{"id":10797,"date":"2020-05-03T07:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-05-03T07:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/?p=10797"},"modified":"2026-04-18T19:34:31","modified_gmt":"2026-04-18T19:34:31","slug":"boris-johnson-covid-19-and-the-dark-side-of-optimism","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/2020\/05\/boris-johnson-covid-19-and-the-dark-side-of-optimism\/","title":{"rendered":"Boris Johnson: Covid-19 and the dark side of optimism"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Since the prime minister was discharged from intensive care after his treatment for Covid-19, British newspapers, notably The Sunday Times<\/a>, have carried critical articles arguing that the UK Government was too slow to deal with the pandemic.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Instead of taking prompt action to ensure social distancing, outlaw mass events, or implement appropriate testing, the government wasted valuable time. Given that we could see from China and Italy what was heading our way, why did the UK government fail to act? A failure which may unwittingly have already cost thousands of lives in the UK. Some experts now predict<\/a> that the UK is likely to have the highest death toll from Covid-19 in Europe. It may already (April 28) be approaching 50,000<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The optimism factor<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Critics of Johnson\u2019s handling of the early stages of the pandemic overlook one important aspect of his personality and political brand \u2013 extreme optimism. He doesn\u2019t simply look on the bright side of life. His views are distinctly rosy. His optimism was very much in evidence on March 18th<\/sup> when he told the country<\/a> that we \u201ccan turn the tide (on the virus) within the next twelve weeks\u201d. He was \u201cabsolutely confident we can send coronavirus packing…\u201d<\/p>\n

This was contrary to views of his expert advisers. At the same event Sir Patrick Vallance, UK Government’s chief scientific adviser, said it is not possible to put timelines on the course of the pandemic; in his view the UK would be in the grip of the virus \u201cfor the long haul\u201d. Professor Chris Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, said it was \u201cimprobable\u201d that the virus could be permanently eradicated. Yet, when pressed, the ever-optimistic Johnson cleaved to the idea of \u201cturning the tide\u201d although, according to The Independent<\/em><\/a>, he did admit he had been accused of being \u201cunnecessarily boosterish\u201d.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

According to one cabinet minister, quoted on Channel 4<\/a>, Johnson was worried that draconian action would damage his optimistic political brand, and he didn\u2019t want to look \u201cbuffeted by events\u201d.<\/p>\n

Johnson\u2019s optimism was particularly to the fore during the EU referendum, and one of the main reasons Tory Party members chose him as leader. No one can deny that Johnson projected an upbeat narrative about Brexit: the endless possibilities for the UK outside the EU. He dismissed those who saw problems with supply chains or tariffs as fomenting \u2018Project Fear\u2019. His opening speech in the new Parliament promised a good Brexit deal and took a swipe at \u2018doubters, doomsters, and gloomsters\u2019<\/a>. When opponents raised genuine problems, such as the Irish Border, Johnson told them to \u2018believe in Britain\u2019<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The downside of Johnson\u2019s optimism is that it\u2019s untethered to reality. Belief is all we need; resolute optimism alone can secure the desired future. That type of magical thinking doesn\u2019t have a place in contemporary government where solutions have to be found for practical problems. Like it or not we are all buffeted by events. The politician\u2019s job is to deal with events skilfully, not pretend they aren\u2019t there.<\/p>\n

It is easy to see how, faced with a pandemic, and the threat it poses for lives and jobs, this optimistic mindset would underplay the problem. If those at the top of government had a history of routinely discounting worst-case scenarios, they would not willingly take the costly action necessary to mount a robust defence. They would rather cling to the notion that plucky Britons could put up a valiant fight and acquire herd immunity<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Strengths and weaknesses of optimism<\/strong><\/h2>\n

So how appropriate is optimism in this crisis? I actively promoted optimism in the early days of the Centre I set up as we specifically focussed on positive psychology, (particularly the work of Professor Martin Seligman, an international expert on optimism). However, I came to see that, while optimism can be beneficial for us as individuals, it may be our undoing as a society if it stops us confronting and grappling with existential problems such as climate change and Covid-19.<\/p>\n

At the individual level optimists may have a distinct advantage in this pandemic. As long as they take the necessary steps to protect themselves, their outlook will help reduce fear and negative feelings. And, as research shows<\/a>, this will be good for their immune systems. But an optimistic style is inappropriate for leaders in a pandemic.<\/p>\n

In his book \u2018Learned Optimism\u2019 Seligman argues that pessimism is vitally important – it keeps us alive. If we didn\u2019t think the worst might happen and hence take evasive action, we might instead take unacceptable risks.<\/p>\n

He writes: \u201cIf the cost of failure is high, optimism is the wrong strategy\u201d and elsewhere: \u201cIf your goal is to plan for a risky and uncertain future, do not use optimism.\u201d<\/p>\n

That calls into question the wisdom of upbeat optimism in Brexit planning \u2013 the cost of failure is high. But it becomes potentially catastrophic in the face of Covid-19. What we needed in early January was a generous dose of pessimism. What we got was an over-optimistic prime minister squandering valuable time in the battle with Covid-19: the worst would not<\/em> happen.<\/p>\n

Undoubtedly voters are attracted to upbeat leaders<\/a> presenting visions of a better future. But effective leaders must use that optimism skilfully \u2013 knowing when to give it free rein, when to temper it with caution. The optimistic political leader needs wisdom. Whatever adjectives supporters of Boris Johnson might use to describe him I suspect \u2018wise\u2019 would not be one of them. <\/strong><\/p>\n

Can-do didn’t do<\/b><\/h2>\n

In choosing his cabinet, Johnson was likely to select can-do optimists. If there had been more pessimists in charge in January and February would they have acted differently: stopping people flying into Britain from disease-stricken countries (or at least managing it better); preparing for a huge testing regime; prohibiting mass gatherings such as Cheltenham Races; discouraging people from shaking hands? Thinking the worst could happen, would they have taken as much evasive action as they could at the earliest possible time?<\/p>\n

Instead, on 3rd<\/sup> March, our optimistic prime minister told the country<\/a> that he was still shaking hands with coronavirus patients. As late as 15th<\/sup> March the UK government was still permitting mass gatherings.<\/p>\n

Am I being harsh on our prime minister? Countries such as the United States have also been slow to act and much of this has to do with President Trump’s personality. But some have taken prompt action. Denmark went for total lockdown on March 11th<\/sup> before there were any recorded deaths. So did New Zealand when there was only one death from the virus. Portugal also took radical action when only one person had died. So too Greece. Ireland closed schools and pubs over a week before the UK. The UK did not take decisive action until March 23rd<\/sup>.<\/p>\n

Interestingly, research shows<\/a> that Portugal, Greece and Ireland are three of the most pessimistic European countries. Both New Zealand and Denmark have female prime ministers and numerous research studies show that women are much more pessimistic<\/a> and risk averse<\/a> than men. In Scotland, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon mandated school closures before the UK government and closed building sites. I suspect that if she had been fully in charge of Scotland\u2019s response to the pandemic, she would have taken action earlier than Johnson.<\/p>\n

However, I don\u2019t think that his delayed action is all about gender. Not all male UK prime ministers have been as off the scale on optimism as Johnson. It is easy to believe that John Major, Gordon Brown, and Tony Blair would have taken the dangers of Covid-19 much more seriously at an earlier stage than our current prime minister.<\/p>\n

The optimistic brand collides with reality<\/strong><\/h2>\n

On New Year\u2019s Eve Johnson\u2019s message<\/a> to the nation brimmed with \u2018confidence\u2019 and \u2018certainty\u2019. This was going to be \u201can exhilarating decade of growth, prosperity, and opportunity.\u201d The year 2020 was to be \u201cthe start of something special\u201d for the \u201chard-working, ingenious people that make this the greatest place on earth.\u201d<\/p>\n

No-one foresaw what 2020 really held in store for all of us. Least of all a man who passionately believed the future could only be rosy. A man who, for the past few years, had been decrying \u2018doomsters\u2019 and \u2018gloomsters\u2019 for pointing out there may be trouble ahead.<\/p>\n

Johnson is now back at work. After hospitalisation and convalescence from Covid-19, this skirmish with death may well have a profound effect and make him a better leader. It is clear that he is now unwilling to lift lockdown early for fear of a second peak. His statements show that he is putting the nation\u2019s health before the economy: extreme optimism tempered by realism and a shift in values.<\/p>\n

Our prime minister has discovered the hard way that cheery optimism alone will not protect us from this virus; the only certainty about the future is that it is uncertain. Bad things can, and do, happen. We are all \u2018buffeted by events.\u2019 I hope this reality check will extend to his view of Brexit.<\/p>\n

I would also like to see our Prime Minister replacing optimism with hope.<\/a> In the words of Seamus Heaney, \u201cHope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

This is an edited version of an article which first appeared on <\/em>Postcards from Scotland.<\/em><\/a> Carol Craig set up and still runs on a part time basis the Centre for Confidence and Well-being<\/a>. She is also the Commissioning Editor for Postcards from Scotland and has written a number of books.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

Images of Boris Johnson (April 28’s minute of silence and March 3 news conference) by Andrew Parsons\/No 10 via flickr \u00a0CC BY-NC-ND 2.0<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Read more about Martin Seligmann here<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

‘Our prime minister has discovered the hard way that cheery optimism alone will not protect us from this virus; the only certainty about the future is that it is uncertain. Bad things can, and do, happen. We are all \u2018buffeted by events.\u2019 I hope this reality check will extend to his view of Brexit.’<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":55,"featured_media":10802,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[706],"tags":[175,480],"class_list":["post-10797","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-society","tag-governance","tag-uk-government"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10797","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/55"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10797"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10797\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":18690,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10797\/revisions\/18690"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10802"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10797"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10797"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sceptical.scot\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10797"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}