Is It Too Late To Call It “The Wuhan Virus” Or Better Yet, “The China Virus”?

Coronavirus_H

I believe this issue should be settled in the context of the immortal words of Chinese dissident Paladin Cheng, who said, “Don’t trust China. China is asshole.”

There is no longer any serious dispute over where the pandemic came from, or why it spread so far and did so much damage before the world was able to respond in a timely fashion. Either the virus arose from the unsanitary, disease breeding Wuhan wet markets, or escaped from a Wuhan lab. Then China, we also now know, covered up the rampaging contagion, allowing it to travel via plane and other means to all corners of the globe.

Conclusion: China is accountable. China is liable. China is asshole.

Of course, we knew the latter even before the pandemic, but China is also profitable, which is why everyone from the NBA to Hollywood to Disney to Hunter Biden still want to avoid making certain that the public knows just how bad—evil, even—the Chinese government and culture is. I presume that after multiple mutations and other distractions, in five years or less most of the public won’t know or remember where the virus that we allowed to wreck the economy, society and culture came from. Where is “Covid,” anyway?

It’s a good bet that if Donald Trump hadn’t been calling the thing “the Wuhan virus” or “China virus” (both terms the mainstream media used until they pretended they hadn’t), one of those terms would have stuck. But the resistance/Democratic Party/ mainstream media game plan to get Trump run out of office ASAP included fueling the Big Lie that he’s a racist. Now, how it’s racist to call a virus that came from China a Chinese virus escapes me now and did then, except that the formula was (and is), if Trump used the term, it must be racist.

The other reason for calling the completely accurate label that also fairly attached accountability where it belongs was that some idiots in the U.S. were attacking anyone, including Americans who looked Asian on the demented theory that they were responsible for what the totalitarians in China had done because they had ancestors or relatives who hailed from the general vivacity. That makes a lot of sense. During World War I, some people of equal IQ scores killed dachshunds too. However, the theory that we should avoid informing the public in order to avoid spectacularly stupid reactions to some undisputed facts is as dumb as the people whose imbecility spawned it. The Left likes the Heckler’s Veto; I suppose this is the Bigot’s Veto. Any excuse to censor facts unhelpful to the progressive agenda, I suppose.

I was thinking about this as we learned that the latest Wuhan virus mutation would be called the Omicron variant, skipping the letter in the Greek alphabet that should have received the honor, Xi. It’s been fun watching the news media and pundits try to deny that this decision was made to avoid naming the infection after the Chinese ruler. “Xi is hard to say,” one pundit actually wrote, whose fans also want to inflict the pronouns xe, xis, xyr, xyrself and xirself on us. How does someone look themselves in the mirror after writing something that dishonest? In D.C., where they streets are alphabetical except for skipping “J,” at least nobody pretended that the reason was anything other than to avoid having a street evoke the unpopular John Jay, whose treaty with Great Britain in 1794 was roundly despised.

We should take every opportunity to ensure that this international disaster is laid at China’s metaphorical feat, and forever. That means, if nothing else, having the name of the virus reflect what happened, and naming a variant after the leader who keeps China the international asshole it is a nice touch too.

Better still would be a UN resolution pinning the blame where it belongs, and bill for damages.

35 thoughts on “Is It Too Late To Call It “The Wuhan Virus” Or Better Yet, “The China Virus”?

  1. But Jack…. it’s RAY-CIST. This is why the mainstream media and the D establishment is currently excoriating Biden for restricting travel from Africa, they way it excoriated Trump and Republicans for banning travel from China!

    What? You mean they’re NOT?

    Well…. never mind, then.

  2. “But the resistance/Democratic Party/ mainstream media game plan to get Trump run out of office ASAP included fueling the Big Lie that he’s a racist. ”

    As Harry Reid would say, “It worked, didn’t it?”

  3. We use place names not to punish but to provide some form of taxonomical uniformity. Places of origin help isolate the initial vector which allows other scientist to track the progression and variants.

    Further, if it could be determined that the viral release was intended, or if not intended covered up, the country of origin should bear the economic consequences of the release.

  4. We use place names not to punish but to provide some form of taxonomical uniformity. Places of origin help isolate the initial vector which allows other scientist to track the progression and variants.

    Further, if it could be determined that the viral release was intended, or if not intended covered up, the country of origin should bear the economic consequences of the release.

  5. “Should all diseases and viruses have their place of origin attached to their name so we don’t forget where it came from and to hold the place of origin accountable?”

    Um…with the possible exception of Legionnaires Disease, we have:

    *German measles,
    *West Nile virus,
    *Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever,
    *Lyme disease,
    *Ebola,
    *Norovirus
    *Norwalk virus,
    *Desert Shield virus,
    *Southampton virus,
    *Bristol virus,
    *Lordsdale virus,
    *Toronto virus,
    *Mexico virus,
    *Hawaii virus
    *Snow Mountain virus,
    *Zika virus,
    *Spanish Flu,

  6. Ok, I’ll take one bite of the 🍎.

    Explain, without referencing this virus, what is so wrong about naming diseases after where they originate?

  7. I apologize to anyone whose comment was rendered confusing, or deleted entirely, because the banned Waldorf’s lucky invasion while I was away required me to spam a bunch of his trollings. One way the banned commenters inevitably prove I was right to ding them is to breach the basic courtesy of staying away from where the host has declared you unwelcome. I was surprised Waldorf waited so long.

          • The name reminded me of Waldorf and Statler, the Muppet characters who sit in the balcony over the stage and yuck it up. They are among my favorite Muppets, along with Animal. Jeeze, Waldorf and Statler are probably younger than I am now.

          • For the record, W. posted 9 comments to this post that I had to spam after being explicitly told that he had no commenting privileges as a consequence of his violating comment policies and being a jerk.

          • Hehe.

            I initially thought you’d reinstated him. But I bet he couldn’t have answered my question without talking about how racist Wuhan virus was.

            I must say he doesn’t seem to have changed whilst he was gone.

            • I explained this but ethical Jack deleted my comments.

              I think the reasoning is that naming a disease or virus based on where it first broke out doesn’t tell us where the virus actually originated from. It can be misleading.

              Another reason is people may wrongly assume they can only get a certain virus or disease if they enter a certain area or interact with a certain type of people. But diseases don’t really discriminate this way.

              And on top of that, it can create unnecessary animosity towards a group of people, like how gay people were treated in the 80s when HIV broke out.

              People wrongly assumed it was only a gay disease and were shocked when straight people could get it.

              The naming conventions should be more scientific-based.

  8. They said the skipped “Nu”, because it could cause confusion with “new”, which seems reasonable. Then said they skipped Xi because it was like a common Chinese name as represented in English. Of course “Delta” is also used as a name (but not of a Chinese president, so…).
    Even so, apparently, neither Slojoe nor Fauci can pronounce “omicron”; both saying “omnicron” in the recent press conference…Joe repeatedly.

  9. Step 1: Understand one’s own values

    We want to be free to label things simply and accurately without fear that our labels will be censored just because someone doesn’t like them. If we can’t discuss evidence and speak freely about events, then we can’t do anything useful.

    Step 2: Understand others’ values

    Other people are concerned that certain kinds of labels and phrases will affect someone else’s place on the Cognitive Dissonance Scale by indirect association, and that those other people will be threatened or denied goodwill as a result. That does happen sometimes, after all. I refer to the cognitive dissonance phenomenon as reputation or “Dust”; as in, “the virus carries a lot of negative Dust, and people want to prevent it from getting on them.”

    Step 3: Frame the situation constructively

    In the long term, if people are going to actually be violent towards or prejudiced against people just because they share a vague area of origin or a general label with a negative phenomenon, I think we need to take it up with the violent and prejudiced people. The world I want to build has no place for people who think like that. I refuse to tolerate a society where I have to be careful what I say lest someone somewhere assault someone else.

    In the meantime, I don’t see it as much of a sacrifice to use a sufficiently accurate and unambiguous label such as COVID-19 so that it doesn’t risk casting negative impressions outside of the virus itself. I’m generally amenable to changing the words I use as long as I’m provided with replacement words that are guaranteed to be acceptable in perpetuity, that are clear, accurate and precise, and that aren’t onerous to say in casual conversation. It doesn’t prevent me from criticizing what I need to criticize, and in some cases it even helps, because it disentangles concepts from each other.

    That’s my hot take on the issue. How does that sound?

  10. Thanks!

    Deliberate invocation of reputation or cognitive dissonance is certainly a valid approach. It may be good to outline what we want to happen as a result. If we turn public opinion against the Chinese government, what’s the next step? Sanctions? If so, we may want to promote those measures alongside the use of the phrase Wuhan virus or China virus. Otherwise, we’ll build up negative emotions towards China but those emotions will have no direction, and that’s when ignorant violence becomes likely.

Leave a Reply to Null Pointer Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.