Thread by @MartinFiszbein

“Rugged Individualism and Collective (In)action During the COVID-19 Pandemic” – new paper with @SamuelBazzi and @melesemesay [1/8]

Full paper: bu.edu/econ/files/202…

In previous work, we show that historical frontier experience across U.S. counties explains the long-run prevalence of rugged individualism—a distinctive combination of individualism and opposition to government intervention. [2/8]

Full paper: tinyurl.com/yy9gx9lo

Rugged individualism may be the backbone of American innovativeness and resourcefulness, but it can also be dangerous—particularly during a pandemic that desperately calls for collective action and for internalization of externatilities. [3/8]

Effective responses to COVID-19 can be badly hampered by the primacy of personal goals over group goals and the regulation of behavior by personal attitudes rather than social norms. Anti-statism and distrust in science compound the problem. [4/8]

Our new paper shows that counties with longer frontier history in the U.S. display less social distancing, less mask use, and weaker local policies to control the virus. [5/8]

Rugged individualism may be the root of several more proximate explanations for collective inaction against COVID-19—weak civic culture, anti-statist partisanship, and distrust in science. We show that frontier history is tighly associated with each of these. [6/8]

Individualistic responses to collective risk can be particularly dangerous given the emphasis of the U.S. legal system on individual liberties. This undermined the response to historical smallpox outbreaks by making vaccine avoidance possible—see Werner Troesken's book [7/8]

Clamoring for freedom against mask use defies common-sense and societal responsibility. This aspect of rugged individualism could hinder an effective COVID-19 immunization campaign if and when a vaccine becomes available. [8/8]