The evolution of the conversation about the lab-leak theory online reminds me of the way someone conscious of their own guilt behaves.
Yesterday morning, the Wall Street Journal broke the news that the U.S. Department of Energy was changing its assessment as to the origins of Covid-19 — relevant not just because the DOE is a federal-government organ, but because its work actually puts it surprisingly adjacent to this field — concluding that the outbreak was “most likely” the product of a lab leak (presumably the Chinese coronavirus research lab in Wuhan), rather than natural mutation and transmission. And, of course, by yesterday afternoon Republicans had commenced the pouncing.
Indeed, God forbid anyone who pointed out that Covid-19 originated from the exact location where risky coronavirus research was being conducted by the Chinese government should get angry about this. Why would we, when we were treated so well by conventional wisdom’s baleful gaze for so long?
The evolution of the conversation about the “lab leak” theory online reminds me of the way someone conscious of their own guilt behaves: moving from “I’m innocent!” to, once they’ve been found out (or the position they’ve taken has proven to be untenable), to “well . . . prove it in court.” So too has the public pas-de-deux on the lab-leak origin of Covid-19 shifted from “that’s an insane theory only insane and/or disreputable conspiracy theorists would even venture in polite company” to “well . . . it’s possible” to now “there are still some remaining federal government agencies that ‘officially’ don’t think it was a lab leak!”
And then these people, either smugly disingenuous or so thick-skulled as to make one despair as to the state of sophisticated political analysis in the country, claim that the DOE’s new assessment was offered with “low confidence,” as if to suggest that makes it a weak claim. Guess what else was offered with “low confidence?” That’s right! The National Intelligence Panel assessment’s conclusion that Covid-19 originated via “natural transmission” was rated “low confidence” by themselves. Read it for yourself, it’s literally page one. Which might be a red flag for the alert: It’s a term of art within the intelligence community, and 99 percent of those slinging it on Twitter have no idea what it actually means.
This brings me to precisely what’s so infuriating about the entire public discourse around Covid-19 (at least as conducted online): the Kabuki theater nature of it. It’s all empty symbolic gestures, audience-facing pronunciamentos, and dramatic pauses for applause. (“Please clap . . . and smash that ‘like’ button.”) It’s a parody of discussion, fit for a modern world where public life is permanently political and so any conversation that might be overheard by a stranger (particularly online, where The Internet Is Forever) reverts to performance just in case: Someone might be listening, you don’t want to lose face, better make sure to hit your marks.
Each side gestures to their Governmental Authority’s Official Assessment as if they are the final word, dueling Pope and Antipope warring via papal encyclical. “The DoE says it’s most likely a lab leak!” vs. “No, the CDC says it’s most likely natural in origin!” Here is the thing: You do not need to be so helpless on this issue. ProPublica and Vanity Fair — certainly nobody’s idea of conservative-leaning or “right-coded” outlets — published what I believe to be the single most valuable piece of journalism of the entire year back on October 28, 2022, with this lengthy piece.
I advise you — indeed, implore you — to read that if any serious doubts remain in your mind as to, if not the certainty of the “lab leak” theory, then at the very least its hyper-plausibility. In a work of sleuthing that threatens to make a man believe once again in the power of investigative journalism, the authors actually piece together and pinpoint the exact date when the Chinese authorities had their “uh-oh” realization that Covid-19 had escaped from the Wuhan lab and began communicating it in the CCP’s uniquely byzantine internal language. (It was scandalously early, November of 2019. This nightmare had been brewing for months before the world caught wind of it.)
So maybe that’s why Republicans are “pouncing” yet again. Not because we’re Republicans, or conservatives, but because we’re normal human beings who do not appreciate having the entire mainstream media as well as our social-media censors, operating with tacit encouragement from the federal government (both the Trump and Biden administrations, mind you), urinate on our legs for a solid three years running while telling us it’s just a protracted patch of bad weather. Even now, the pusillanimous refusal to even grant that the lab-leak theory is not just “fringy/disreputable” (or even a 50/50 proposition), but is indeed more likely than not, is evidence of a mulish incapacity for self-reflection or intellectual growth from people whose whims we continue to be subject to, and whom we are asked to regard as our intellectual and moral betters. You cannot claim that rank unless you submit yourself to fair chastisement.
I can tolerate quite a bit. I draw the line at having my intelligence insulted repeatedly by dimwitted people who were wrong — and were wrong precisely because they blindly and unthinkingly followed the very authorities they insist I must trust — when I made none of their mistakes.