The COVID-19 pandemic has had an international impact since the novel coronavirus first surfaced in late 2019. Since then, different countries have taken different approaches to try and limit transmissions and deaths. While this is seemingly unprecedented in modern day times, many pandemics, or plagues, have happened relatively frequently in history. This paper examines three historical plagues through the lens of social psychologist Geert Hofstede’s six cultural dimensions to distinguish between cultures: power distance, individualism versus collectivism, masculinity versus femininity, uncertainty avoidance, long term orientation and indulgence versus restraint. This paper then applies these dimensions to the modern day U.S. and South Korea, two countries who have had different success in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. Through these dimensions, this paper aims to explain a factor in why South Korea has had better results than the U.S. It also recognizes that Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are not the only factor to affect the pandemic, and explores political influences in America through the lens of Henry David Thoreau and John Dewey. Overall, this paper argues that the U.S. has been unsuccessful in taming the pandemic because of certain cultural dimensions, such as more an individualist and indulgent culture, and its unstable and divisive political climate. Given this, the United States has a hopeful, yet arduous path moving forward with COVID-19 and future pandemics.

On January 5, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported on the outbreak of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, China. Two weeks later, a 35-year-old Washington resident checked into a local urgent care clinic with a 4-day cough and fever. Laboratory testing would confirm this individual as the first case of the novel coronavirus in the U.S., and on January 20, 2020, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reported this case to the public. In the days and weeks to follow, Twitter, a social media platform with 450 million active monthly users as of 2020, provided many American residents the opportunity to share their thoughts on the developing pandemic online. Social media sites like Twitter are a prominent source of discourse surrounding contemporary political issues, allowing for direct communication between users in real-time. As more population centers around the world gain access to the internet, most democratic discussion, both nationally and internationally, will take place in online spaces. The activity of elected officials as private citizens in these online spaces is often overlooked. I find the ability of publics—which philosopher John Dewey defines as groups of people with shared needs—to communicate effectively and monitor the interests of political elites online to be lacking. To best align the interests of officials and citizens, and achieve transparency between publics and elected officials, we need an efficient way to measure and record these interests. Through this thesis, I found that natural language processing methods like sentiment analyses can provide an effective means of gauging the attitudes of politicians towards contemporary issues.