious virus. At the same time, the leadership created a tremendous healthcare structure to treat the ill. The current stage is to address the financial ramifications - as it capably did in the 2008-2009 crisis. Clearly an autocratic system has its strengths. However, it was an ugly process with individual and family rights disregarded continuously.

The US system as the exemplar of democratic power began in the same way as the autocratic system. As the virus emerged in Seattle, the Federal government and the CDC suppressed further study. But as the virus emerged, news services and information began to proliferate. Unlike the autocratic leadership, the democratic government did not engage. However, private citizens and companies began to act on their own self-interest and create "social distance." This process has continued to develop as news proliferates about this virus, resulting in cancelled concerts and other gatherings as well as hygiene approaches.

The next phase is how the healthcare system will respond. So far, the absence of testing focus has been surprising and seems to point to a paralysis in democratic governance. Further, the slow development of travel restrictions seems to highlight the weaknesses of individual rights protections. As the financial ramifications develop in a highly leveraged system, it will be interesting to see if the government rallies as effectively as in 2008-2009 times.

These trials will continue to compare autocracy and democracy in an increasingly fragile and complex world.