Yeah, It Was a Lab Leak

[Amazon Link]
(paid link)

Jim "Indispensable" Geraghty notes the latest: The Wuhan Institute of Virology 'Faced an Acute Safety Emergency in November 2019'.

For a long time, there was a large and seemingly ever-growing pile of circumstantial evidence pointing to the possibility that a lab leak or accident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the cause of the Covid-19 pandemic. But there wasn’t a smoking gun, something akin to a confession or a contemporaneous internal communication indicating there had indeed been some sort accident.

Today ProPublica and Vanity Fair report on Toy Reid, a China specialist for the RAND Corporation and a political officer in East Asia for the U.S. State Department, who reviewed hundreds of dispatches archived on the website of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Reid worked as part of a team assembled by the minority oversight staff of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

Jim (I call him Jim) has extensive quoting from the linked articles. Recommended additional reading: An Analysis of the Origins of COVID-19, prepared by the "Minority [i.e., Republican] Oversight Staff" of the Senate Committee on Health Education, Labor and Pensions.

Despite its appearance in "mainstream" publications like Vanity Fair and ProPublica, this story doesn't appear to have made it into general circulation. Gee, you'd think the origin of a virus that killed tens of millions around the world might be of some newsworthiness.

But in Googling around, I noted this Science article: Conduct probe exonerates scientist accused of obscuring pandemic‘s origin.

Republican members of Congress have failed to persuade the U.S. National Academy of Medicine (NAM) to expel one of its members, conservation biologist Peter Daszak. In an email to its members, NAM concluded there “was no evidence” that Daszak had violated its code of conduct, as the representatives had alleged in a complaint to NAM.

The complaint suggests Daszak is somehow linked to the mysterious origin of the COVID-19 pandemic. Daszak runs a research nonprofit, EcoHealth Alliance, that has collaborated with China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). The Chinese institute has received intense scrutiny because the first cases of the pandemic surfaced where it is located. Although no direct evidence ties WIV to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, some believe the virus leaked from the lab or may even have been engineered by scientists there.

An anonymous NAM member is quoted calling the complaint "frivolous and political". The Science article links to the complaint from those nasty Republicanses. You make the call on how "frivolous" you find it.

But I found this final paragraph to be (almost certainly unintentionally) telling:

Another NAM member who also asked not to be named said the complaint reflected a desire by some Republicans to blame China for the pandemic. “I think it’s really bad for pandemic preparedness,” this member said. “We need international collaboration to confront pandemics effectively.”

My translation of the anonymous member's statement: "We can't do or say anything that might piss off China."


Last Modified 2024-01-16 4:58 AM EDT

Cultish

The Language of Fanaticism

[Amazon Link]
(paid link)

Another "wish I had liked it better" book. I might have been seduced by the title, which (I thought) might promise a dispassionate look at how languate trickery is used to sway people into behaving irrationally. The author, Amanda Montell, has a linguistic degree (apparently undergraduate) from NYU, kind of a qualification. But…

Well, let's start with the good. The book is a very accessible look at specific examples of "cults", starting from the obvious (Jonestown, Heaven's Gate, the Church of Scientology) to the less obvious (multi-level marketing firms, e.g. Amway; fitness/self-improvement schemes, e.g. SoulCycle), QAnon. Montell writes personally, continually injecting her anecdotes, acquaintances, and reactions into the narrative. This is often compelling, occasionally off-putting.

Getting to the ostensible focus of the book: Montell notes a number of commonalities in "cultish" language. Most interesting are the "thought-terminating clichés", which have their own Wikipedia page: phrases used in a discussion to shut down dissent and short-circuit critical thought. ("Don't think about it too hard.") But there's also "us-versus-them" language, verbal abuse, and (often) the generation of an entire lexicon of words and phrases "private" to the cult.

You don't need to be a linguist to recognize this.

The book is seriously marred by Montell's leftist politics. Why are Americans seemingly so susceptible to cultish come-ons? Ah, page 27 informs us it's due to our lack of "universal healthcare." On page 81, Montell points out "the oratorical similarities between [Donald] Trump and Jim Jones." On page 88, we are informed that we are conditioned to "automatically trust the voices of middle-aged white men." "Capitalism" is used throughout with an obvious implied sneer.

There's a brief discussion of the "tyrannous atmosphere" of Amazon. Much is made of a Jeff Bezos quote: "I constantly remind our employees to be afraid, to wake up every morning terrified." Montell says this is from a "1999 shareholder letter".

It's easy enough to find on the web. The letter is addressed not just to shareholders, but "To our shareholders, customers, and employees". And the fear-inducing sentence in context?

We intend to build the world’s most customer-centric company. We hold as axiomatic that customers are perceptive and smart, and that brand image follows reality and not the other way around. Our customers tell us that they choose Amazon.com and tell their friends about us because of the selection, ease-of-use, low prices, and service that we deliver.

But there is no rest for the weary. I constantly remind our employees to be afraid, to wake up every morning terrified. Not of our competition, but of our customers. Our customers have made our business what it is, they are the ones with whom we have a relationship, and they are the ones to whom we owe a great obligation. And we consider them to be loyal to us – right up until the second that someone else offers them a better service.
Is that still quite as "tyrannous" now?

Last Modified 2024-01-16 4:58 AM EDT