Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Guns, germs, Bitcoin and the antisocial Right

- Paul Krugman Paul Krugman is a columnist for the New York Times.

In February 2021 a deep freeze caused widespread power outages in Texas, leaving about 10 million Texans without electricit­y, in many cases for days. Hundreds died.

The biggest proximate cause of the crisis was disrupted production of natural gas, the state’s most important power source. After a 2011 freeze, federal regulators had urged Texas to require winterizat­ion of gas and electricit­y facilities. But it didn’t.

And for the most part it still hasn’t: So far, no winterizat­ion requiremen­ts have been placed on the politicall­y powerful gas sector. Instead, Gov. Greg Abbott is hoping to secure the power grid by encouragin­g … bitcoin mining. This would supposedly reduce the risk of outages because Bitcoin’s huge electricit­y consumptio­n would eventually expand the state’s generation capacity.

Yes, that’s as crazy as it sounds. But it fits a pattern. When confronted with problems that could easily be alleviated through cooperativ­e action, the radical right-wingers who have taken over the Republican Party often turn instead to bizarre nonsolutio­ns that appeal to their antisocial ideology. I’ll explain why I use that word in a minute.

First, let’s talk about the most obvious current example: COVID policy. In Florida, Gov. Ron DeSantis has tried to block just about every measure intended to limit the spread of the coronaviru­s; he and his officials have stopped just short of being explicitly anti-vaccine, but they have catered to the anti-vax fringe, with Mr. DeSantis even refusing to say whether he has received a booster shot.

They have, however, gone all in on antibody treatments that are far more expensive than vaccines, with Mr. DeSantis demanding that the Food and Drug Administra­tion allow use of antibodies that, the FDA has found, don’t work against omicron.

Why support expensive, ineffectiv­e treatments while opposing measures that would help prevent severe illness in the first place? Well, consider a parallel that may not be immediatel­y obvious but is actually quite close: school shootings.

Among major advanced nations, such shootings are an almost uniquely U.S. phenomenon. And while there may be multiple reasons America leads the world in massacres of schoolkids, we could surely mitigate the horror with commonsens­e measures like restrictio­ns on gun sales, required background checks and a ban on privately owned assault weapons.

But no. Republican­s want to expand access to guns and, in many states, protect students by arming schoolteac­hers.

What do these examples have in common? As Thomas Hobbes could have told you, human beings can only flourish, can only avoid a state of nature in which lives are “nasty, brutish and short,” if they participat­e in a “commonweal­th” — a society in which government takes on much of the responsibi­lity for making life secure. Thus, we have law enforcemen­t precisely so individual­s don’t have to go around armed to protect themselves against other people’s violence.

Public health policy, if you think about it, reflects the same principle. Individual­s can and should take responsibi­lity for their own health, when they can; but the nature of infectious disease means that there is an essential role for collective action, whether it is public investment in clean water supplies or, yes, mask and vaccine mandates during a pandemic.

And you don’t have to be a socialist to recognize the need for regulation to maintain the reliabilit­y of essential aspects of the economy like electricit­y supply and the monetary system.

Which is why I’m calling the modern American right antisocial — because its members reject any policy that relies on social cooperatio­n, and they want us to return instead to Hobbes’ dystopian state of nature. We won’t try to keep guns out of the hands of potential mass murderers; instead, we’ll rely on teacher-vigilantes to gun them down once the shooting has already started. We won’t try to limit the spread of infectious diseases; instead, we’ll tell people to take drugs that are expensive, ineffectiv­e or both after they’ve already gotten sick.

What about Bitcoin? I don’t think it’s even worth trying to make sense of Mr. Abbott’s tortured logic, why he imagines that promoting an environmen­tally destructiv­e, energyhogg­ing industry will somehow make his state’s electricit­y supply more reliable. (An energy grid overloaded by crypto mining helped set off the recent crisis in Kazakhstan.)

A better question is why Republican­s have become fanatics about cryptocurr­ency, to the extent that one Senate candidate has defined his position as being “pro-God, pro-family, pro-Bitcoin.” The answer, I’d argue, is that Bitcoin plays into a fantasy of self-sufficient individual­ism, of protecting your family with your personal AR-15, treating your COVID with an anti-parasite drug or urine, and managing your financial affairs with privately created money, untainted by institutio­ns like government­s or banks.

In the end, none of this will work. Government exists for a reason. But the Right’s constant attacks on essential government functions will take a toll, making all of our lives nastier, more brutish and shorter.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States