What is the meaning of "pre and after corona"?

I tried to restrain myself from delving into the subject of the Corona epidemic that affected us, due to various considerations, including the fact that I have not forgotten myself the ability to understand what is going on around us. We are facing events that are accelerating at a greater rate, faster than the mind can absorb.

And I was amazed at how many of our intellectuals - and we live in a state of success - how they are quick to draw lessons and lessons from what is happening; some of them are asking about the role of art and artists in our difficult times, wanting to exalt the matter of preaching and preachers; and some of them are familiar with the traditional religious system, indicating their inability to Keep up with the times and get involved in the search for the vaccine. And among them is a third category that sees what happens in a conspiracy whose strings are about to tighten their grip on the world.

In fact, I still admit that I am unable to understand what is going on; however, upon reflection, I find myself complying with the words of the ancient Arab poet:
You will see if the dust is clear ** mare under me or a donkey
so the similarity between us and this poet is that we are surrounded by thick dust that obscures seeing our rain And if the poet - unlike us - speaks in a language of trust, and knows that the dust will clear to the overseer that he is riding a horse. As for us, it seems that we are only confident of one thing, that the time after Corona will not be like the time before it. As for our position in this coming time and our place under the sun of tomorrow, only God knows them.

And if you are surprised, how surprised was the idea of ​​"what is before Corona and beyond", and tightened its grip on the minds as a Muslim upon which every discussion is based, and upon which every thinking is based. Why is the post-epidemic world necessarily supposed to be different from what it was before? What has changed? It is true that this claim can be based on an extrapolation of the history of epidemics, such as saying that all epidemics changed the features of the world, and laid the foundations of new civilizational systems and international relations.

But it is difficult for historians to prove that humanity during the previous epidemics was - and is fighting for survival - governing the same postulate we are governing today, knowing in advance that the pre-epidemic world will be different from the post-epidemic world.

I remember writing a few years ago, under the title "The Lost Symbol or the Age of Esotericism", and the article is a reading in Dan Brown's novel "The Lost Symbol". What excited me in the novel at the time was Dan Brown's talk about a laboratory on which the watchers mean working with ideas, and they want to crystallize the strongest idea that has the power to drag the world and define the direction of human action in it.

Today, I find myself wondering: Are we not - and we recognize the idea of ​​"before Corona and beyond" - in front of the most powerful idea on the face of the earth, that defines the point of human thinking and obscures other perspectives from it! It seems to me that the idea of ​​"before and after Corona" is preparing minds to accept new imperatives that cannot be paid.

One of the motivations that compelled me to write these lines was the article by Henry Kissinger, for which he chose the title: "Corona's epidemic will change the world forever." I was stopped in this article by one sentence, built on a postulate that the world of post-Corona will forever be different from the world before it, and this sentence says: "The epidemic has produced a historical paradox for us, which is the revival of the city surrounded by walls (meaning here the state with closed borders) ) At a time when prosperity depends on world trade and the movement of people. "

This sentence includes an invitation to implement the strategic mind in order to lift the contradiction between the need of states to deflate themselves, away from the logic of economic globalization that justifies openness, and their need for global trade based on the movement of peoples. This is a real dilemma, as it is impossible to raise one or two imperatives, such as if we open the borders of the state, or stop the movement of peoples.

The breach of this dilemma is absent from Henry Kissinger, a seasoned strategist. He says that it is impossible or difficult to think about the issue of authority and legitimacy now while we are in the time of the epidemic, but - at the same time - he stresses the necessity of preserving the values ​​of lights, calling on all parties to show patience and restraint. We see from this conversation a kind of deliberate confusion that is intended to entice readers to think about the future of America and the strategic enlightened world, starting from the state of emergency imposed by the epidemic.

This is not correct: if it is true that the epidemic covers the whole world, and does not recognize geographical borders, and that combating it requires the concerted efforts of all and their cooperation; then why is it not correct that the epidemic be an opportunity for a new strategic thought, consolidates the pillars of an international system that understands the risks to humanity, and urges everyone to reject Previous differences to start a new page! The least that can be said is that Kissinger’s words have great ambiguity and ambiguity.

We are most likely to have what is required and what is required of the new strategic thought - silent about it - is to install lists of a hybrid system based on the synthesis between the biased state within the traditional geographical boundaries, and between a virtual global market that keeps the right of peoples to virtual mobility in place.

From now on, the demand for prosperity will be accompanied by two conditions: the first condition is the existence of a state with liberal specifications, traditional and solid at the same time, other than the state in our fluid times as Zikmont Baumann calls it; and the second condition is a virtual market that penetrates all borders.

Thus, the Corona epidemic will change the features of the world forever, or it will be an opportunity to announce the birth of a new era, in which liberal / solid states - which derive their solidity from the state of emergency - will compete around a virtual global market or markets.

When meditating, we find that we are in the quarantine that we live today - to avoid infection with the Corona virus - we only ask two things: a supply basket that guarantees us food and drink, and means of communication with the outside world, in other words the Internet and its supplies. It is as if we are the stone imposed on the world, as it strengthens the pillars of remote communication, distance education, and remote work, but rather undermines the remaining foundations of the traditional democratic public space, which may facilitate the empowerment of the virtual market strategy in the world of tomorrow.

Why don't people - as Kissinger thinks - think about formulating a post-Corona strategy? As if you say, for example: We want to get out of our burrows to find a post-Corona world, a created, compassionate, and belittling life in which to live, guide the movement of man in the universe, societal synergy prevails in it, the financial speculative spirit is curbed, pollution decreases, and man turns to necessities more Who is keen on luxuries, in which we rearrange our family relations better, and arrange international relations in a way that guarantees peoples cooperation in the common interest? 

This will not be possible with the liberalization of the trading state and its dominance in the virtual space. In the pre-corona phase, hybrids would allow thinking from within the virtual space, then descending into the geographic public space.

After Corona, the liberal / solid state will control the reins of power to direct collective intelligence within the virtual space, depending on its ability to artificial intelligence, intelligence that expands the idea that it wants, and narrows the idea that it does not want, intelligence that wrestles to obtain the strongest and longest idea And the most influential in the cosmic reality.

I find here to repeat what I wrote - in an article that was published two years ago - away from the atmosphere of the saying "before Corona and beyond"; I said the following: "It seems to us - at first sight - that it is simple, we believe that we are heading towards a new international order based on the two axes: The American Democrat, and the undemocratic Chinese. Indeed, in his apparent simplicity, it seems to us a lot more complicated when turning the eyes. If the people in the Arab-Islamic world - and with them even the peoples of Europe - roll between these two models, hesitate to either side lean, then this is evidence of losing The destination, and an indication of the collapse of all traditional power models, whether democratic or not Ratih.

What is happening today - on the truth - is that the terrible digital technological development has contributed to dismantling some of the foundations upon which the system based on and against the democracy of dualism was built; and in return, it produces a new system for which its major features have not yet been determined, except if we exclude it as a system that does not care about the rule of peoples For her own sake, as much as he claims to be indifferent to the judgment of individuals for her selves. "

I suspect - and God knows best - that this epidemic that has befallen us, and which we hope God will lift it from us, and we call on people to adhere to health measures to combat it; many may find in it an opportunity to install horrendous future strategies, and the face of atrocity in it is the boldness of missionaries to speak about ways to achieve Hegemonism, as if we were coming out of a war between us, and the principle is that we are fighting the epidemic together, and that in our meeting this may facilitate prospecting a future with other features, a future in which the inherited conflicts are lessened.

However, our hope that the free people - imposed by the epidemic on us - should not be interrupted by an opportunity to reflect on the dimensions of our fatigue to be observed before, in the course of human civilization, in the future of science and the world, in our relationship to life and death, in the viability of many of our movements and our dwellings, And in the meanings of major existence.