How does a country like South Africa, one of the most unequal societies in the world, react?
The country did well at first. The government’s reaction was based on the recommendation of a wide range of clinical contributions. At the time, South Africans trusted President Cyril Ramaphosa and almost all cooperated with the closure.
Then trust was drastically eroded: regulation was meaningless. It soon became transparent that the medical recommendation alone is not enough in the face of unprecedented social upheavals related to hunger, uncertainty, anger and economic collapse, all of which affected others who were already very vulnerable.
Advice and assistance from humanities and social experts have been included, and we now argue that this will have to be done.
A recently published special edition of the South African Journal of Science asked humanities and social sciences experts to intervene. The collection of pieces is not exhaustive, but it adds nuances to the national debate. It directs policy makers to areas that are essential if citizens want to follow the commands and rules on the management of the coronavirus pandemic and its consequences.
The articles highlight the need for transparency, accountability and popularity of the basic non-unusual sense of the population. No one needs those who have enjoyed dying, however, the replacement in behavior demands the club that is missing lately.
Several considerations
History: The collection begins with history. Howard Phillips examines how history provides direction for the future, with the option that lessons learned should not be repeated. These classes inspire others to participate in medical studies and enhance the adjustments that are already underway.
Economic consequences: Tanja Ajam recalls the need for economic reflection. How other people understand and balance pandemic prices is essential. Charting the way forward will require new imaginative partnerships between the public, personal and civil society sectors, and new thought tactics. It’s too wonderful a challenge for a person, organization or establishment to solve on its own—it requires systemic reflection.
Philosophical: Great social adjustments have practical and philosophical implications, Thaddeus Metz stresses. Questions arise about who deserves to live, who deserves to die, the justifications for those decisions, and who makes them. Philosophy requires others to weigh their answers to questions like these: How do we deserve to allocate scarce resources? Should we obey the government? Who do we believe? It is not only the lives of other people who are affected by their answers to these questions, but also the lives of others.
Social implications: Solomon Benatar argues that the social implications of these possible options should be explored through moral arguments, among other angles. The tension between individual rights and social intelligence has shaped South Africa’s incredibly unequal fitness systems and the general fitness of our society. Moving from festival to cooperation and balancing rights and daily work are critical challenges.
Unequal systems: South Africa’s communities and families are formed through deep divisions. How does the state respond when the pandemic follows the paths of unrestricted systems? For political scientists, the pandemic raises basic questions about political management. What interests matter? What commitments can and deserves to be made? How are these commitments going to emerge and divide strength in the country? Here, Adam Habib acts as an academic.
Beliefs: If other people want to cooperate, their ideals should be taken seriously, writes Jess Auerbach from the attitude of an anthropologist. What other people are much less important in practice than they think. Our understanding of price should extend beyond monetary to the human and social.
Language. We will have to pay attention to the way South Africans communicate about new reports and new realities, especially when this discourse is now mediated through masks and screens. If other people pay attention to the language in all the official languages of the country, they will be briefed a lot about quotes from others with COVID-19, Rajend Mesthrie suggests.
Religion: Religion studies provide an access point to make sense of uncertainty and what cannot be known. Barney Pityana reminds us that “human life is never a useless act, but an act imbued with purpose.” COVID-19 is not only an individual experience, it’s also about the network and the family. Responses to the pandemic will also have to see others in context, with whom, what and how they like it.
The law: Thuli Madonsela, president of social justice at the University of Stellenbosch and former protector of citizenship, does not go around when she thinks of the non-public consequences of the pandemic as a lawyer. What is justice? Who is suffering How is this suffering measured in relation to the country’s constitution? Is it appropriate for a child to be hungry or for a man to be unable to bury his father because of the kinship patterns that have been established across the state? It calls for the urgent establishment of a multidisciplinary consultative forum on COVID-19 to supply where medicine has so far failed.
Sociology: The social side of the virus “involves a form of self-imposed exile,” writes Vasu Reddy. Sociology reminds us all that social worlds have “relationships with Americans and within groups.” The pandemic is “known” differently based on the geography, race, class, disability, gender, age, and frameworks and metaphors used by others. How can we make these differences in pandemic preparation and long-term challenges?