Frances Lee and Stephen Macedo's book, "In Covid’s Wake: How Our Politics Failed Us," examines the political response to the COVID-19 pandemic as a stress test for political systems. The authors analyze how various institutions, including journalism, science, and universities, performed during the crisis, focusing on the quality of debate and deliberation surrounding pandemic policies.
The book criticizes the decision-making process during the pandemic, arguing that early decisions deviated from conventional wisdom and violated pre-existing pandemic plans. The authors highlight the lack of evidence-based support for measures such as nationwide lockdowns, border closures, and quarantines. They emphasize the trade-offs involved in prioritizing saving lives at all costs, noting that these measures had significant economic and social consequences, exacerbating inequalities.
Lee and Macedo argue that health officials showed intolerance towards criticism and skepticism, failing to acknowledge uncertainty and the potential limitations of their chosen measures. They cite examples of health officials communicating differently in public compared to private settings. The authors suggest that a greater willingness to confront the limits of scientific knowledge would have been beneficial.
The book also points to failures in other truth-seeking institutions, such as academia and journalism, for not adequately challenging policymakers and providing critical analysis. This lack of accountability, according to the authors, is a significant element of the political failures of the pandemic response.
Lee and Macedo emphasize that science alone cannot solve political questions. Policy decisions require consideration of diverse values, interests, and inevitable trade-offs between different groups, something the book suggests was inadequately considered during the pandemic.
The most important takeaway, according to the authors, is the critical need for acknowledging uncertainty and a willingness to learn and adapt. This includes resisting moralized antagonism and engaging with dissenting perspectives. Furthermore, it’s important to avoid blaming others and instead confront the limitations and challenges involved in tackling such a crisis.