I can’t recall a week like it. The world has turned upside-down. Since I returned home from university, my time in Cambridge has been defined by difference. Time I was expecting to spend exploring the city, working in the library and perhaps undertaking some work experience is now spent at home. Never before have I so appreciated the benefits of having a garden. My mornings and evenings are spent, however much I try to resist temptation, scrolling through twitter and the news, looking at the latest developments in the UK and across the globe. For coronavirus is truly universal in the suffering it has unleashed.
While there have been some enjoyable moments like watching plenty of films (Kes, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Hairspray and even Mean Girls), I have spent much of the time feeling extremely sad and worried. I’ve become used to looking at the death toll every day, in anticipation for the latest statistics. It’s tricky to find the good news in all this - the number of new deaths in China and Italy declining, testing kits becoming more widely available - but it can, just, be found. For individuals, whether working for businesses or self employed, their financial situation is under great threat. The personal impact on me - term three of university cancelled - is very little. It is others I worry about, feel sorry for and fear their health consequences from catching the virus. One has to find some optimism. While I, sadly, think Boris Johnson’s lockdown measures were ultimately necessary, they must be temporary. The infringement of our civil liberties, giving citizens restricted opportunities to go outside, is undeniably huge. It is necessary in the short term but supporters and opponents of these measures should at least agree they are massively significant on our human freedoms. Unfortunately, people alone were not following the advice to remain indoors; the large numbers at beaches or markets was proof of that. MPs and the public, however, must ensure these measures are repealed as soon as possible. While I quite enjoy the peace and quiet during my evening jogs, I always remind myself that people aren’t optionally choosing to remain at home. It has been forced upon them. As I say, while these measures are justifiable, I would, of course, rather they never had come into place. Obviously, I'd rather the coronavirus never existed, but we have to deal with matters as they are, now how we would like them to be. Do these times mark a permanent turning point? I wonder how we will look back on these months in 20 years. Will they be a blip, where everyone temporarily stopped commuting, before the return of the dreaded Tube journey? This time could start something quite revolutionary. Already, it is clear individuals are adapting their routines to these new times. I’m no tech genius, but apparently ‘Zoom’ is the way forward. Perfect for online conferences and video calls, it allows individuals to communicate from the safety of their own homes. For environmental benefits and to save time, such conferences could be the norm (providing the internet connection works, that is). The same is the case for work generally. I have longed believed that the future of work is one of the most exciting discussions of the 21st century. There is potential for great progress and potential exploitation. As work becomes more insecure and evolves to meet new demands, wages could inevitably be affected. While it is a relief that workers are being assisted, with the self employed being given a new package of measures, financial difficulties for individuals are real and could get worse. Whether because of failures to save, spending too much or being poorly paid, the coronavirus has created much concern about how people can afford to live. Calls then, for a universal basic income have shot further up the political agenda. Initially, such a pledge seems unjustified. A universal amount to every citizen - regardless of wealth - can appear bizarre. People often forget it would be a basic income. Whilst the sum would provide enough to live on, an individual couldn’t lead a luxury lifestyle along on such a payment. Our desire for success and greater wealth would mean people would work, increasing their wealth and also paying taxation back into the system. UBI would be a safety net for individuals between jobs or those who wanted to take some time out of their working lives - a sabbatical - to further a passion. Talk of UBI in this context is temporary; I believe it should become permanent. Any society should have a sense of togetherness and community. While this was previously based around religion, I think human solidarity, regardless of one’s beliefs and birthplace, doesn’t require a non-existent God telling us how to live. It shouldn’t require a pandemic either. I’m afraid this crisis has ultimately reflected my view of human nature: that we have the potential to be compassionate, selfless and altruistic but that we can also be wicked, individualistic and quite evil. It depends on the context; some may call this sitting on the fence, but I say it’s an honest assessment of how humans behave. Society should have a sense of social unity that goes beyond dealing with a common enemy - the coronavirus - after the virus reduces in severity. Yet, given we all live such different, varied lives, I would question the likelihood of this taking place. Our range of experiences and lifestyles can be both a blessing and a curse. One experience that usually unites people is a desire to go travelling. Whether for a two week holiday or six month exploration, our wish to leave our ordinary lives for a period of time transcends most boundaries. The demand for such a break is most obvious by looking at the RyanAir flight tracker. Just a few weeks ago, Europe would have been full of planes flying overhead, reaching every nation from morning to night. Having checked the flight tracker this morning, there were just three planes from RyanAir in the skies, all of which were heading to Dublin. It is quite remarkable that nations have gone into lockdown, planes have been all but grounded for the foreseeable future. For decades, a globalised future had seemed the only way forward. How amazing, and terrifying, that it can so easily shut down. The reversal occurred so rapidly. With that globalised future came a faith in the ability of the market to deliver the needs of people. I never subscribed to this view. Reliance on the private sector alone would leave people behind not because of their own vices but because what was most ‘popular’ wasn’t necessarily the best. For example, large corporations may be popular but they never match the beauty and authenticity of a small independent business. Again, the word of this blog is remarkable. To see Boris Johnson, instinctively someone who would support the private sector, spending billions on keeping the economy afloat is nothing but remarkable. The scale of the sums make John McDonnell look like Margaret Thatcher. The state has therefore returned in its relevance. The hegemony of Thatcherism, defined by reducing the size of government, is on the wane. The state’s importance mirrors that of the 2008 financial crisis. Banks who had given out sub-prime mortgages to individuals who couldn’t make their repayments were reliant on the government borrowing billions to save them. Of course, the state has no money so this was, and will be paid for, by taxpayers over decades. Again, when times are tough, large businesses and billionaires are suddenly reliant on the state to tide them over. I don’t believe in state ownership of everything. It isn't practical, desirable and stifles human ingenuity and innovation. The speed, however, at which belief in the state as a mechanism for good has returned is truly astonishing. That the Conservatives are so willingly spending money tells you something about their new voter coalition. It mirrors their promises during the election campaign, to invest in the NHS and police (though, for the police, the sums only taking forces back to their 2010 levels). Conservative voters are defined by favouring Brexit. They wanted to leave the EU and have sovereignty returned to Westminster. Many of them were former Labour voters, who, while holding a socially conservative attitude to life, economically believed in the state as an innovative force for good. The Conservative coalition before the referendum, under David Cameron, were far more likely to be socially liberal and economically conservative, favouring EU membership for private sector trade. The investment from the government is therefore required for dealing with the immediate crisis and reflects their longterm evolution as a party in terms of whose support they garner. The Conservatives have moulded to meet the ideology of their voters. Conservatism under David Cameron was also defined by appearing strong on territory occupied by the left. For example, by rebranding the Conservative logo from a torch to a tree, Cameron wanted to show that support for environmental matters was not a fringe issue for left-wing activists, but a defining part of what it meant to be a Conservative. As has been reported, the one area benefiting from the coronavirus pandemic is the environment. Whether because of closed factories, reduced tourism and fewer flights, nature has been the only entity to come out of this pandemic well. Shamefully, some have celebrated this in the most appalling manner. Arguments have been made that humans are the virus and the coronavirus is the vaccine. Go and tell that to the families of the 20,000+ people who have died across the world. That some fringe movements believe humans must, and should, suffer for the environment to flourish is nihilistic, senseless and the very definition of anti-humanist. It is thanks to human action like the Industrial Revolution, scientific discoveries and freedom of thought originating from the Enlightenment that humans have lived such long and prosperous lives. However bad things may be, today is the best day to be alive. Apart from tomorrow. The zero-sum approach of extreme environmentalists is a barrier to progress. I want the world to deal with and mitigate the negative impacts of climate change by moving from a reliance on fossil fuels to renewable energy. A mixture of wind, solar and tidal energy, as well as nuclear energy, should all be part of the discussion. It should not be mutually exclusive for both humans and the environment to flourish. Earlier this month, I stewarded a Tedx Talk discussing the potential for nuclear fusion as a sustainable, renewable energy source. These are the conversations and debates that need to take place. Reductive, and, dare I say it, ecofascist environmentalists, who believe in human suffering for environmental development offer nothing to the discussion and deserve no influence whatsoever in political decisions. For now, what can humans do to deal with the crisis? Staying at home seems to be the wisest, simplest response. If my inaction at home can prevent the virus’ spread, meaning NHS staff have fewer patients to deal with, I will feel pleased. For those looking for something to do, the government are desperate for volunteers to deliver food, medicine or even have a telephone conversation with a vulnerable person. We must also remember the balance between free will and determinism. There are many events that are out of our hands. We cannot control everything that happens. What we can control is our response to the event. Let us use this extra time on our hands to celebrate the best and worst of global culture, be it film, TV, radio, music or online theatre. As I’ve previously written, there is now more time to try out new projects that a nightmare commute and long working day have prevented. Most importantly though, we can each be there for one another. Whether in real life or virtual form, having another voice ask 'How are you?' can be all someone needs to brighten up their day.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Author:Noah enjoys writing a blog and drinking tea Archives
September 2022
Categories
All
|