July 2020 Blog

When walking about any town in Sweden during this summer of Covid, it becomes obvious very quickly that virtually no one wears a facemask. The Swedish town where I live has a population of 100 000, and this week I have been into the centre three times, visited five shops and yet I haven't seen anyone wearing a mask. Over the course of the pandemic the very few people I have seen wearing masks have been those who were likely not born in Sweden. This difference has been observed by the main Swedish media and the reasons for the difference in mask use and for the effects on immigrant communities are important to understand. The relaxed Swedish attitude contrasts with the TV pictures I see from Spain where Spanish television goes to elaborate lengths to show only people wearing face masks. Any cursory look at Spanish media will show that nearly every person pictured is wearing a mask even inside bars. In fact we are probably only a couple of weeks away from a situation where it is compulsory to wear a mask whenever you go outside, anywhere in Spain. Politicians are taking the path of least resistance in trying to stop any outbreaks of the disease by passing emergency legislation that provokes little resistance in a population that was in a "lockdown" similar to a type of house arrest, for three months. Instead of trying to reduce public concern by explaining that the new cases are the result of increased testing and that the age profile of people being infected is getting younger , the local governments stick to the promise to eradicate Covid in a fight to the death in which all types of liberties will be taken away as a necessary sacrifice to el bicho. Meanwhile in the UK the debate seems to be following the confusing messaging started by the government following the decision to make mask use compulsory in shops. The Conservative party is returning to its roots in social authoritarianism as it panics about massive public expenditure and the fact that many people seem to enjoy working from home where "factory discipline" can no longer be enforced.

Sweden has had a different strategy from many countries in its response to Covid. There have been a number of legislative interventions including the closing of 16 plus education , laws to limit crowd sizes and regulations to enforce social distancing in bars. But all businesses have remained open including bars and restaurants. In addition schools for students under 16 never closed and although up to 30% of pupils stayed away in the first weeks of the crises ,by the end of the term attendance was normal. Much has been written on the Swedish way but the two main differences in Sweden's policy has been the fact that schools were not closed and that the use of facemasks in public has not been encouraged. Why is there no rush to mask up? Why no compulsion? and why do Swedes seem so relaxed about the country's response to Covid 19?

The first thing to point out is that the government has chosen to follow the recommendations of the Swedish Public Health authority (Folkhälsomyndigheten) in its response to the virus.The government could have chosen to follow another strategy but has chosen not to do so. On the authority's website there are only a few references to facemasks (munskydd in Swedish) and most of them concern workers in old peoples homes. Some parts of the foreign press have been critical of Sweden's decision not to lockdown as severely as in other countries or recommended the use of masks by the public and its has been left to Anders Tegnell, the state epidemiologist, to explain the policy in detail. The reasons against mask use according to him are :-

• The evidence for the effectiveness of facemasks in public is very weak or non-existent
• The evidence for social distancing of "an arm's length" as protection is very strong and this should be stressed more than anything
• People should stay at home if they are ill and a mask is likely to encourage people to go out
• It is very difficult for people , even health professionals , to wear masks in a way which makes them effective. Constant touching and moving instead increases risk.
• Mask wearing can create a sense of immunity and people are likely to ignore the other very effective measures when wearing them
• Rather than acting as a signal for people being concerned about Covid masks may signal a sense that the mask wearer has some sort of immunity
• WHO recommendations are also based on the weak evidence and enjoy no special status
• The authority would change its recommendations if more substantial evidence for mask use was presented

For Tegnell and others in Sweden it is surprising that facemask use has become a type of concern signalling for many people as if it were a litmus test to hold both public authorities and individuals to account over their commitment to caring. Most people in Sweden are not qualified to pass judgement on the effectiveness of mask use by reading some of the few scientific papers relating to them, but are willing to trust the Folkhälsomyndigheten and their policies. As a Swedish resident I also accept this policy and as an immigrant to Sweden I also look at the two countries I know best outside of Sweden, namely the UK and Spain, for comparison. In Spain where the epidemic was for a few weeks at panic levels, the Spanish population locked themselves into their homes at the governments insistence and stayed there with the help of an aggressive enforcement policy aided by every mainstream media outlet. TV images generated a sense of fear and passivness into the population on scale that was , to me at least, very surprising. As the de-escalation of the state of emergency has proceeded, a new narrative of deviance and laxity has been introduced to explain the inevitable spreading of the disease as normal life returns. Until the narrative of war and betrayel is dropped for a less confrontational approach, then lockdowns and fear will remain at the heart of Spanish strategy and the remarkable unity of Spanish people will be put under pressure.

An easy way to control this narrative has been for local politicians to blame people for the spread of the disease. In Spain's case the blame has been given to young people , party goers , people from other regions and people accused of not having enough care or concern for the victims of Covid. Politicians have responded with local lockdowns, depriving voters who have Covid symptoms from voting, fines for non-compliance of local health laws and now mandatory facemask use outside the home. Laws have been introduced under the rubric of "the new normal". These laws will be in place until Covid has been eradicated as Spain seeks to build a biological fortress against the disease. In Spain's case it is clear that facemask use, whatever its effectiveness , is necessary as a way of signalling support for the struggle against Covid , for showing solidarity for victims and concern for the health of neighbours. It has very little to do with efficient measures to reduce infections. The language of war is used freely and any resistance or questioning of the governments strategy becomes very difficult. By devolving power to the regions it becomes more likely that simplistic measures and panicked responses using their new authoritarian powers will give local councils a taste for using their new found biopower.

The British facemask debate seems connected with the Conservative governments desire to return the economy to normal as soon as possible. There has been an increasing moral tone to recent government announcements and at the heart of its policy there is a deep desire to see the return of the protestant work ethic and the end of money for nothing culture. There is a strong dislike of people not working and very likely an instinct that the Corona lockdown brings a number of threats to Capitalism. Faced with these threats Boris Johnstone changed from his libertarian , relaxed bon viveur cosmopolitan act into that of Victorian factory owner. Facemask use then becomes a way of encouraging a frightened population back into the offices where they belong.