Crisis demands shared leadership

The shape of our two primary political party’s response to COVID demonstrates the great need we have for multiple dominant parties.

In the early stages of the pandemic, it was the Democratic party’s response that proved most human. Most Democrats were swift to listen to scientific guidance and protect the vulnerable, to release funds and organize a coherent response. The Republican party, in contrast, quibbled with the scientific community, claimed moral superiority in upholding freedom at the expense of the vulnerable, and balked at even modest capital expenditure.

In the later stages of the pandemic, however, the tides turned. The Democratic party has become entrenched in their moral superiority to protect the vulnerable, even if the vulnerable don’t want their help. While swift to listen to scientists when given warning, they’re slow to acknowledge recent scientific discoveries that would encourage a withdrawal of many COVID precautions. The champion of the vulnerable has become the oppressor. The Republican party, ready to relinquish government control and revive our sense of stability, has thoughtfully responded to the progression of information and spread of COVID. They may have been slow to heed the dangers in the beginning, but they have not let fear paralyze their reason.

In light of these discoveries, I want to be an early-stage Democrat, late-stage Republican. Swift to sacrifice for my neighbor when crisis hits, and swift to relinquish control and grant my neighbor the dignity of choice as crisis fades. Thank God for Democrats and Republicans.