A

s I write this article from my 
home in Miami, Fla., my state’s 
COVID-19 rates continue to 
peak at tens of thousands of new cases 
per day. An article from The Guardian 
described the magnitude of the Sunshine 
State’s crisis as such: “If Florida was a 
country, it would be one of the world’s 
biggest hotspots.” Nonetheless, Florida 
Gov. Ron DeSantis has adopted an opti-
mistic, yet somewhat dismissive outlook 
on the growth in cases. In June, DeSan-
tis chose to veto an increase in health 
care spending from the state’s budget. 
More recently, while advising Floridians 
to be cautious but not fearful, DeSantis 
quipped, “I think fear is our enemy here.” 
DeSantis has been criticized for his 
lackluster response to the pandemic — 
and rightly so. In spite of expert medical 
advice, DeSantis has pushed to reopen 
the state’s businesses, its schools and even 
Disney World as soon as possible. His 
eagerness to open back up has been criti-
cized by many as prioritizing economic 
gain over protecting vulnerable lives, 
but it’s also been criticized for its defer-
ence to President Donald Trump. Many 
local, state and international leaders have 
expressed concern with the commander-
in-chief’s statements and policy regard-
ing COVID-19. The Red Cross even 
spoke out against the U.S.’s response, 
deeming it divisive and ineffective. 
In Brazil, however, Trump’s bombastic 
rhetoric may have found a receptive audi-
ence, especially within the Latin Ameri-
can country’s own executive branch, 
based on the leaders’ similar responses 
to the pandemic. In April, Brazil Presi-
dent Jair Bolsonaro had responded with 
a shrug when reporters pressed him 
about Brazil’s record number of deaths. 

“So what?” said the president of the larg-
est and most populous country in Latin 
America. He continued dismissively, “I’m 
sorry. What do you want me to do?”
It is unlikely there is any single expla-
nation for the drastic rates of infection and 
death in the U.S. and Brazil. Americans 
and Brazilians are not inherently sick-
lier or weaker than the rest of the world. 
While some structural factors — geogra-
phy, public health resources and even the 
weather — can make disease spread more 
likely in any given country, the impact of 
irresponsible and reckless leadership 
on transmission is pronounced. To 
that extent, Brazil and the U.S. cer-
tainly have many geographic, struc-
tural and climatic differences but do 
share one eerie commonality: a lack of 
effective, responsible leadership. 
I am often hesitant to assign too much 
theoretical power to any particular poli-
tician because government is inherently 
complicated and a single person is rarely 
the only one responsible for a larger phe-
nomenon or problem. But the reality is 
that Bolsonaro and Trump do wield an 
incredible amount of persuasive power 
over some of their constituents. Many 
people do make decisions based on what 
their country’s leaders say, even if what’s 
being said is misleading or simply untrue. 
As Brazilian media has reported, 
every time that Bolsonaro downplays the 
coronavirus on television, his supporters’ 
adherence to social distancing declines. 
Likewise, to say that Trump has also 
been dismissive of COVID-19’s spread 
throughout America would be an under-
statement. Despite the massive scale 
of the outbreak that is raging through 
major metropolitan centers throughout 
the U.S., the decision to wear a mask 

appears increasingly political. As the 
U.S. handles tens of thousands of new 
cases a day, the White House is planning 
to block funding for test-and-trace funds 
and other prevention measures. On July 
19, Trump insisted in an interview on 
“Fox News on Sunday” that the corona-
virus would eventually “disappear.” 
Both countries’ leaders have publicly 
minimized the pandemic. That matters. 
A politician’s ineffective leadership can 
affect the behavior of fervent support-
ers and casual observers alike as well as 
make the difference between a minor 
dip or a spike in cases. In the wake of 
misinformation and new data around 
COVID-19’s transmission and fatality 
rates, this much is likely true for the U.S. 
and Brazil: It’s going to get a lot worse 
before it gets better. That’s something 
we know based on scientific expertise 
and thoughtful analysis of public health 
outcomes from professionals who are 
trained to assess risk to vulnerable 
populations. Brazilians and Americans 
alike should continue to practice social 
distancing, wear a mask and encourage 
others who are reluctant to do the same. 
Fear is not the enemy. Carelessness 
is the enemy. The willingness to sac-
rifice lives for economic and political 
gain is the enemy. Reckless behavior 
and misinformation serve as powerful 
vectors for disease. When Gov. DeSan-
tis opens the public beaches — which 
he will, sooner rather than later — we 
should not take that to mean COVID-19 
no longer poses a serious public health 
concern. Instead, we should acknowl-
edge it means the very opposite.

4

Thursday, July 30, 2020
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
OPINION

420 Maynard St. 
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
 tothedaily@michigandaily.com

Edited and managed by students at 
the University of Michigan since 1890.

 BRITTANY BOWMAN
Editorial Page Editor

Alanna Berger
Zack Blumberg
Brittany Bowman
Emily Considine
Elizabeth Cook

Jess D’Agostino
Jenny Gurung
Cheryn Hong
Zoe Phillips
Mary Rolfes

Michael Russo
Gabrijela Skoko
Timothy Spurlin
Joel Weiner
Erin White 

Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board. 
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.

EMMA STEIN
Editor in Chief

EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS

ALLISON PUJOL | COLUMNIST

Allison Pujol can be reached at 

ampmich@umich.edu.

The real enemy

O

ur nation’s military bases 
should serve as a reminder 
of the courage and bravery 
of our country’s armed forces, not 
as monuments to men who fought 
to tear the United States apart. It is 
time the U.S. government remove 
the names of Confederate generals 
from our military bases. 
Some of the nation’s largest and 
most well known military bases, 
such as Fort Hood in Texas, Fort 
Bragg in North Carolina and Fort 
Benning in Georgia are named 
after Confederate generals. In 
total, there are ten major army 
bases named after Confederate 
generals. The recent Black Lives 
Matter 
protests 
and 
growing 
national conversation about racial 
justice have put this issue back in 
the spotlight and reignited calls 
for the bases to be renamed. 
Support for the name change has 
been channeled into action with 
lawmakers adding a provision to 
the National Defense Authoriza-
tion Act requiring that all Con-
federate names be removed from 
U.S. military bases. A version of 
each bill passed the House and the 
Senate, however, the removal of 
names is not yet set in stone. 
President Donald Trump has 
vowed to veto the bill if it includes 
a stipulation to rename bases. The 
House and Senate passed the bills 
by a veto-proof majority of over 
two-thirds in each house. How-
ever, if the president decides to 
veto the bill, Republicans in the 
Senate could switch their votes 
to prove their loyalty to Trump. 
Additionally, since the versions 
of the NDAA passed by the House 
and Senate were different, the 
two chambers must negotiate a 
final version to vote on, which 
might not include a requirement 
to rename the bases. Sen. Jim 
Inhofe, R-Okla., a conservative 
Trump supporter who has a great 
deal of negotiating power as Sen-
ate Armed Services Chair, has 
vowed to fight to remove this pro-
vision from the final bill. 
It is simply unacceptable that 
in 2020 we are still having this 
debate. We should not have our 
military bases serving as monu-
ments to men who actively fought 
against the U.S. Army and were 
willing to tear our country apart 
in order to hold onto their slaves. 
Instead, we should rename our 
bases after true American heroes 
who better represent our values. 
Currently, there are no U.S. mili-
tary bases named after women, 
despite the important role that 
countless women have played in 

various wars. There are so many 
people to choose from, both male 
and female, who deserve the honor 
of having a base named after them, 
whether it be Harriet Tubman, 
John McCain, Ulysses S. Grant or 
other deserving individuals for 
whom the bases can be named. 
Trump and some of his supporters 
have opposed renaming the bases, 
saying it is giving in to cancel cul-
ture and promoting a revision of 
history. They also argue changing 
the names takes away the honor of 
these bases, which have been criti-
cal to past U.S. military success. 
President Trump reiterated this 
claim in a Fox News interview, 
saying “We won two world wars, 
two world wars, beautiful world 
wars that were vicious and hor-
rible, and we won them out of 
Fort Bragg, we won out of all of 
these forts that now they want to 
throw those names away.” 
Arguments such as these cheap-
en the hard work and dedication 
of those who served in the World 
Wars and other military conflicts. 
The successes that have come out of 
these bases have nothing to do with 
their names — it has to do with the 
courageous men and women who 
serve there. By making this argu-
ment, the president is demeaning 
their commitment and sacrifice. 
Our president should be focused 
on commemorating the legacy of 
true American heroes and patri-
ots, not Confederate generals.
The whole argument of keeping up 
Confederate memorials to remember 
our history is ludicrous statues and 
namesakes do not serve as a reminder 
of history — they serve as symbols 
of white supremacy. We should not 
honor Confederate generals who 
fought to protect their right to own 
other people and tried to tear our 
nation apart. 
Countries such as Germany have 
shown us that you do not need statues 
or monuments to remember history. 
In Germany, there are no Nazi flags, 
no statues to Hitler or elementary 
schools named after Mengele. They 
recognize their sinful history and 
work to atone; they do not commemo-
rate the monsters of the past. 
Removing the names of Confederate 
generals from our military bases will 
not fix everything. It is a small step in 
the marathon of changes that we need 
to make in this country. However, it is 
an important step that must be taken 
to ensure that we commemorate the 
values and individuals who repre-
sent our highest American ideals. 

Rename the bases

ISABELLE SCHINDLER | COLUMNIST

Isabelle Schindler can be reached at 

ischind@umich.edu.

