5 Things the Government Can Learn from Bio-Disaster Films

Reading Time

I’ve been watching a lot of bio-disaster films lately, particularly ones involving a virus or mutated bacteria that infects and kills people instead of turning them into zombies or vampires or whatever. These films are actually quite interesting, because they’re usually low budget, but also strangely much more fascinating than a lot of zombie films in terms of character development and the examination of the human condition.

In watching all of these films, however, I’ve discovered that there are quite a few repeated themes that indicate the incompetency of authority in a time of crisis. This acknowledgment led me to create a list of the five things that governments today can learn from bio-disaster films to survive a serious infection. Here are those five things:

Don’t treat people like filth, especially when they’re infected.
Almost every bio-disaster film I have seen has made this point painfully clear:
if you want to maintain control and keep the infection from spreading at an astronomic rate, you have to treat every single person with care and respect. Why? Because the second you give people a reason to run away from authority figures, you’ve lost. Take the film Right at Your Door as a prime example of this. When the government realizes that the attack in downtown LA contains some sort of biological agent, the first thing they do is start rounding up people at gunpoint. Nobody knows what is going to happen to the people being shoved into black vans–maybe they’re getting medical care?–but it doesn’t really matter. The damage is done. The fact of the matter is that the government does not have enough manpower to control a serious infection with force. They need the people to be willing to cooperate with officials so that the infection can be controlled. If you can’t control the infection, then you can’t survive. Plain and simple.

Don’t lie or keep valuable information from the public.
Most people are not stupid. They can usually tell if you’re lying or keeping something from them. Worse yet, they already know that something is going on, and that it’s not good news. The best thing the government can do is provide some truth and useful information to the public. Tell them what is going on and explain to them what they should do. If you’re already treating them with a certain level of respect, then they’re very likely to follow instructions and use what little information you can give them to make sure they can survive. But if you lie to them or intentionally keep silent about things that they’re demanding to know, they’ll panic.1

Respond quickly.
This particularly point is one we should already have learned from recent non-bio disasters, such as the New Orleans/Hurricane Katrian fiasco. But bio-disaster films have been making the case for quick response times for decades. If there is a biological threat, whether in the form of a zombie-style virus, a bio-weapon, or a mutated bacteria, then reacting quickly is the best and only way to go about things. The longer it takes for you to control the spread of the infection, the better chance the infection has of moving into the general populace. You have to keep the infection contained to one area, and do so as fast as possible. Infections spread like wildfire, and firefighters know how bad those can get.

Provide food and medical supplies.
There are two things that people care the most about during any sort of crisis: food and medical supplies. It should be pretty obvious why. We need to eat and drink, and some of us might be hurt, or infected. In the movies, both of these things are impossible to come by, either because the government refuses to hand them out, people steal them, or people are too afraid to leave their homes to acquire the supplies they need (maybe because the government shoots them if they are found wandering the countryside). This can be solved, if not entirely, then at least to a certain degree. Providing care packages to people, whether delivered door to door or dispensed at special locations across the city (the former is preferable), can go a long way towards making sure people survive, are less afraid, and are more cooperative. Starving people or people who need meds are not happy people, and people who are not happy are the kinds of people who tend to steal, become violent, and so on. All that is bad news for anyone trying to control an infection.

Have a well-developed, and practiced, contingency plan for a bio-disaster.
Reality #1: Biological weapons exist. Reality #2: Viruses and bacteria continue to evolve and super-strains do exist. Reality #3: Police and other public protection services need to be prepared to handle all of these. Officials should be trained in handling the infected or the potentially infected and in infection containment. Otherwise, it’s quite likely that all four of the things that precede this point will occur. And we don’t want that.

So, what things do you think the government should learn from bio-disaster films?

————————————————

1. The irony of this particular point is that the reason for lying to the public or keeping silent about pertinent information is usually to keep people from panicking. Yet in doing so, they end up producing the panic they were trying to avoid.

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Digg
Reddit
LinkedIn

4 Responses

  1. Excellent points!

    "But if you lie to them or intentionally keep silent about things that they're demanding to know, they'll panic."

    Sounds like the whole UFO cover up. Whatever the UFOs are–classified government experimental craft, actual alien craft, or foreign craft–the public is being treated like idiots when the govt just puts up a silent front or labels everything ball lightning or insanity.

  2. Exactly! Being silent or lying either makes people more curious or more likely to panic. In the case of UFOs, it makes us more curious. The fact is that there are things in sky. They're most likely not aliens. They're probably mostly things that are easily and reasonably explained. But the government spends so much time pretending such things don't exist, rather than giving us some answers. The least they could do is at least give us something that is reasonably close to reality, but still a shade away from the truth…

  3. Having seen a couple of Really Odd Things In The Sky, I am inclined to think that the government is hiding more than natural phenomena or secret reasearch projects. 😉

Leave a Reply

Follow Me

Newsletter

Support Me

Recent Posts

A Reading List of Dystopian Fiction and Relevant Texts (Apropos of Nothing in Particular)

Why would someone make a list of important and interesting works of dystopian fiction? Or a suggested reading list of works that are relevant to those dystopian works? There is absolutely no reason other than raw interest. There’s nothing going on to compel this. There is nothing in particular one making such a list would hope you’d learn. The lists below are not an exhaustive list. There are bound to be texts I have forgotten or texts you think folks should read that are not listed. Feel free to make your own list and tell me about it OR leave a comment. I’ll add things I’ve missed! Anywhoodles. Here goes:

Read More »

Duke’s Best EDM Tracks of 2024

And so it came to pass that I finished up my annual Best of EDM [Insert Year Here] lists. I used to do these on Spotify before switching to Tidal, and I continued doing them on Tidal because I listen to an absurd amount of EDM and like keeping track of the tunes I love the most. Below, you will find a Tidal playlist that should be public. You can listen to the first 50 tracks right here, but the full playlist is available on Tidal proper (which has a free version just like Spotify does). For whatever reason, the embedded playlist breaks the page, and so I’ve opted to link to it here and at the bottom of this post. Embeds are weird. Or you can pull songs into your preferred listening app. It’s up to you. Some caveats before we begin:

Read More »

2025: The Year of Something

We’re nine days into 2025, and it’s already full of exhausting levels of controversy before we’ve even had a turnover in power in my home country of the United States. We’ve seen resignations of world leaders, wars continuing and getting worse and worse (you know where), the owner of Twitter continuing his tirade of lunacy and demonstrating why the billionaire class is not to be revered, California ablaze with a horrendous and large wildfire, right wing thinktanks developing plans to out and attack Wikipedia editors as any fascist-friendly organization would do, Meta rolling out and rolling back GenAI profiles on its platforms, and, just yesterday, the same Meta announcing sweeping changes to its moderation policies that, in a charitable reading, encourage hate-based harassment and abuse of vulnerable populations, promotion and support for disinformation, and other problems, all of which are so profound that people are talking about a mass exodus from the platform to…somewhere. It’s that last thing that brings me back to the blog today. Since the takeover at Twitter, social networks have been in a state of chaos. Platforms have risen and fallen — or only risen so much — and nothing I would call stability has formed. Years ago, I (and many others far more popular than me) remarked that we’ve ceded the territory of self-owned or small-scale third party spaces for massive third party platforms where we have minimal to no control or say and which can be stripped away in a tech-scale heartbeat. By putting all our ducks into a bin of unstable chaos, we’re also expending our time and energy on something that won’t last, requiring us to expend more time and energy finding alternatives, rebuilding communities, and then repeating the process again. In the present environment, that’s impossible to ignore.1 This is all rather reductive, but this post is not the place to talk about all the ways that social networks have impacted control over our own spaces and narratives. Another time, perhaps. I similarly don’t have space to talk about the fact that some of the platforms we currently have, however functional they may be, have placed many of us in a moral quagmire, as in the case of Meta’s recent moderation changes. Another time… ↩

Read More »