The 14th century bubonic plague, which decimated societies across Europe, triggered some widespread changes in the continent. The plague is estimated to have killed over 20 million people.

With the consequential shortage of manpower, landowners were forced to raise the pay of impoverished serfs. The landed elites also agreed to grant them certain rights. Thousands of serfs had migrated to the cities as well during the plague. Many became merchants and daily-wage workers. Some returned to the countryside when landowners were compelled to rent out portions of their lands to former serfs. Herein lie the roots of the creation of the middle class, and the concepts of human rights, capitalism, democracy and nationalism. But it was a lengthy process.

Recently, climate change has begun to drastically impact world weather. This year alone saw unprecedented rains and floods in the historically arid southern areas of Pakistan, whereas many regions in Europe that have a wetter and cooler ‘oceanic climate’ experienced record-breaking heatwaves and drought-like conditions.

Intrigued by the changes in the political economy of mediaeval Europe because of the 14th century plague, political scientists and economists have launched studies to investigate the political impact of the recent increase in natural disasters.

Natural disasters and calamities can provide an opportunity for marginal political groups and mainstream political outfits to outshine each other in disaster management, and to create vote banks

The more knee-jerk ideas in this context suggest that natural calamities almost always go against sitting governments, who do not have the resources to convincingly mitigate the sufferings of people experiencing unprecedented disasters because of climate change. But the more in-depth studies on the subject posit that political outcomes of natural disasters are far more complex.

Read: In flood catastrophe, the educated are culpable for many injustices as this was a tragedy foretold

Firstly, the radical impact of the 14th century plague on the political economy of Europe was not instantaneous. Secondly, the immediate political consequences of natural disasters do not always go against sitting governments.

In the book Playing Politics with Disaster, T.W. Kneeland writes that US President Richard Nixon was quick to respond to mitigate the impact of a powerful hurricane in New York and Pennsylvania in June 1972. Nixon, a Republican Party man, was looking to get re-elected. New York and Pennsylvania had been voting for Democratic Party candidates since 1960. But Nixon still decided to announce a generous aid package for these states. This saw the two states help re-elect Nixon in November 1972.

According to Kneeland, had Nixon not ‘used’ the calamity as a political opportunity, the consequential criticism against the federal government could have impacted Nixon’s ratings in pro-Republican states as well.

Fast forward to 2005, when a devastating hurricane hit New Orleans in Louisiana. Then US President George W. Bush was slow to respond to the catastrophe, despite the fact that Louisiana is a hardcore Republican state. However, its main city, New Orleans, is a Democratic Party stronghold.

Those impacted by the hurricane exhibited more anger towards the federal government led by Bush than they did towards the Democrats in-charge of the city’s administration. The Democrats made themselves seen in the field. They lamented that the Bush government wasn’t interested in helping the people of New Orleans because they were largely black and did not vote for the Republicans. As this narrative became part of the mainstream discourse, the Bush regime’s ratings plummeted.

Many regions in China often face natural disasters that have killed millions of people. Yet, the country has continued to be a one-party state since 1949. According to the German political scientist E. Hörhager, the Chinese state, controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), has established an effective way to reduce the chances of possible political change triggered by natural disasters.

The state immediately appeals for national unity. It begins to highlight the ‘heroism’ of individuals helping the needy. It incorporates various sections of society into the national unity narrative and also (temporarily) allows non-government organisations to operate. However, any sign of someone overtly using the disaster to undermine the CCP’s position is taken to task.

Indeed, China has an authoritarian political set-up and can use state-owned media to push forward the unity narrative and push out critical voices. But it is also a fact that, over the years, Chinese authorities have developed effective disaster management organisations and means.

In authoritarian as well as non-authoritarian set-ups, natural disasters can either see the emergence of marginal political groups, or mainstream political outfits can become further entrenched. In the aftermath of the 1985 earthquake in Mexico City ― Mexico at the time was a one-party state ― activists from the peripheries of mainstream politics entered the city and became involved in aiding the impacted population. The activists formed an alliance. They then managed to win the local elections in the city. They are often seen as the harbingers of multi-party democracy in Mexico.

Also read: Politics in times of calamity

During the 2010 floods in Sindh, Islamist groups that were largely located on the fringes of society, actively took part in the relief efforts. But even though this gave them space to build their madressahs in affected areas, their efforts did not transform into votes. In 2013, most voters voted for mainstream parties in Sindh, especially the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) because, despite the fact that the popular media had concentrated on Islamist groups, Sindh’s PPP-led provincial government had more resources at its disposal and the voters were aware of this.

This is why one can again see some top leaders from Sindh’s ruling party, the PPP, active and visible in the flooded areas of the province. The federal government too is making itself visible in the impacted regions, despite the fact that high inflation and political instability is compounding the task of mitigating the damage done by the floods. The federal and Sindh governments are also weaving a narrative of unity in a bid to better manage the crisis.

But the main opposition, led by former prime minister Imran Khan, is in no mood for any kind of unity. Like a hard-nosed populist, Khan is creating polarisation, because a polarised society impacted by serious economic issues and a natural calamity are opportunities through which he believes he can slide back into power.

He is least concerned by the criticism he is receiving for this. Remember, he is the same man who was voted for by people in Karachi who he had once called zombies. He’s also a politician who has managed to keep various senior members of the judiciary on his side. This can change, though.

Therefore, it will be interesting to see exactly how the provincial governments, the federal government and Khan are treated during a future election by those impacted by the floods.

Published in Dawn, EOS, September 11th, 2022