This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/19/opinion/coronavirus-politics.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
We Must Assist One Another or Die We Must Help One Another or Die
(about 7 hours later)
It’s a commonplace that emergencies can bring people together. But the imperative issued right now by experts, governments and businesses seems to suggest the very opposite: The sign that you care is that you engage in “social distancing.”It’s a commonplace that emergencies can bring people together. But the imperative issued right now by experts, governments and businesses seems to suggest the very opposite: The sign that you care is that you engage in “social distancing.”
Rather than looking after others — and possibly infecting them — the best you can do for society is to look after yourself in digitally connected isolation. And yet it would be wrong to think that the coronavirus outbreak will only reinforce the selfishness from which Western societies already suffer. Like the Spanish flu of 1918 and other previous shared experiences of vulnerability, this pandemic can pave the way for the collective insight that we absolutely need a public infrastructure — and not just in health care.Rather than looking after others — and possibly infecting them — the best you can do for society is to look after yourself in digitally connected isolation. And yet it would be wrong to think that the coronavirus outbreak will only reinforce the selfishness from which Western societies already suffer. Like the Spanish flu of 1918 and other previous shared experiences of vulnerability, this pandemic can pave the way for the collective insight that we absolutely need a public infrastructure — and not just in health care.
The feeling that there is less and less social cohesion in today’s democracies is justified. A recent survey in France showed that 35 percent of people think they have absolutely nothing in common with their fellow citizens. Today, the wealthiest are seceding into gated communities; some are even contemplating escapes into outer space or to remote locations (think about the fantasies spun out by Silicon Valley billionaires like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk). Meanwhile, the poorest hardly participate in society at large — and certainly not in elections, a trend that has long been clear in the United States, but is now affecting other democracies, too.The feeling that there is less and less social cohesion in today’s democracies is justified. A recent survey in France showed that 35 percent of people think they have absolutely nothing in common with their fellow citizens. Today, the wealthiest are seceding into gated communities; some are even contemplating escapes into outer space or to remote locations (think about the fantasies spun out by Silicon Valley billionaires like Peter Thiel and Elon Musk). Meanwhile, the poorest hardly participate in society at large — and certainly not in elections, a trend that has long been clear in the United States, but is now affecting other democracies, too.
There are larger reasons behind such trends. After the end of the Cold War, it became ever less obvious for what exactly we need our fellow citizens: with the globalization of supply chains, it seemed that we could do without them as workers; with free trade, we have no need of them as consumers; and, with the shift away from mass conscript armies, we also don’t really need them as soldiers.There are larger reasons behind such trends. After the end of the Cold War, it became ever less obvious for what exactly we need our fellow citizens: with the globalization of supply chains, it seemed that we could do without them as workers; with free trade, we have no need of them as consumers; and, with the shift away from mass conscript armies, we also don’t really need them as soldiers.
Institutions that used to unite citizens for a collective purpose declined: Churches, trade unions, political parties have all hemorrhaged members. Why feel solidarity, or care about inequality in the absence of any sense of interdependence — the notion that, ultimately, we need one another and are all in this together?Institutions that used to unite citizens for a collective purpose declined: Churches, trade unions, political parties have all hemorrhaged members. Why feel solidarity, or care about inequality in the absence of any sense of interdependence — the notion that, ultimately, we need one another and are all in this together?
There is nothing sentimental about solidarity. It means mutual help in cases of calamity, and it is not quite the same as equality. The depressing argument from historians is that only large-scale violence or other catastrophes — including pandemics — have ever brought about comprehensive leveling.There is nothing sentimental about solidarity. It means mutual help in cases of calamity, and it is not quite the same as equality. The depressing argument from historians is that only large-scale violence or other catastrophes — including pandemics — have ever brought about comprehensive leveling.
One reason that these calamities brought about more equality was that they wiped out wealth, an effect also emphasized by the French economist Thomas Piketty. But apart from sheer destruction, crises could lead to something more constructive: a commitment to mutual aid, a sense, to paraphrase W.H. Auden, that we must assist one another or die.One reason that these calamities brought about more equality was that they wiped out wealth, an effect also emphasized by the French economist Thomas Piketty. But apart from sheer destruction, crises could lead to something more constructive: a commitment to mutual aid, a sense, to paraphrase W.H. Auden, that we must assist one another or die.
A common affliction demonstrates that our feeling of individualism is illusory. Digitally connected isolation is predicated on fellow citizens producing and delivering food, and anyone along the delivery chain, forced to work because they live paycheck to paycheck, could be contagious. What the legal scholar Jed Purdy has called the “power to withdraw” depends on the pressure workers feel to deliver.A common affliction demonstrates that our feeling of individualism is illusory. Digitally connected isolation is predicated on fellow citizens producing and delivering food, and anyone along the delivery chain, forced to work because they live paycheck to paycheck, could be contagious. What the legal scholar Jed Purdy has called the “power to withdraw” depends on the pressure workers feel to deliver.
World War II played a crucial role in motivating the push for the National Health Service in Britain. After aristocrats and workers fought together, it was much harder to deny the latter basic shared benefits.World War II played a crucial role in motivating the push for the National Health Service in Britain. After aristocrats and workers fought together, it was much harder to deny the latter basic shared benefits.
It is less well known that the Spanish flu had already created a sense in the interwar period that proper disease surveillance and free effective treatments were desperately needed. Eugenicists had claimed that the irresponsible poor and immigrants were to blame for succumbing to disease, but it became clear that unhealthy environments and underdeveloped states were the problem.It is less well known that the Spanish flu had already created a sense in the interwar period that proper disease surveillance and free effective treatments were desperately needed. Eugenicists had claimed that the irresponsible poor and immigrants were to blame for succumbing to disease, but it became clear that unhealthy environments and underdeveloped states were the problem.
In Sweden, the pandemic revealed the squalor in which the poor lived. Sick children were found on the floor in homes without beds. The welfare state — called “folkhemmet,” or people’s home — was to end such conditions once and for all; it not so much leveled citizens (Swedish capitalists lived very comfortably in the folkhemmet) as enabled a people to protect themselves from collective risks.In Sweden, the pandemic revealed the squalor in which the poor lived. Sick children were found on the floor in homes without beds. The welfare state — called “folkhemmet,” or people’s home — was to end such conditions once and for all; it not so much leveled citizens (Swedish capitalists lived very comfortably in the folkhemmet) as enabled a people to protect themselves from collective risks.
Of course, not all crises bring people together. Some divide us, with climate change an obvious example. But the current experience of shared vulnerability is so visceral that political entrepreneurs who usually profit from polarization might have a hard time convincing citizens that this is all hoax, or partisan warfare.Of course, not all crises bring people together. Some divide us, with climate change an obvious example. But the current experience of shared vulnerability is so visceral that political entrepreneurs who usually profit from polarization might have a hard time convincing citizens that this is all hoax, or partisan warfare.
True, competence can always be recoded as just one side in the culture wars, and experts are suspected of being condescending “liberal elites”; anti-vaxxers and populists have managed to reduce citizens’ trust in government health advice to dangerously low levels in Italy and the United States.True, competence can always be recoded as just one side in the culture wars, and experts are suspected of being condescending “liberal elites”; anti-vaxxers and populists have managed to reduce citizens’ trust in government health advice to dangerously low levels in Italy and the United States.
But things change when your — or your grandparents’ — life really does depend directly on the experts, and when you realize that no gated community can keep a virus out. As Jonathan D. Quick, former chair of the Global Health Council, has argued, one is only ever as safe as the least safe place. That sounds like a version of the motto of the Wobblies, the radical trade union, that “an injury to one is an injury to all.” Nobody can buy immunity, let alone immortality; nobody can wash his hands of conditions that make the United States look more like a failed state than a functioning democracy.But things change when your — or your grandparents’ — life really does depend directly on the experts, and when you realize that no gated community can keep a virus out. As Jonathan D. Quick, former chair of the Global Health Council, has argued, one is only ever as safe as the least safe place. That sounds like a version of the motto of the Wobblies, the radical trade union, that “an injury to one is an injury to all.” Nobody can buy immunity, let alone immortality; nobody can wash his hands of conditions that make the United States look more like a failed state than a functioning democracy.
A decade ago, the historian Tony Judt wrote, “If social democracy has a future, it will be a social democracy of fear.” To be sure, fear can always be turned against foreigners — something right-wing populists are busy trying to do now. But it can also motivate us to see through the fog of fake individualism and realize that interdependence requires proper infrastructure: from a public health system to an informational infrastructure where platforms like Facebook are forced to remove falsehoods that cost lives.A decade ago, the historian Tony Judt wrote, “If social democracy has a future, it will be a social democracy of fear.” To be sure, fear can always be turned against foreigners — something right-wing populists are busy trying to do now. But it can also motivate us to see through the fog of fake individualism and realize that interdependence requires proper infrastructure: from a public health system to an informational infrastructure where platforms like Facebook are forced to remove falsehoods that cost lives.
A large economic stimulus, as the White House is proposing, is all well and good, but structural change is what’s desperately needed; charity is appreciated, but will never make up for a dysfunctional government; and business, which by definition, is in it for profit (and now bailouts), cannot be relied on to take care of us.A large economic stimulus, as the White House is proposing, is all well and good, but structural change is what’s desperately needed; charity is appreciated, but will never make up for a dysfunctional government; and business, which by definition, is in it for profit (and now bailouts), cannot be relied on to take care of us.
Jan-Werner Müller teaches at Princeton and is the author of the forthcoming “Democracy Rules.”Jan-Werner Müller teaches at Princeton and is the author of the forthcoming “Democracy Rules.”
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.