The Pond

I spend about 3 months in the year in the north of England. The long American summers allow for a massive, uninterrupted period of travel from June to August. My experience between the two countries has given me much appreciation for the world at large, and much dissatisfaction with the two nations I call home. There exists a common trend of realization of a sub-par social structure in the United Kingdom and subsequent shock in realizing the problem exists in an exaggerated variant in the United States. 

English public transport is criticized around Europe for its high-prices and poor service; however, British mass transit is heavenly when compared to that of America. Ever since the John Major administration, railway and bus have been privatized, continuing the trend of privatization set by Margaret Thatcher. While the decision was intended to create a consumer-centered service through the laws of the free market, that was certainly not the case. Companies were essentially given local monopolies over sections as different corporations proved unable to communicate with each other. This allowed the industry to raise prices exponentially, capitalizing on a service that many people require to commute to work or visit family members. Since this system is so intertwined with modern life, companies can make stops as frequent or as infrequent as suits them--people have no other choice but to deal with it. Despite its flaws, it functions. Millions of commuters and tourists alike rely on the system to bring them from one place to the next. The USA, on the other hand, does not have this saving grace. In 16 years of experiencing this country, I have not once had a pleasant mass transit experience. Even in affluent Los Angeles, a metro is essentially nonexistent and buses are infrequent and costly. Transit demonstrates the pernicious American tendency to regress to the norm. So many people have been accepted cars as the dominant form of transit than an actual public system seems unlikely. Whether the American strategy of no attempt at all or the English fumble into a poor attempt is better is a matter of personal beliefs. However, one message is clear: both the United Kingdom and the United States have a lot to learn when it comes to moving their citizens. 

Every general election in the UK is followed by the losing side declaring that the entire process was undemocratic and needs to be altered; in America, no such claims exist. Despite appointing themselves the champions of democracy and freedom, America is one of the least democratic developed countries. It has forced itself into two-party gridlock, with two center-right parties controlling the entire legislation. This system evolved out of the first-past-the-post voting system. Since voters can only indicate a preference for one party, smaller parties with a lower chance of winning are often ignored in fear of "wasting your vote." This effect has mutated to the point that the average American can not even name a third-party candidate, let alone consider voting for one. This binarism is present in Britain but to less of an effect. Two main parties, Labour and the Conservatives, do dominate the political scene, but smaller parties and interests are still represented in Parliament. This is because certain regions have their own regional representation. Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland all have exclusively local political parties that set the trend for niche interests across the entire UK. While this may be a lucky accident, it is still significantly more desirable than the two-party chokehold of the United States. Britain puts little effort into strengthening their democracy; still, that little effort goes much further than the United States in ensuring that all people are represented. 

Both the UK and the US know that not everyone will follow the rules and recommendations intended to slow the spread of COVID-19, so both countries have employed rather unsuccessful strategies to deter disobedience. Recently, I had to visit the United Kingdom to see a terminally ill relative. It was shocking to see the usually busy Heathrow Airport almost empty. The ads that would usually line the hallway were now replaced with government posters urging travelers to obey the mandatory 2 week isolation period. There was this facade of strictness that made me extremely wary. But, it was exactly that: a facade. As soon as I left the airport, I found swathes of maskless, physically-close people interacting as if there was no pandemic at all. As I drove north, I discovered more and more crowds of people going about their daily activities. Even as we isolated in a rental home, the landlord and neighbors urged us to break the quarantine and head outside. I thought my contempt for the American handling of the virus was now unjust and everything would make sense again when I returned home. It did not. As soon as we arrived in customs, we were shoulder to shoulder with people from all around the world. Heathrow had bubbles 2 meters apart and police to make sure the markers were properly respected. LAX had nothing of the sort and simply posted the periodic sign suggesting that people keep their distance. In fact, the lines were more crowded than usual. The staff had made the decisions to merge the citizens and visitors line, leaving a heaving mass of people to one side and derelict counters to the other. The officers that would be sitting in those counters were often unmasked and uncouth in their practice of the CDC recommendations. I had expected that CDC documents would be published in the same frequency as NHS ones had been at Gatwick. However, the only mention of the 2-week quarantine was on a small piece of paper handed to us as we exited the plane and one asking for quarantine if arriving from Wuhan, presumably posted as this virus first came into existence. The UK response to the novel coronavirus is dreadful; I would call the American response a disaster if there was a response at all. It is much better to try and fail than to never try at all; the USA needs to learn that. 

To some, these comparisons may seem unfair. A continent and an island are different in a myriad of ways. Yet, it is important to realize the intrinsic relation the two nations share. There will forever be a history of colonizer and colony that will make the UK and the US more similar than they are different. Acknowledging this similarity, it is disappointing to see that the massive nation that is America makes fewer concessions to the public good than the small island of Britain. Despite being defined on being not Britain, America needs to look towards their mother nation for inspiration in these trying times.