While he may falter and fail in any other things, one has to give credit to Prime Minister Rama for his unyielding strategy of diverting attention and kidnapping the public debate when he really puts his mind to it. A diversion is much needed when the vaccine supply only trickles a couple of hundred shipments scattered over time and in the midst of a severe deterioration of the pandemics situation. Now when all the hospitals are a brink capacity and the regional hospitals, depleted of equipment and medics, are being forced to take in Covid-19 patients it is clear that the overall evaluation of citizens over the pandemics management will be a influential factor at the ballot box on the upcoming general elections of April 25.
Cue in the vaccine act.
First and foremost, Rama and his PR machinery has orchestrated an exhausting show every time a small shipment arrives with a press conference at the airport in the arrival evenings and later on with him personally being at the vaccination sites every time jabs are being administered. However this type of show was being repetitive and not so captivating anymore that is why it needed a little jolt. Rama’s proposal in this case was to say that out of the high-risk group of octogenarians to be vaccinated he would prioritize the “personalities of the nation”, various well-known names primarily from culture and arts but from politics too.
It is beyond any doubt that this proposal infringes all medical protocols and steps over the red line of discrimination. The selection of vaccine beneficiaries should be done exclusively based on medical data and expertise. Other countries have also their personalities, their virtuosos and their Nobelists, their acclaimed scientists, actors and former presidents. However none of them have chosen to bring them up on the line.
However Rama’s objective was to cause diversion and in that he succeeded. For days the debate shifted from mismanagement and a faltering public healthcare system (increasingly even the private one!) into a human rights debacle and a polarizing online discussion whether we in fact value personalities here or not. Beyond diversion the debate served also the further intention of polarization as online micro-aggressions between people emerged, accusations abut being ungrateful to important contributors to society and others trying to vouch for their parents’ sacrifices which had to be enough to put them on the list. Divide and conquer the online arena.
The usage of the healthcare crisis for short term political gain and electoral campaign is shameful. It is present elsewhere too and equally ugly. Since we can’t change the temptation of politicians it is time to invest in the reliance of societies themselves to counteract this masterful acts of diversion and casting citizens against each other.
The latest vaccine debate should be a lesson and a case study in that regard.
