Abstract
3 July 2020. Over the past months, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has shaken societies around the world. The pandemic has highlighted the hierarchy of types of knowledge and disciplines, as the imperative of ‘flattening the curve’ has thrust medicine and epidemiology to the forefront of public attention. Sociology has been slower and less prominent in the response. This is problematic as there was, from the beginning, a pressing need to consider sociological factors, such as harms and costs linked with the social-psychological impact of social distancing, the suspending of involvement in many types of work and business, anxiety linked with responsibilities to enact new protocols, and how power and inequality have been key variables shaping the relative probability of infection.
The health and social impacts of the pandemic are inextricable. As Ryan Nolan will argue in a subsequent issue, there is a feeling of going through an enormous ‘breaching experiment’ that has revealed the ethnomethods by which we conduct daily life. At a macro level, this crisis has pushed the concept of ‘society’ to the forefront of consciousness, breaking for a period the individualistic ideology of our era. In many polities, the pandemic has arguably led to a boost in trust and solidarity, in contrast to the blame and scapegoating that resulted from the previous great crisis of the Great Recession. Effectiveness in public health is a new form of political legitimacy, status, and statement about the soundness of the model of political economy of each state. The pandemic has also resulted in ‘the return of the institution’, as central banks, governments, professions, and health systems have taken centre stage. In contrast, few if any have run to the ‘free market’ for solutions.
Nonetheless, the coronavirus has also revealed and amplified inequalities and systemic injustices. Uneven mortality rates between different social groups are a dramatic illustration of how we are not exactly ‘all in it together’. Unemployment rates have spiralled, but not for all. Staying at home is impossible for those who are homelessness or in inadequate accommodation. And home is not precisely a safe haven in situations where people are at risk of domestic abuse; nor is it a sanctuary of peace amidst the unequal distribution of caring responsibilities and domestic labour. The pandemic has increased and illustrated these inequalities in myriad ways. And yet, we should not forget the various opportunities that this emergency has opened up. At present, we may not quite feel that modernity is a juggernaut with no one behind the wheel. As we have been forced to radically change how we manage and organise social life, we may also regain a sense that life can be otherwise, as well as trust in our collective ability to create more humane and sustainable societies. From redesigning our cities in favour of eco-friendly mobility to reinventing the world of work or finding a new role for the state in providing basic welfare to citizens, the current situation is full of possibilities for progressive social change.
This Debates issue presents the first part of a series of responses to a call for thought pieces on the pandemic jointly launched by the Sociological Association of Ireland and the Irish Journal of Sociology. Drawing on Girard and Mauss, Kieran Keohane (UCC) reflects on possible directions societies could move towards as a result of the novel coronavirus. Michael McGann (Maynooth) explores how policy responses to Covid-19 are reconfiguring the Irish welfare state, as well as the nexus between the market and the state in the Republic. Mary Murphy (Maynooth) alerts us to the possibility that the economic costs of the pandemic are thrown on the shoulders of Ireland’s youth, while Egle Gusciute (UCD) contrasts the official rhetoric around protecting the most vulnerable with the realities of Direct Provision. Finally, Hazel O’ Brien (WIT) offers a comment on what religious practices adopted during this emergency period may tell us about religion’s capacity to adapt and evolve.
We hope that this issue will inspire future collaborations between the SAI and the IJS. Our thanks go to Sage’s production team, and especially Ashwani Shahi, for their work during this difficult time. We also wish to thank the contributors for their valuable thought pieces, which demonstrate the value of sociological insights in a time where biomedical expertise is vital but hardly sufficient to address the many challenges ahead of us.