There will be a post hoc debate about whether the colossal and unprecedented (in peace time) economic toll of ‘lockdown’ measures was a price worth paying, and if there were / are better alternatives, which will focus in Europe on a comparison between Sweden and the rest of Europe. It will be heavily politicized, and the more political it becomes, the more that it will divorce itself from what actually is and has happened – this is the bane of the era in which we live, for which social media does carry some, but definitely not all of the blame. But the central question is for whose benefit (public health and health services’ capacity constraints are obvious, but not the only reasons) and on the basis of what analysis of the risks and potential consequences, were decisions taken. However, this is the sort of post mortem exercise which politics is fond of, but generally ends up as a blame game for political advantage, even if there are obviously many lessons to be learnt for future contingency plans for pandemics. The key task is to plan a way forward, particularly the likely sharp shifts in business and consumer behaviours.
What are some of the initial lessons, beyond the numerous supply chain issues noted in the previous article? The first is that the collectivized meaning of what ‘science’ is, is in fact deeply flawed. Science is neither truth or the sum of all our knowledge, but rather a process in which we further our understanding and knowledge, which future scientific research can expand upon and refine, and in that process, also refute what is currently accepted as ‘factual’. This is inherent in Heraclitus’ observation that ‘stability is a permanent state of change’. That is rather abstract, but nevertheless something that should not be lost sight of.
How about in more practical terms? For all that the ‘fourth industrial’ or technological revolution has indubitably changed our lived experience in very substantive ways, since the end of the Cold War, it appears that we have been flirting with it, rather than genuinely embracing it. This should not come as any great surprise, (particularly when seen through the lens of Hirschmann’s ‘hiding hand’), as humans operate on a paradox, on the one hand enjoying and finding mental and emotional stimulation in things that are new, though only in so far there is a sense of control (even if illusory). But we are equally fearful of changes over which there is no sense of control, above all anything that appears to present an existential threat to our daily lives and habits. Many western cultures’ fondness for cyclical views of time are premised on this, but many Asian cultures take a rather more longitudinal view – bear in mind that when thinking on this that the best definition of culture is ‘it’s the way we do things here’, an inherently non-judgemental definition. As history illustrates sudden shocks are often the catalyst for economies to jump across or up to a new set of rails, in no small part because the shock has already ripped through any sense of control, and thus reduces conservative instincts.
8 | ADMISI - The Ghost In The Machine | Q2 Edition
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42
