Wuhan’s Wet Markets

There are those who say that Melissa Chen’s criticism of Wuhan’s wet markets is out of bounds because nobody can ever really form intelligent judgments about anywhere other than home. I’ve been hearing this a lot lately from people who were angered by Melissa’s recent piece in Spectator USA. In essence, the criticism of Chen is epistemic privilege on steroids, and I find it deeply unsatisfying.

Should we be cautious when trying to form judgments about the new? Absolutely. Are we likely to get much wrong? Absolutely. But shutting down all criticism with some version of “only insiders can get this place” seems like an excessive response. This is how a certain Facebook friend of mine waves away all criticism of Iran, how another one waves away all criticism of Saudi Arabia, and how yet another waves away all criticism of Modi’s India; it’s how the British waved away all criticism of their colonial depredations in India, and it’s how many of the cops I know wave away all criticism of the police; it’s how touchy Québécois nationalists wave away all criticism of Québec, and it’s how white southerners waved away all criticism of slavery in the nineteenth century. In other words, it’s a sneaky dodge and an epistemological dead-end.

Whether we like it or not, there is but one world, and we have to share it with each other. The COVID-19 pandemic has driven that point home with deadly seriousness. Chen has the right to criticize Chinese practices she views as vile just as much as a woman in Wuhan has the right to criticize American practices she views as vile. This is especially true when the practices in question have demonstrably catastrophic consequences. If it’s true that these wet markets are behind the coronavirus pandemic, then they’re everybody’s problem. And I thank Melissa Chen for having the courage to say so.