Showing posts with label Rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rights. Show all posts

Feminism That Is Post-Colonial, Transnational, And Global.

Feminist thought has grown increasingly international, much as commerce, technology, communication, and politics have. 


For feminist theory, globalization presents both problems and opportunities. 

Meetings of cultures are always educational, even if they may be confrontational at times. 

As feminism becomes more global, feminists must strive to balance efforts to advocate for all women with tolerance for and understanding of cultural diversity. 

Because of strongly entrenched ideas and practices regarding women and their position in certain cultures, reconciliation is often difficult. 

When critiquing cultures other than their own, feminists must use caution, yet this is one of the responsibilities of global feminism. 

But, more importantly, criticism is never enough. 

Global feminism aims to strengthen bonds amongst women all over the globe via shared political commitments to social change. 

Susan Moller Okin once said that, just as academic feminists and academic feminist theory began to emphasize women's differences, as we saw with third wave feminism, women's activists all over the globe began to seek links between women. 

These activists saw connections among women and parallels in oppression as a foundation for coalitional politics to advocate for all women's human rights. 

Global feminists recognize women's diversity in terms of class, culture, religion, and ethnicity, but also identify common ground for political action. 

This is coalitional politics at its finest. 

Women all around the globe, according to Okin, need assistance from Western feminists and the international community as a whole. 

A global feminism must be capable of both identifying grounds for collective action to protect women's human rights and condemning damaging cultural practices, even within one's own society. 

But, more significantly, global feminism and transnational feminism deconstruct the traditional aid trajectory, warning against models or ideas that place the ‘two-thirds world' in need of help from the ‘one-third world.' These theories ignore the agency and power of women and men in underdeveloped countries. 

The phrases "two-thirds world" and "one-third world" clearly depict the relationship between those who "have" and those who "don't." Industrialized nations are home to just a small percentage of the world's population. 

The Global South, often known as the Third World or less developed nations, is home to two-thirds of the world's population. 

However, these words are divisive. 

In the middle of first-world grandeur, one may live in "third-world circumstances." Furthermore, using the term "developed" to describe industrialization implies a uniquely Western concept of development. 

For these reasons, transnational and global feminists and other activists working for a more equitable distribution of the world's resources sometimes use the one-third/two-third terminology, or use other terminology with political consciousness, infusing new meaning into old concepts such as "Third World." 

Building connections between feminist and other women's organizations is a political effort that requires no shared experience or identity. 

Human rights, coalition or solidarity, and empowerment are key ideas in global feminist philosophy. 

Human rights are everyone's fundamental rights, and they typically contain both positive and negative rights. 

Positive rights are entitlements to something, such as the right to leisure time, a good job, a fair pay, and safe working conditions. 

Negative rights are safeguards such as the right not to have one's property seized by the state unfairly or arbitrarily, the right to practice one's religion freely as long as it does not infringe on others' fundamental rights, and the right not to be tortured. 

Solidarity is defined as a group of individuals coming together to achieve a shared objective. 

It necessitates commitments to both the objective and to those who share that commitment. 

Coalitions, in a similar manner, are linkages between and among individuals or organizations for political purposes. 

These ideas are used by global feminists to show the links between women's organizations beyond country boundaries and language barriers. 

They demonstrate the good force that comes from collaborating for a shared goal, even if ideological disagreements exist. 

In feminist theory, empowerment refers to a person's or a group's recognition of their own power. 

This is the ability to change oneself or a group, and it often extends to changing the lives of others, social institutions, and society as a whole. 

When individuals feel oppressed, they often fail to see their own strength. 

The process of emancipation is also a process of empowerment, as it frees oneself from the shackles that prevent one from recognizing and acting on one's own strength. 

Global feminism examines problems that impact women across the world or from a global standpoint. 

That is, certain problems, such as sex and gender-based harassment and violence, seem to impact women all over the globe. 

Consumption, for example, necessitates a global view with a female awareness. 

Third-wave feminists believe that buying and selling goods is a political act. 

By examining the impact of purchases on women and children all across the world, global feminists make that political goal worldwide. 

Human rights, as I have said, are one of the most important aspects of global feminism. 

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) of the United Nations is the most comprehensive and generally recognized statement of human rights, although it is far from universal in reality. 

The paper has piqued the attention of many feminists across the world. 

They point out that many societies still do not see women as fully human, much alone legal people deserving of protection. 

The declaration itself makes just a passing reference to gender and makes no mention of sex-based human rights abuses. 

Global feminists propose particular methods for extending women's human rights, including as gaining full legal status for women and amending existing human rights standards to account for sex and gender-based abuses. 

The terms "global feminism" and "transnational feminism" are often used interchangeably. 

Nonetheless, there is a clear distinction between the two. 

Feminism that crosses national boundaries is known as transnational feminism. 

It does not, however, have to address global issues, though it may do so. 

When women in a developed country collaborate with women in a developing country to provide opportunities for women and exchange information and expertise, this is an example of transnational feminism. 

For example, Norwegian women's organizations have collaborated with Thai women's organizations to attempt to stop the flow of human trafficking from Thailand to Norway. 

They do this in a variety of ways, including providing grants to university women's centers, providing loans to women's co-operatives to help them support and sustain alternative sources of income, and funding the establishment of programs to educate people about the true intentions of recruiters who come to villages looking for domestic workers for the city. 

However, international feminism cannot be a one-way street. 

Thailand's women's organizations must likewise strive to educate Norwegian women's groups. 

They must explain why certain women are more susceptible to trafficking than others due to cultural traditions and customs, as well as what kinds of alternatives will make a difference in the lives of impoverished women. 

Furthermore, whether from universities or villages, Thai women encourage Norwegian women to solve the issue of human trafficking by focusing on traffickers and consumers, johns, or those who book sex holidays in Thailand or send for mail order brides from Southeast Asia. 

In other words, Norway's task is to investigate the reasons of human trafficking from the demand side. 

This example emphasizes the importance of women working together in the fight for human rights and women's rights beyond national boundaries. 

However, cultural norms, language obstacles, and government regulations often obstruct women's organizations' capacity to collaborate. 

Global and transnational feminisms strive to respect cultures and national sovereignty while challenging sexist aspects of both. 

It's not always simple to walk this line. Often, one must first address issues in one's own nation before being trusted by women's organizations in another country. 

If the United States' policies have a direct and negative effect on women in El Salvador, for example, women's organizations in the United States must alter US government policy before they can fully engage in social change with women in El Salvador. 

Trust, as well as bravery and honesty, are on the line. 

Just as one must face one's own sexism before condemning the sexism of others on a personal level, one must confront those factors in one's country that lead to sexist discrimination or violence before or while criticizing others. 

Postcolonial feminism and Third World feminism are two more approaches to feminism with issues and followers that transcend borders or span the world. 

Insofar as they pay attention to the issues and variety of race, class, culture, country, ethnicity, and religion, as well as sex, they have a lot in common with global feminism and transnational feminism. 

In that sense, these feminisms are often lumped together or referred to in the same way. 

Third-world feminism has its own set of theoretical features. 

Many of the issues that less developed nations face may be traced back to colonial history, according to postcolonial feminism. 

Colonialism robbed not just of natural riches, but also of civilizations, educational systems, racial and gender relations ideas, and languages. 

Within this framework, postcolonial feminism examines sexist ideas and behaviors. 

Postcolonial feminists come in all shapes and sizes. 

They might live in one of the former colonies, Europe, or America. 

They may be descendants of colonists or colonized. 

Regardless, the history of colonialism and its long-term consequences serves as their analytical framework. 

Of course, colonialism did not affect every colony in the same manner. 

Imperialist governments handled the peoples of the countries they conquered in a variety of ways. 

This range of experience is also essential when considering postcolonial feminism. 

Many postcolonial feminists detect traces of colonialism in other feminists' universalizing statements. 

When first and second wave feminists, for example, argued based on oppression in women's common experience, they disregarded or missed the many ways in which women did not and do not share comparable experiences. 

Some feminist schools of thought and initiatives, according to postcolonial feminists, replicate dominant relations or reinscribe oppressive identities. 

When feminists impose Western liberation ideals on the two-thirds globe, they are engaging in a kind of neocolonialism that replicates colonialism's historical experience by attempting to make the "colony" more like them. 

Although political takeover of land as a form of colonialism is mostly a thing of the past, postcolonial theorists are targeting a new kind of colonialism. 

Through business methods, hegemonic culture, worker exploitation, and the replacement of traditional crafts, multinational companies and transnational enterprises, mainly based in Western countries, bring their own colonial impact. 

Unlike traditional forms of colonialism, which involved the colonizer assuming the privilege of ruling in the colony, neocolonialism rules indirectly through the power it creates and enjoys by bringing manufacturing jobs to a region or providing consumer goods to a people – often Western-inspired consumer goods. 

Old-style colonialism often murdered or dispossessed indigenous peoples; new-style colonialism impoverishes countries by inundating them with Western values, goods, or aspirations. 

When sexist oppression exists, both types of colonialism become apparent feminist issues, but postcolonial feminists believe that there are significant links between sexism and racism, colonialism, classism, heterosexism, ecological injustice, and other kinds of oppression. 

Despite the fact that postcolonial feminist liberation tactics involve recognizing variations across peoples and experiences, oppression analyses may be grouped together under the same umbrella structure. 

They highlight that oppressed peoples' identities and experiences are shaped by their history of colonialism and oppression, and that various kinds of oppression often overlap to influence social life. 

Third World feminists, in a similar spirit, fight racism, sexism, colonialism, and imperialism by stressing strength and resistance in the face of dominant culture. 

Third World feminists identify their places as ‘Third World' to highlight the circumstances of poverty, exploitation, and marginalization that may be experienced anywhere one lives, regardless of wealth or poverty. 

The term "Third World" comes from a colonial era, but it has been adopted by feminists and other activists to express political solidarity in the face of injustice. 

One important aspect of this resistance is the rejection of colonial history produced from the imperialist colonizer's point of view. 

Third-world feminists, on the other hand, propose rewriting history from the point of view and experience of colonial peoples. 

This gives history more nuance and avoids the generalizations of previous imperialists. 

Furthermore, Third World feminists lead philosophy by examining the particular struggles of survival in the daily lives of colonial and previously colonized peoples. 

Both postcolonial and Third World feminists believe that the only way to end women's oppression is for individuals and peoples to be free to create their own futures in light of their repressed histories. 

They will require independence from dominating cultures as well as imperialist countries in order to accomplish so. 

Humans create resistance communities on a daily basis, uniting them in fights for human dignity and opposition to oppressive powers. 

Human dignity necessitates economic and political self-determination, as any human rights campaigner would argue. 

Breaking away from dominant culture's imperialist influences is critical to such efforts. 

Writing is one tangible technique for resistance, in addition to those used in day-to-day survival attempts and more overt efforts for social and political change. 

Personal narrative, or creating one's own tale, has been utilized by feminists of all stripes to uncover one's own subjectivity and express agency in the face of oppressive circumstances. 

Writing is used by Third World and postcolonial feminists to claim the memory of cherished cultural traditions, colonized and brutal past, and family honor. 

In their attempts to promote women's rights and fight sexist or patriarchal institutions throughout the world, global, transnational, postcolonial, and Third World feminists address a variety of problems. 

Examining problems as linked and mutually reinforcing is an essential aspect of global feminist thought. 

In order to address the feminization of poverty, for example, problems of race and class must be addressed both locally and globally, as well as the gendered elements of poverty. 

Other problems, such as human trafficking or rape in war, may also lead to feminization of poverty and vice versa. 

The following sections address some of these problems and demonstrate the sophisticated analysis required for global women's emancipation. 



‘Absolute poverty and feminization of poverty, unemployment, increasing environmental fragility, ongoing violence against women, and the widespread exclusion of half of humanity from institutions of power and governance highlight the need to continue the search for development, peace, and security, as well as ways to ensure people-centered sustainable development. 

The involvement and leadership of the female half of humankind is critical to the search's success. 

Only a new era of international cooperation between governments and peoples based on a spirit of partnership, an equitable international social and economic environment, and a radical transformation of women and men's relationship to one of full and equal partnership will enable the world to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century.'

~ Jai Krishna Ponnappan

You may also want to read more about Feminism and Activism here.

Invest In Nature To Stop The Next Pandemic

A new study from Harvard University and international experts indicates that investments in nature are required to prevent the next pandemic. 

As the globe battles to control COVID-19, a group of prominent scientific experts from the United States, Latin America, Africa, and South Asia published a study today laying out the scientific underpinnings for avoiding the next pandemic by limiting pathogen spillover from animals to humans. 

  • The International Scientific Task Force to Prevent Pandemics at the Source argues that investments in outbreak control, such as diagnostic tests, medicines, and vaccinations, are important but insufficient in addressing pandemic risk. 

  • These results come at a time when COVID-19 vaccination coverage in many low- and middle-income countries is still insufficient, and vaccine coverage in richer countries is far from reaching the levels required to control the Delta variation. 

"To manage COVID-19, we've already spent more than $6 trillion on what may turn out to be the most expensive band aids ever bought." 

        ~ Dr. Aaron Bernstein, interim director of the Center for Climate, Health, and the Global Environment at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health 

  • We must take steps to prevent pandemics from spreading by preventing disease transmission from animals to people. 

  • We can also aid in the stabilization of the planet's climate and the revitalization of its biosphere, both of which are critical to our health and economic well-being.

Climate change is also reducing ecosystems and forcing animals on land and water to migrate to new locations, allowing diseases to infect new hosts. 

  • Since 1940, agriculture has been linked to more than half of all zoonotic infectious illnesses that have infected humans. 

  • With the world's population growing and food insecurity on the rise as a result of the pandemic, investments in sustainable agriculture and crop and food waste prevention are critical to reducing biodiversity losses, conserving water resources, and preventing further land use change while promoting food security and economic well-being. 

The task force's main proposal is to use investments in healthcare system improvement and One Health to promote conservation, animal and human health, and spillover prevention at the same time. 

  • A successful example of this integrated approach may be seen in Borneo, where a decade of effort resulted in a 70% reduction in deforestation, access to health care for over 28,400 patients, and significant reductions in illnesses such as malaria, TB, and common pediatric disorders. 

Additional funding and research suggestions include: 

  • Priorities for investment: 

    • Conserve tropical forests, including those that are reasonably intact and those that have been fragmented. 

    • Improve biosecurity for livestock and farmed wild animals, particularly when animal husbandry takes place near large or quickly growing human populations. 

    • Establish an intergovernmental cooperation with allied agencies such as the FAO, WHO, OIE, UNEP, and Wildlife Enforcement Networks to combat the danger of wild animals spreading disease to livestock and humans. 

    • Leverage investments to improve healthcare systems and One Health platforms in low- and middle-income countries to promote conservation, animal and human health, and spillover prevention. 

Prioritize research to determine which measures, such as those focusing on forest protection, wildlife hunting and trade, and agricultural biosecurity, are most successful in preventing spillovers. 

  • Assess the economic, ecological, long-term viability, and social welfare effects of spillover-reduction measures. 

  • In economic studies, include a cost-benefit analysis that includes the entire range of advantages that may result from spillover avoidance

  • Improve our knowledge of where pandemics are most likely to occur, including evaluations of pandemic drivers such as government, travel, and population density. 

  • Continue viral discoveries in wildlife to determine the range of possible diseases and enhance genotype-phenotype relationships that may be used to evaluate spillover risk and severity. 

Harvard Chan C-CHANGE and the Harvard Global Health Institute convened the task group (HGHI). 

The results of their first report will be converted into international policy recommendations in time for the G20 meeting in October and the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November.

You may also want to read more analysis about the COVID-19 Pandemic here.

Global Cultural Contexts - A Must In Future Pandemics

Cultural Strategies To Combat Pandemics

According to experts from Simon Fraser University and two American institutions, combating future pandemics would need strategies that are not just scientifically sound but also take into account the cultural background of nations. 

  • Carolyn Egri, a professor at Simon Fraser University's Beedie School of Business, examined COVID-19 case data from 107 countries alongside Ratan Dheer (Eastern Michigan University) and Len Trevio (Florida Atlantic University), concentrating on the first 91 days of the pandemic. 

  • Researchers found that nations that put a higher cultural emphasis on the collective society over the individual, with people more inclined to follow government orders, had lower COVID-19 case growth. 

The findings of their research appear in the Journal of International Business Studies. 

  • Countries that prioritize group collaboration and well-being, such as Malaysia, South Korea, and Singapore, were able to rapidly adjust their behavior and restrict COVID-19 case development. 

  • Case growth was higher in individualistic nations like Canada, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States, which emphasize individual freedom and choice. 

  • Because citizens were more inclined to obey government instructions, countries with a high power distance, where people accept hierarchical power connections, had lower case growth. 

  • Despite the lack of full lockdowns, people in Japan and Taiwan practiced mask wearing, physical distance, and self-isolation. 

Case growth rates were greater in low power distance countries, which are more equal and have citizens who are more inclined to challenge specialists. 

  • COVID-19 limitations were opposed in Germany and the United States, for example. 

  • The researchers also highlight that nations with strong uncertainty avoidance, such as Portugal and Spain, which value predictability and are usually reluctant to new ideas, challenged COVID-19 limitations and had greater case growth than countries with lower risk aversion, such as Denmark. 

The culture of the country and the government's reaction to the epidemic.

Governments tightened containment and closure restrictions during the initial wave of the epidemic, although the efficacy of these efforts was determined by a country's culture. 

While relatively modest levels of government involvement decreased case increase in collectivist and high power distance nations (Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan), pandemic spread in individualistic and low power distance countries required greater and more restrictive government actions (Canada, U.S., U.K.). 

According to the results, governments in individualistic countries may promote behavioral change early in a pandemic by concentrating on incentives that benefit individuals and decrease individual suffering, such as unemployment benefits and food subsidies. 

  • While authoritative leadership and rules are less likely to foster compliance in low-power countries, governments can provide the right tools for individuals to make decisions, such as factual and scientific information—including knowledge gained from previous pandemics—to help them make informed decisions. 

  • Low-power-distance governments may also enlist the help of the media, local governments, public-service agencies, and non-governmental organizations to promote public compliance. 

The authors of the study also recommend that governments should communicate clearly and transparently with citizens in high-uncertainty-avoidance countries, where people may be particularly concerned about changes to their everyday lives and routines meant to reduce COVID-19 case development. 

  • Government officials may utilize this study on the effect of culture on the transmission of infectious illnesses to develop COVID-19 and future pandemic mitigation measures that save lives while reducing economic costs. 

  • Multinational businesses and employee well-being: insights 

    • Despite the fact that the worldwide pandemic has hastened the transition to virtual work, there will certainly be cultural disparities in workers adopting large-scale and long-term job digitalization in the post-pandemic future. 

    • While workers in individualistic nations may appreciate the virtual workplace's greater flexibility and freedom, employees in collectivistic countries may experience increasing social isolation in less relationship-oriented virtual workplaces. 

    • Multinational companies will need to manage employee relations and develop culturally appropriate recruiting, training, and support methods. 

    • Companies' adjustment to post-pandemic workplaces must also take cultural factors into account. 

In high-power countries, corporations should strive to establish clear standards and processes, while in low-power countries, employee involvement in planning, more tailored training, and flexibility may be required to secure commitment.

You may also want to read more analysis about the COVID-19 Pandemic here.

COVID-19 Pandemic's impact on Global Politics


A slew of international and domestic political issues has arisen because of the worldwide epidemic. The COVID-health crisis is an external shock to the global system, affecting international politics and causing new tensions between foes and friends. It will likely have far-reaching repercussions and long-term consequences for geopolitics.

Political leaders from major countries such as the United States and China may try to use the crisis to gain an advantage in the global political order's continuous battle for hegemony. 

States have been left scrambling to gather enough supplies and resources to properly combat the virus in many cases, prioritizing national interest and the well-being of their own populations.

The US, for example, asked to stop supplying protective masks to Canada and Latin American nations so that they could keep them for domestic usage. In the rush to produce a vaccine for the virus, a type of "vaccine nationalism" emerged, which erected hurdles to collaboration and favored local delivery once mass manufacturing began. The pandemic has the potential to intensify existing inter-state political tensions. COVID, for example, has the potential to exacerbate tensions between India and Pakistan over Kashmir.

We might witness greater entrenchment of the armed status quo, as well as local initiatives to emphasize the weakness of Indian administration in Kashmir, while political leaders in both nations focus on battling the virus. 

Hardline Indian nationalist initiatives might potentially be utilized to shift public attention away from the COVID situation. The magnitude of the pandemic danger, on the other hand, is likely to focus attention in India and Pakistan on the urgent needs for public health services and the need to alleviate domestic economic distress. Politicians in countries with supranational governance institutions, such as the European Union, have had disagreements over new policies.

Despite disagreements during the negotiating process, EU member states finally reached an agreement on an economic recovery plan in July, despite reservations from so-called "frugal" nations about the plan's cost. 

However, debates over seasonal migrant labor have fueled tensions inside the EU, with certain businesses, particularly farmers, seeking access to foreign workers and populist leaders advocating for tougher immigration controls. The epidemic has also exacerbated pre-existing international issues around people migration.

Asylum seekers and refugees have been hit especially hard, especially as the epidemic threatens to exacerbate current humanitarian situations.

Temporary economic migrants have also been affected by the epidemic, particularly because of the economic crisis, which has led many businesses to lay off workers. Even though governments have implemented economic measures to help enterprises, temporary migrants are frequently left out of these programs.

Some governments are also contemplating changing migration restrictions and drastically altering how they handle asylum applications, such as limiting face-to-face interviews, erecting additional physical obstacles, or even encouraging asylum seekers to bring their own black or blue ink pens. 

Internal migration has also been impacted by the epidemic, with several countries imposing travel restrictions. In a variety of ways, the public health issue is impacting internal political conflicts.

Some politicians, for example, used the outbreak for partisan political benefit during post-Brexit discussions between the UK and the EU. 

In certain circumstances, politicians have questioned experts' authority, eroding voters' faith in evidence-based understanding.

To further their beliefs, they have often mischaracterized or usurped scientific expertise on problems such as mask wearing. 

In several nations, political division has fueled and worsened debate about the epidemic, creating tensions between regional/state and national/federal political authorities. Calls for unity and concerted action, on the other hand, have occasionally served to bridge ideological and party divisions.

The pandemic offers distinct threats to state stability, potentially amplifying the dangers of political violence, internal armed conflict, and state failure. 

Rebel organizations and other militant players have taken advantage of chances to expand their power, further political goals, and demonstrate their ability to administer and enforce norms. 

Armed groups operating along Colombia's southwest coast, for example, have publicly said that curfew offenders will be viewed as "military objectives."

In some situations, COVID- has given armed opposition groups the opportunity to ramp up assaults and target government opponents, while in others, the opportunity has been used to enhance claims of legitimacy and demonstrate their ability to deliver public services and rule.

To combat the pandemic, the Islamic State, the Taliban, and al-Qaeda affiliates, for example, have all offered instruction and local support. The pandemic has also had an impact on political engagement. Protest politics, for example, has been a hot topic of discussion.

On the one hand, residents in certain nations have turned to the streets to protest government measures aimed at containing the virus, such as lockdown and stay-at-home orders.

Protests like as those organized by Black Lives Matter activists throughout the world, on the other hand, were a source of debate as people and political leaders debated whether such events led to fresh COVID outbreaks.

Election politics are also affected by the consequences on political engagement. Local and national political leaders in several nations, for example, have opted to postpone elections or rethink voting rules and practices.

Governments have taken efforts to ensure social separation, health, and safety during the voting process, such as expanding the use of postal voting or establishing measures to ensure social distance, health, and safety during the voting process.

Traditional customs and behaviors such as shaking hands have been restricted, which has had an influence on campaign activities.

Furthermore, political gatherings pose a significant health danger for the virus's transmission. This aspect becomes particularly salient after former US President Donald Trump started large-scale political campaign activities immediately after his COVID treatment hospitalization.

Other politicians used virtual rallies and events to commemorate significant campaign milestones, such as the Democratic Party's announcement of a presidential candidate in August. COVID- has also influenced the substance of political campaigns and party politics. Issues like as public health and socioeconomic and racial inequality, for example, have grown increasingly prominent, and historically split parties have converged on more similar viewpoints on fiscal prudence and public expenditures.

When it comes to politicians, law enforcement, and the media, among others, TRUST is a critical component of political life.

High-profile instances of politicians disobeying their own stay-at-home directives, or openly contradicting or undermining health professionals can cause widespread misunderstanding and erode public faith.

The politicization of topics such as obligatory mask wearing demonstrates how a lack of consensus and diverse approaches may thwart public health initiatives and foster suspicion not just of politicians but also of law enforcement authorities entrusted with enforcing compliance.

In some situations, lawbreakers have retaliated violently against cops executing the new legislation. 

Members of an extreme militia were detained in relation to suspected intentions to abduct Michigan's governor and put her on trial for draconian pandemic policies in a particularly spectacular instance.

Furthermore, by adopting framing strategies or prioritizing certain material as they disseminate information to the public, the media can have a compounding influence on public trust (or lack thereof). 

Political trust can be exacerbated using social media by politicians to promote disinformation regarding COVID and associated legislation.

You may also want to read more analysis about the COVID-19 Pandemic here.


Lack of Civility and the Spread of COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 is examined through the prism of civility. 

For two causes, an emphasis on civility is important. For starters, the idea of civility is often discussed in public forums. 

In a variety of situations in public life, society wants individuals to behave in a certain way. Some people are fast to accuse those who are found to have broken these rules of conduct of being uncivil. 

As American football player Colin Kaepernick began kneeling during the national anthem to demonstrate economic and social inequality, US President Donald Trump deemed the gesture uncivil and insensitive. 

'You have to stand respectfully for the national anthem otherwise you shouldn't be performing, you shouldn't be there, maybe you shouldn't be in the world,' Trump suggested. ‘[t]hat is a complete disrespect to our heritage,' he said. 

That is a complete betrayal of everything we stand for.' Trump was enraged by Kaepernick's words, and he voiced his approval when former Vice President Mike Pence and his wife left the stadium in Indianapolis as part of a counter-protest before an ers-Colts NFL game. 

Accusations of incivility have been levelled at Kaepernick on a regular basis. However, his situation raises a crucial question: can we all be polite to one another? ‘When civility leads to suicide, revolting is the only moral reaction,' Kaepernick recently argued. 

Often it's necessary to be uncivil in order to bring attention to and combat inequality, particularly when other methods aren't (or are no longer) efficient. Another high-profile US event occurred recently when the owner of a restaurant in Lexington, Virginia begged former White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders to quit. Several LGBTIQ+ waitstaff members objected to her support for President Trump's anti-transgender policy. In an era of outrage and polarized politics, the event posed critical concerns about moral and pragmatic decision-making. 

Those in favor of the move saw it as justified in light of the administration's breach of moral values of fair respect for all citizens—a central level of civility. 

Right-wing commentators, on the other hand, saw the restaurateur's behavior as uncivil, though telling Huckabee Sanders to leave the premises went against generally accepted politeness norms. This breakdown of civil trade has the potential to have far-reaching consequences. 

Both sides identified the other's violations of civility standards, but both centered on a different aspect of civility. This leads to the second explanation for emphasizing civility: the concept's disputed existence in academic literature, especially in political theory and philosophy. 

Second, there is controversy about what civility entails (and therefore incivility). Second, even though people agree on the definition of (in)civility, they can disagree on whether individual incidents of speech or behavior should be classified as civil or uncivil depending on that definition. 

So, what does civility entail? 

Existing scholarly work offers a variety of conceptions of the term, all of which are at odds with one another. However, there are two key points of view. 

On the one hand, civility is often correlated with courtesy and politeness standards: to be respectful in this context means speaking and acting in accordance with these standards. 

In the other hand, it is related to the concept of high-mindedness: to be civil in this second sense implies to demonstrate a devotion to the public benefit, rather than only one's own personal or sectarian interests, and to regard others as free and equal. 

When we defend political laws, we have a "duty of civility" to only refer to public motives (i.e. reasons that our fellow citizens can recognize and find persuasive). 

This second understanding of civility is famously captured by John Rawls' argument that we have a "duty of civility" to only appeal to public reasons (i.e. reasons that our fellow citizens can understand and find persuasive). 

Although, as we'll see, civility as public-mindedness can also be interpreted in a non-justificatory context, implying that we don't treat people in discriminatory or hateful ways. 

We consider politeness and public-mindedness aspects of civility, which will help concentrate on how COVID-19 tests our desire to be respectful while still providing chances for people to discover new ways to be civil to one another in these trying times.

You may also want to read more analysis about the COVID-19 Pandemic here.

COVID-19 Pandemic presents Risks and Threats to Civility and Public-Mindedness

At both the local/national and international levels, various actors and organizations have reacted to the pandemic in ways that have sometimes fallen short of the demands of normative and justifiable civility. 

  1. First, members of oppressed communities have been subjected to different types of bigotry and hate, violating their identity as free and decent people in morally reprehensible ways. 
  2. Second, a variety of political figures have used COVID-19 to further sectarian political interests or to overprioritize some political ideals in comparison to others, in ways that defy justifiable civility criteria. 
  3. Third, certain policymakers have enacted policies that place unfair ‘commitment burdens' on some classes of people, especially those who are already marginalized and disadvantaged structurally. This, we concluded, risks weakening the legitimacy of these measures in the eyes of the public. 
  4. Finally, challenges to justificatory civility have arisen as a result of a lack of scientific knowledge of COVID-19 and its social and cultural aspects, as well as the politicization of research by certain actors for personal or partisan benefit. 

If we wish to avoid an eruption of moral and justifiable incivility, we must act quickly to address these issues. 

We proposed a variety of options for governments and people to pursue this goal. Where it comes to moral civility, policymakers should take action toward more equitable measures that reduce inequality and strengthen the lives of those who are disadvantaged. 

This may include multi-pronged techniques such as clear messaging, localization, collaboration, and policy co-design. Identifying the roots of racism and hate speech, tracking and gathering evidence, working with civil society actors, using media and emerging tools for program implementation, and strengthening legal processes such as hate speech legislation are also ways that lawmakers can better combat the rise of racism and hate speech. 

Responding to COVID-19's obstacles to justificatory civility necessitates a variety of interventions. First, sectarianism can be averted through structural bulwarks against incivility such as judicial processes that can help to deter religious convictions from encroaching on political laws. 

Governments should foster justificatory civility at the same time by promoting the virtues of solidarity, other-regardingness, and reciprocity through educational institutions and the use of consultative and deliberative bodies. 

Furthermore, the implementation of ethics structures may assist governments and people in better articulating the requirements for determining when and how those political values should be prioritized over others in public policy justification. 

Furthermore, policymakers should gain a better understanding of the social and political realities that characterize their society, especially structural inequalities that place additional burdens on marginalized groups; develop more tailored policies that prioritize marginalized groups; and engage in greater activism to reduce the strains of commitment that certain policies may impose on those groups. 

Finally, policymakers must ensure that strategies are not implemented based on faulty or unreliable scientific data. This will necessitate encouraging and financing further scientific studies on COVID-19 (both medical research and research on the virus's social and cultural dimensions), as well as ensuring that governments and the scientific community have open and reliable lines of communication. 

In order to stop using scientific facts in ways that are unsound and unjust, and therefore endanger justificatory civility, policymakers would need to improve their scientific literacy.

You may also want to read more analysis about the COVID-19 Pandemic here.

COVID-19 Pandemic's Impact on the Elderly

Older citizens are a third demographic group that has been disproportionately affected by policy responses to COVID-19. 

We already stated in the article that older people are more likely to contract COVID-19 and die from it than children and younger adults. Large outbreaks have occurred in aged care homes, with elevated fatality rates. 

When we consider the consequences of some of the policy reactions to the pandemic, though, we see that older populations are more vulnerable. 

For example, figures suggest that unemployment rates for jobs aged and older have been higher than in recent recessions. 

Furthermore, many elderly adults have had their retirement plans disrupted, and they will not have the same chances to continue travel until the pandemic has passed. 

One recent retiree in the United States expressed his dissatisfaction with the pandemic's timing: These were the years that we had set aside between, you know, and maybe the early s, that we were trying to do all of the stuff that we had put off since we were raising a family because we were nearing the end of our most fruitful years of our careers. 

Since our jobs were hard and our careers were demanding, we didn't enjoy long breaks or do a lot of stuff. We mentioned that we will retire at a younger age than any others... We had a couple of nice years where we [travelled] across Europe, Australia, and most of the United States, and now it's all gone. Around the same time, we're getting older, and these are the years we'll never get back. When you're, it's not that you can fly [in the same way]. 

The social alienation caused by interventions like stay-at-home directives and social distancing laws, on the other hand, is a far bigger issue. 

These interventions have also discouraged older people from participating in social encounters that are important to their well-being, such as those with their relatives and family, as well as those that take place in shops, within neighborhood groups, in places of worship, and during other daily activities. 

For example, we spoke with an Italian woman who explained the precautions she took during the first phase of the pandemic: ‘[t]o try to protect the health of my elderly mother, who lives one floor above me, I only met with her for a few minutes [every day] while wearing a mask for two months.' Isolation like this can lead to or intensify loneliness, despair, and, in the case of older adults with dementia, more cognitive loss. 

Owing to major restrictions on the number, timing, and modalities of visits by friends and family, older adults in long-term care (LTC) facilities have been especially affected. 

Visitors are often expected to undergo testing prior to visiting LTC facilities, and the visits are often brief and performed outside. All involved must keep a safe distance and wear masks and other safety gear. This has an unavoidable effect on the meeting's efficiency. 

In the Canadian context, health researchers and practitioners note that [t]he impracticalities of such visits are obvious: spouses of residents are often older adults who face mobility challenges getting tested, residents have hearing and vision loss, making communicating during a physically distanced visit outside challenging, and masking visitor faces is not helpful or advisable. 

Due to COVID-19 outbreaks, some inhabitants have been socially segregated for months, spending every day and every meal alone in their apartments, kept captive by ill-conceived policies... 

These initiatives are out of step with residents' interests and cause emotional distress. This means that some of the main measures put in place by policymakers in reaction to COVID-19 have placed undue pressures on the elderly. 

This risks undermining their public legitimacy and necessitates lawmakers' awareness of the policies' disparate social effects, particularly given the precarious role several older people already occupy. There are, however, ways to mitigate the effect of such measures on the elderly. 

For example, in long-term care facilities, this could include [refocusing] care on the occupant and reintroducing person-centered care into countermeasures... 

This includes embracing and campaigning for creativity, user-friendly emerging tools that foster interactions with loved ones, and using [nurses'] intimate partnerships with residents to lobby for more person-centered policies. 

Online services have also been used in ways that aren't exclusive to LTC services. 

For example, in addition to Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp, older people in the United Kingdom have access to the Next-door App, which allows neighbors to communicate and connect socially.

 Older citizens have also used internet outlets to attend worship events, play online board games, and attend virtual music concerts. 

Some also suggested alternative means of care, such as letters, notes, and parcels, telephone calls, and cognitive behavior training, since many elderly adults do not have high levels of IT literacy. 

Justifiable civility should not need governments to always reject COVID-19 policy responses simply because they might have a disproportionate impact on older citizens. 

After all, these policies are needed to slow the spread of the virus and save lives. 

Policymakers must, in the very least, recognize the disparities in outcomes and, where possible, make a sincere attempt to either change their strategies or introduce and encourage interventions to reduce the disparities. 

This may be achieved directly, such as supplying older people with the financial and technical means to access internet services from the comfort of their own homes, or indirectly, such as coordinating public awareness programs urging residents to follow any of the above supportive behaviors in their everyday encounters with older people.

You may also want to read more analysis about the COVID-19 Pandemic here.