Pandemics, Politics, and Society

This chapter argues that the current Covid-19 crisis can be understood as a crisis of globalisation itself. From the rapid worldwide expansion of the virus to its unprecedented impact on the global economy, this pandemic is likely to be remembered as the most global event in human history yet, as it has put 70% of the world population under similar restrictions of movement, work and education. As it was first formulated in 1986, Ulrich Beck's risk society theory played a visionary role in highlighting the global nature of those challenges that come from the decoupling of politics, culture and the economy. I contend that we have now reached a new stage in this process, as this pandemic has led to the realisation that current globalisation has moved beyond a point of 'decoupling' and has become 'unhinged'. The solution to this global crisis requires more rather than less globalisation. But it will have to be a globalisation of a different kind, one that will no longer be a zero-sum game between the global and the national but will require us to rebalance the dynamics global economy, the role of international institutions and the fiscal position of nation-states.



Donatella della Porta (Scuola Normale Superiore, Florence)

A title and summary is currently not available. The chapter will focus on social movements and democracy in the context of the pandemic.



Six Political Philosophies in Search of a Virus: Philosophy and the Pandemic
Gerard Delanty (University of Sussex, UK)

The Coronavirus (Covid-19) poses interesting questions for social and political thought. These include the nature and limits of the ethical responsibility of the state, personal liberty and collective interests, human dignity, and state surveillance. As many countries throughout the world declared states of emergency, some of the major questions in political philosophy become suddenly highly relevant. Foucault's writings on biopolitical securitization and Agamben's notion of the state of exception take on a new reality, as do the classical arguments of utilitarianism and libertarianism. In this chapterr, I discuss six main philosophical responses to the pandemic, including provocative interventions made by Agamben, Badieu, and Zizek, Latour on the governance of life and death as well as the Kantian perspective of Habermas on human dignity and utilitarianism. The chapter includes a short discussion of nudge theory.

Tipping Points: The Anthropocene and Corona
Eva Horn (University of Vienna)

The chapter deals with structural analogies between the complex ecological meta-crisis we have come to call the "Anthropocene" and the acute crisis we are facing with the Corona pandemic. Instead of trying to pinpoint causal relations between the Anthropocene and Corona, the text focuses on the type of event that is common to both crises: the tipping point, i.e. process that links a long, seemingly slow and incremental latency period to a short and very rapid change within a complex system. In the first part, I examine the different propositions for an Anthropocene starting date as attempts to understand the new geological epoch as a threshold, attempts that each bring the focus to different factors and aspects. Secondly, I describe the structure of tipping points as types of events both in natural and social complex systems. The reason why they are highly unpredictable, I argue, lies in their temporal structure, connecting a long and slow, seemingly linear process to a sudden and radical turning point. An understanding of such tipping points in natural processes, e.g. in climate science, can only be founded on a new understanding of nature that sees nature not as a balanced, stable harmony, but as an ever changing, dynamic system in which humans have come to play a major role of a novel, destabilizing factor. A third part tries to understand both the Anthropocene and Corona as types of radical transformation. While the Anthropocene can be dubbed a "catastrophe without an event" (Horn 2018), Corona is a catastrophe as a rapidly evolving event, but which can be understood as a model of the Anthropocene on fast-track. A forth part develops some perspectives for the lessons Corona can teach for a new understanding of sustainability in the future.

Political Decision-making in a Pandemic
Daniel Innerarity (University of the Basque Country)

Crises are moments that put many things into question, especially our decision-making procedures. These decisions can be examined in a temporal order, from the decisions that governments have to take in order to be prepared for a crisis, therefore, before they take place, the decisions that are taken during the crisis and those that are taken as a result of it. The first question posed by a critical situation is whether we were prepared to manage it, that is, how it is decided when there is still, so to speak, nothing to decide. When crises erupt, their outcome is largely conditioned by the preparation and anticipation of our democratic societies to manage them. The second question I ask myself is whether populist systems (or, if you prefer, the populist features of many governments) offer an appropriate decision-making structure to deal with a crisis such as the current health crisis. Thirdly, I examine the drama that inevitably characterizes political decisions taken in the midst of a crisis that stresses the different values and logics of a differentiated society. And fourthly, I wonder about the debates that we must hold on globalization which, from this point of view, are going to require us to review which level of governance is the most appropriate for what kind of risks.

Corona Pandemic Policy: Options and Conflicts
Claus Offe (Hertie School of Governance, Berlin)

The chapter provides an analysis of the contested policy terrain through an exploration of the policy options that follow from the presuppositions that governments have made as regards the demographic and epidemiological models. These modes divide the population into six epidemiological groups. The chapter looks at the policies that follow from these models. This leads to an analysis inspired by classic game theory about how collective action problems emerge. The chapter then discusses some of the dilemmas that result for policy makers. Beyond these problems, the chapter discusses how new patterns of stratification take shape, especially in relation to work. The chapter includes a discussion on the controversy over "right to life" vs. other human and civil rights.

Title not yet available
Goran Therborn

Tbc



Covid-19 and Two Theodicies
Bryan S. Turner (Australian Catholic University, Sydney)



Plagues in the past called forth elaborate theodicies to explain human misfortune. The most famous, giving rise to the idea of theodicy, was Gottfried Leibniz's response to devastating Lombardy floods in 1710. In response to the covid-19 pandemic, we might envisage both a religious and a political response, defining the consciousness of a covid-19 generation. However, in our secular European environment, a religious theodicy is unlikely. Religious gatherings have helped to spread covid-19 not to answer it. One critical example is the role of the Shincheonji religious cult of South Korea. By contrast, we have seen the pandemic playing into the hands of the Far Right: close the borders, end to immigration, send migrant workers home, defend national sovereignty, undermine international co-operation, reject multiculturalism and destroy the liberal state and its affluent elites. The political theodicy explains misfortune by identifying a global conspiracy to replace white populations. Far right militants fear the 'great displacement' whereby Muslims and other external enemies with high fertility rates will replace white populations now decimated by a 'Chinese' virus.



The Naked State: What the Breakdown of Normality Reveals
Stephen P. Turner (University of South Florida)



Giorgio Agamben was roundly criticized for a statement which predicted that the state would treat the Covid-19 crisis as a state of exception, and that the continuous invocation of exceptions would undermine the normality of law and politics itself. As the crisis unfolded, he appeared prescient. What was revealed was a triangle of power in which political leaders were dependent on experts, who were their only source of public legitimacy, but whose powers to define the situation and impose extreme, often extra-legal demands, proved to be greater than their power to resist, leaving resistance to "the people." This exposed representative government, and even the courts, as sham institutions, and revealed expert power that did not merely depend on expert success. Because the crisis was a not a case of successful expertise, where expert power is hidden, but of extreme expert failure, it could not be hidden, and revealed "the new normal." But it was only the hidden normal that had arrived on cats paws already.

The Pandemic in Brazil: Systemic Breakdown under Bolsonaro
Frédéric Vandenberghe (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro)

I will analyse the systemic breakdown of Brazil before and during the pandemics of 2020. The chapter contains four parts. I will first present a chronicle of events (the revolts of 2013, the impeachment of President Dilma Roussef in 2015, the election of Jair Bolsonaro in 2015) that have led to systemic turbulence. Next, I will present an analysis of the conjuncture by looking at the events, the scenes, the actors and the correlation of forces that brought President Jair Bolsonaro to power. Then I will analyse how the rise to power has lead to the social and systemic disintegration of society. Finally, updating a radicalizing Habermas's analysis of legitimation crisis, I will follow the sequence of crises (economic, political, institutional, security, ecology, sanitary, military and existential) that have led to a systemic breakdown of society. If I have the courage, I will work out the concept of a 'systemic clusterfuck.

Who is charge now? Scientists or politicians?
Jan Zielonka (University of Oxford and Venice)

Liberals always complained that populist politicians ignore scientists and science. However, since the outbreak of the pandemics our lives seem to be in the hands of scientists more than politicians. Should we rejoice that Trump, Kaczyñski or Johnson seem no longer fully in charge? This chapter will argue that there is no simple answer to this question. Economists suggest different solutions than medical doctors and they all work on the basis of patchy evidence. Some of them have murky relations with either governments or firms or both. And in democracy we want to know that those in charge are elected and accountable. This is the case with politicians, however imperfect - but not with their scientific advisors.





Technocracy after Covid-19
Jonathan White (LSE, UK)

This chapter explores what the current crisis implies for government by expertise, in particular in economic policy. It charts shifting ideals of technocracy in the twentieth century, centred on the three figures of the engineer, the scientist and the doctor, and asks what model of expertise is emerging in the present period.



Additional chapters:
A further chapter is under discussion with Craig Calhoun.

There may be scope for 2 or 3 additional chapters, especially on more sociological topics. Potential authors might include Syliva Walby, Will Davies, Rahel Jaeggi,