We are grasping for "why aren't more Africans dying" explanations, but maybe the better question is why are so many people in the US and Europe (and Brazil) dying?

I'll never forget @tweetmoraa's observation that this isn't a military crisis, this is a crisis of care. In what ways do militarized narratives of statehood and national identity undermine the practice of collective care?

Yesterday the UK prime minister said in parliament that the reason why there were more cases in the UK than in western Europe in this second wave is basically because the UK "loves freedom more". Underneath that bravado, think about what acts of care that framework nullifies.

The head of the Africa CDC probably said it best: it's way too early and partial to say that Africa has escaped the worst of the coronavirus. We still don't know exactly what's happening. But it's not too early to reflect on what has happened in the worst affected countries.

I guess I'm saying is that we need to ask what is it about capitalist, individualist and militarized statehood that makes such societies particularly vulnerable to pandemics? Isn't this the more urgent question: what unites the way the worst affected societies are structured?

One underlying presumption in the "why aren't more Africans dying" pieces is that widespread death was inevitable. But there is plenty of evidence that it wasn't (Taiwan, S. Korea, New Zealand). So what is it about the worst affected societies that is causing it?