Throughout history, epidemics have been among the greatest makers of change in the course of humanity, transformed the course of human civilizations and changed societies, politics and economics, and contributed to the birth of new ideas and philosophies. The contemporary world since the Second World War.
The crisis produced revisions of prevailing ideas and self-criticism, written by Western thinkers, philosophers and sociologists, who found an opportunity to express their perceptions of the future of Western civilization and towards modern societies living in a series of unprecedented turmoil and transformations.
virus
In record time, the controversial Slovenian philosopher Slavoj يجiçek wrote a book in an electronic version entitled "Virus", in which he reviewed the effects of the crisis on our minds and on a socio-economic system that was no longer effective, and expected that the pandemic-related emergency would bring with it a new authoritarian state even if it strengthened societal ties, He pointed out that the exit from the non-temporary disaster is likely to pass through what he called "the disaster of the disaster."
On how to weather the ongoing emergency, Cicek commented that "we live an exceptional experience that can reveal the worst or the best in us, and to confront unity, perhaps the best solution is to move forward with a routine that prevents us from surrendering to chaos and maintaining order to be ready for tomorrow." .
Cicek says in his book that isolation will not become a solution or more quarantine, stressing the need for "full, unconditional solidarity and coordinated response at the global level, which is a new form of what was called communism previously, and if we do not direct our efforts in this direction it may become the current Wuhan city It is the model of future cities (...) If countries isolate themselves, wars will begin (...). "
French controversy
Just as France was at the heart of the global health crisis, its contemporary thinkers and intellectuals contributed to the reviews, which included philosophers, sociologists, intellectuals, and writers who differed among themselves.
While French philosopher Bruno Latour invoked "the precautionary principle," the 1990s social scientist Edgar Morin warned of what he called "obsession with profit," and French philosopher historian André Comte-Sponville warned that "a health system replaces the moral system."
The French philosopher Michel Onfrey had sparked a wave of comments and controversy, when he considered that the pandemic of the emerging Corona virus would constitute a new stage in the "collapse of the Christian-Jewish civilization" according to the analysis presented in his book "Decline", and Onfrey stated that this virus is part of the collapse movement, and that Europe has become a "new third world", noting that the outbreak of Corona coincides with the collapse of the ideology of Europe, which pursues liberal policy aimed at profit only, as he put it.
For his part, the sociologist Moran - whose books were translated into Arabic - considered that globalization transformed the world into a large market, through advanced technology that brought the distances between continents closer, but at the same time, overcoming the obstacle of distances did not lead to establishing dialogue between peoples.
In fact, this situation reinforced the idea of seclusion over identity and the rise of dangerous national policies, according to the French philosopher in his dialogue with the writer Nocheo Uridini, Professor of Italian Philosophy.
"This global market in which we live has not been able to create feelings of brotherhood among peoples, on the contrary it has created a state of fear from the future. Today, the Corona virus has come to highlight this paradox and make it more visible to everyone, and this situation reminds me of the economic crisis," Moran added. In the thirties of the last century, when European countries, especially Germany, headed towards extremist nationalism. "
American criticism
In his interview with the American non-profit site Heritage Out, the thinker and linguist Noam Chomsky, a professor of linguistics at the University of Arizona's MIT-winning author of over 120 books as well as thousands of articles, discussed how "neoliberal capitalism itself stands behind the failed dealings of states United with the Corona pandemic. "
Chomsky says that the epidemic was expected long before the appearance of the Corona pandemic, but the anticipatory measures needed to deal with such a crisis were prevented by the dire necessities of an economic system that did not care to prevent a future catastrophe, because that was not economically profitable.
The American thinker - known for his sharp criticism of what he calls "brutal liberalism" and the foreign policy of his country's governments - explains that the United States has the worst record in responding to the crisis, indicating that scientists have warned of the pandemic for years, especially since the SARS epidemic in 2003, and the time has been a good time since then to start In applying rapid response systems in preparation for outbreaks and allocating the necessary backup power, it was also possible to take initiatives to develop defenses and treatment patterns for similar and near viruses.
Chomsky added that scientific understanding is not enough, and "there must be someone picking up the ball and running with it", but this option was canceled due to the diseases of the contemporary social and economic system.
"The market signals were clear, there was no profit in preventing a future catastrophe. The government could have intervened, but this is forbidden by the ruling capitalist doctrine that" government intervention is the problem, "which means that decision-making must be fully handed over to The business world, which is dedicated to the private sector and private profit and does not include those who may be interested in the public interest.
"The years that followed gave a dose of neoliberal brutality to the unrestricted capitalist system and produced twisted forms of markets," he says.
In his lengthy essay on his personal blog, American academic and philosopher Gregory Fernando Papas considers the current crisis an opportunity to make profound changes in contemporary society, but it may also mean an opportunity for the authoritarian, reactionary, and narrow-minded.
Papas believes that it is very difficult to predict the future of the world in light of the pandemic, and in return, "we should instead conduct a review of the lessons we learn, so that we do not forget our common experience."
The University of Texas academic says the current turmoil gave us an opportunity to discover what would simply happen if the world stopped, and continued, "If we want to create a better country and a better world for our children, and if we want to make sure that we remain as a nation and a democracy, we must pay attention to what we feel now."
The critic and editor-in-chief of American Philosophy Magazine fears that the current uncomfortable feeling of strike and suspicion leads to the hectic desire to return to "normal life" again at any cost, considering that this may mean not benefiting from and learning from current lessons.
European controversy
In a statement similar to the statement issued at the end of last February, the Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben said that the emergency measures taken by governments in the context of combating the outbreaks of the Corona pandemic are irrational and unjustified, based on the statement of the Italian National Council for Research, which considered that the symptoms of the pandemic are mild or moderate in most cases .
"Why do government authorities and the media create a climate of panic, which creates a real exception that includes restricting movement, suspending daily life and working in whole regions ?!" Agamben asked wondering. Considering that this situation leads to the imposition of "real militarization" on those regions, in a formula described by the Italian philosopher "mysterious and unspecified", predicting the generalization of the state of exception to all regions.
The Italian philosopher concluded his statement that the authorities have exhausted the justification of terrorism to take exceptional measures, and for this "the invention of a pandemic gives it the perfect excuse to generalize its actions that exceed all borders," referring to the state of fear and collective dismay, and what he considered "an acceptance of the governments restriction of freedom under safety cases."
The Agamben essay sparked enormous controversy among European philosophers, and Slavoy Cicek responded by saying that the reaction of the Italian philosopher is a hardline version of the common leftist view of panic and panic as an authoritarian exercise of control, control and racism.
Cicek added that the measures to confront the pandemic should not be reduced to the usual model of control and control adopted by the French philosopher Michel Foucault, considering that the alternative right and the false left refuse to accept both the reality of the pandemic and denounce the measures to confront it.
As Western thinkers and philosophers disagreed about analyzing the reality of the pandemic and presented differing visions about the questions of the present and the future, it seemed that there was general agreement that contemporary modernity has become - in its final version - damaged and in need of radical reform, but the dispute over the methods of reforming it has not been resolved yet.