No. The opposite is true. As I explained last night, the first few cases are not used by statisticians because the outcomes are essentially random.
Anything relating to structural factors like political incompetence, lockdowns, partial lockdowns, air pollution, and whatever other mud you want to sling, will come out in the general trends visible from the large numbers.
The outcomes of the first cases, or which country goes from 1 to 15 cases more quickly (something you brought up last night) can decided by totally banal and random factors like whether the first spreader stayed at home or went out to play cards with their mates before having the test. No political decisions would've played a part in that.
But seeing as this is like getting blood from a stone why don't I turn your stubbornness back around on to you: if the UK and Italy have had coronavirus for the exact same number of days, and Italy going from 1 to 100 cases first is a sign of corruption, air pollution, incompetence, and whatever, how come the UK is now losing 1000 citizens a day
while Italy is losing a lot fewer
? And what is that a sign of?