I know, but at some point, doesn't basic decent human nature kick in for even *one* of them? I find it astounding, every time they show themselves anew, that every single one of them seem to exhibit not one iota of care for anyone outside of their little coterie. Or even for those inside of it, but who are not part of the financial or political leadership. It just strains everything I thought I armchair-understood about human psychology to have such a huge group of Machiavellis having swarmed together to work in concert.
People are so good at compartmentalizing. Most, I suspect, feel compassion for an individual person who is suffering in front of them. But making the connection between a choice made by Trump in terms of policies or funding or personnel at the CDC? That's too abstract. So they hang on his
sad little scrunched up face (he's probably been studying pictures of
Paul Ryan and practicing in front of a mirror in an attempt to get that expression "right") and his breezy assurances as evidence that he cares and that he has confidence in his own abilities.
There's also a very serious issue, one that has plagued the human race since its inception, I think, is that empathy can be very selective. People tend to relate more to those who are familiar to them, or who are in close proximity to them, to those they consider to be like themselves. So for many, seeing images and hearing accounts of "the other" suffering don't register fully, or they might rationalize that "those people" are somehow to blame for their predicament. I suppose it's a way of dealing with cognitive dissonance.
The good news is that we are capable of shifting our perception of who we regard as like us. Human empathy can even extend to other species, and it often does. But it takes work, exposure, and experience to do this, and it can lead to some rather uncomfortable emotions.
I suspect not, because the whole rationale for not showing decisive leadership in this crisis has been fear of one element of his base, which is bizarre blend of Libertarians, rich people, and the more authoritarian-minded Religious Right. Those "don't tell me what to do" people are still out there, and he relies on them for support.
However, I could certainly see him and others turning a blind eye to bands of armed vigilantes who take it upon themselves to start shooting people who are out and about when they "shouldn't" be, or who have out-of-state-plates, or who appear to be ill (which likely means not white) in public spaces. They don't even have to say they thought their victim might have been armed now, simply insist the victim was coughing and posing a threat to the shooter and/or their family/
Of course, Trump has shown himself perfectly capable of turning 180 degrees from a previous position and convincing his base he's been there all along. I suspect he's still more likely to lift the order before it's wise to, though, because he cares more about seeing an economic bounce of some kind before November.
Then there's the
Putin approach, which is to utilize tracking technology to enforce strict stay-at-home orders. I'd lay odds that this technology will stay in use after the Covid-19 outbreak is over too. I'd also lay odds that Russians will find ways to hack or circumvent this technology with varying degrees of success. That sort of thing would be harder to implement here, though, where we can't even seem to get a national shelter in place order at all, and some argue that the Constitution wouldn't allow it.