Lockdown media has been full of celebrities speaking to us from wherever they may be isolated, and one might think that because we’ve all got ‘lockdown’ in common, that we might somehow feel closer to the celebrities who are also going through the same challenges as the rest of us ordinary folk… as if they are celebs, just like us!
Channel Four’s ‘Stef Show’ is the most obvious example I can think of that spins this narrative – not only is ‘Stef’ presenting the show from home, not only is she herself a pretty ‘ordinary’ presenter (one of very few non middle class presenters on T.V.), the show intersperses video feeds of ‘ordinary families’ with celebs.
However, rather than feeling solidarity with these celebs, I think the glimpses we are getting into their homes serves as a reminder of the class divide.
Many of them have been broadcasting from huge open plan kitchen-diners, often in the South East of the country. It’s as if lockdown has become an opportunity for them to show off their wonderful homes.
A prime example of this is Gloria Hunniford, speaking here: her pristine, ornamented house signifying that upper middle class identity….
And when Griff Reese Jones was interviewed, he was sitting underneath a picture of his great great uncle (or something like that) who was a past mayor of Cardiff. That was after us seeing some footage of him collecting eggs from his chickens from his large garden in the countryside.
This got me to wondering…. what proportion of celebrities have chickens? Probably at least thrice the national average.
However, there are counter-cases
I was particularly impressed when Jack Monroe, whose been given a slot on ‘Daily Kitchen Live‘ told Matt whatever his name is (the main presenter) that arborio rice isn’t a necessity, while he was making a recipe with it because ‘that’s what he had lying at the back of his cupboard.
Jack Monroe really did come across as ‘like us’, I mean who else has Arborio Rice kicking about at the back of the cupboard?
It’s quite a nice feeling heading outside at 20.00 every Thursday and banging on a saucepan for 5 minutes to show support for the NHS.
And I’ve even had the chance to chat with some neighbours who I never even talked to before the lockdown, despite having live where I’m living for almost two years.
Thinking sociologically about the weekly ‘national clap for the NHS’, it’s tempting to think of it as an example of a practice which reinforces social integration: a lot of people coming together to say ‘thank you’ to ‘front line workers’ in unison, at both the local and national level.
You certainly get this feeling if you watch the national clap on Television: there’s a five minute slot on Thursdays devoted to it, where certain streets are focused on, and there is a certain feeling of ‘belonging’ to the local and national during the event, I can’t deny it.
HOWEVER, I can’t quite bring myself to think of this as an example of us acting in solidarity because of the extremely passive, almost impotent nature of the event.
A I understand it solidarity defines ‘working towards a shared goal’ in the sense of building a better society, but I don’t think that describes what we’re celebrating when we clap for front-line workers.
Those Front Line Workers aren’t really working to build a better society, they’re just trying to prevent a melt down, they’re trying to prevent people from dying and from the NHS being overwhelmed, and just to ‘keep essential services ticking over’.
For the majority of us, our role in this crisis is to ‘stay home and protect the NHS’. We have no clarity over when this crisis is going to end, no certainty over how we’re going to come of Lockdown, and no agreement over what the ‘best way forwards’ is through summer and autumn.
In short, there’s nothing positive and long term for us to unite around, only the short-term agreement around saving lives and staying in.
Also, there is no discussion of what comes next – this is blanked in the media, so we have this looming uncertainty.
Liquidarity, my new concept!
I want to call the national clap for the NHS ‘liquidarity’ after Bauman’s concept of Liquid Modernity. Yes, we are coming together, but it’s as if this national clap is the ONLY sense of national routine we have left, there is nothing else, no clarity ATM about the way out.
Liquidarity = a shared expressive act in a response to shared fear and uncertainty, where there is no clear underlying set of principles or clear long term goal which unites people.
NB that’s very much a first thoughts definition, just working it through.
I’m sure once we start hear proposals for a staged way out of Lockdown and the social changes that are going to come in to deal with a post-corona age, we’ll be back to the same old tensions and divisions again.
It’s all very well and good clapping for the NHS, but if these workers really are facing higher levels of risk, maybe a pay rise is in order? I wonder how many people would put their tax money where their hands are for one minute every Thursday? And what happens if Brexit is delayed for years because of Corona fall-out, are Brexiteers just going to suck that up through the early 2020s?
In the meantime, let’s enjoy the national clap, it’s a nice enough distraction from all the uncertainty, and I’m certainly not going to argue that front line workers don’t deserve some recognition.
A Marxist-Feminist response to covid-19 demands that the political response to the pandemic puts people, and especially essential-service workers, before the interests of capital.
Below I summarise an article from Spectre, a Marxist-Feminist journal, based in the United States, which outlines seven ways we should be responding to the pandemic.
I’ve re-worded some of the material to make it a bit simpler to understand, as it is written in typcically ‘Marxist’ language/ Hopefully I haven’t changed the meaning too much in translation
Better funding for life-making institutions
Social reproduction services such as the health care services and education have been undermined by years of cuts. The crisis has shown us how essential these are, and so we should maintain them at a higher level of funding going forwards.
Better pay for essential service workers
We need to recognize the real value of nurses, care workers, cleaners and the people who do the basic work of society. They need better pay and conditions
Bail out people, not corporations
The article suggests that some CEOs are sacking people while keeping their high salaries, we need to make sure bail-out money doesn’t go to the shareholders of companies who have cut jobs
Open borders, close prisons
This is the most contentious to my mind – but they remind us that migrants and prisoners are probably some of the most effected people in all of this – the former because their livelihoods are decimated with border closures, the latter because they are forced to be inside in crowded conditions.
Stand in solidarity against domestic violence
Governments need to make sure domestic violence services are funded appropriately to meet the spike in DV since coronavirus
Use solidarity against capital
Ordinary people all over the world are stepping up and voluntarily making sure their neighbours and the vulnerable are getting what they need during this crisis. The governments need to follow their lead in provided assistance – help the people, but take the lead from the people, based on need.
Use solidarity to change society
This moment can be the moment when the left push forward with a pro-people, anti-capitalist agenda, it needs to be dynamic and global.
A few thoughts on the above
IMO there’s little to disagree with in the above statements with maybe the exception of the borders/ prisons point.
I like the idea of building on the voluntary work and renewed (or just new?) respect key workers now have in the eyes of general public to really push forward an economic recovery agenda that emphasizes rebuilding society based on basic individual needs, a recovery which puts health, care, education, essential services at the center.
It will be interesting to see if this is going to be the case!
The mainstream media’s coverage coronavirus is utterly disgraceful – the narrow agenda being firmly focused on using official statistics uncritically to provide an exaggerated picture of the covid-19 death rate, for failing to engage in any critical debate about how we’re going to come out of this mess, preferring to distract us by a perpetual stream of presenter and ‘public-hero’ celebreities ‘sharing’ their ‘isolation’ coping strategies, and thus normalising individualised solutions to public problems. At the same time the commercial channels are more than happy to allow companies specializing in domestic services to ramp up their advertising at us.
It follows that unless you are going to do systematic content analysis of the mainstream media’s coverage of coronavirus to document the extent of this extremely narrow agenda, you should switch off the Television (actually physically unplug it until at least June would be my advice), avoid newspaper and radio at all costs, and be extremely selective about which web sites you visit.
If, however, you would like some more objective, fact based and critical sources to help keep up with pandemic developments, I can recommend the following:
Alternative news sources on Coronavirus
The Conversation offers some insightful articles exploring some of the less focused on consequences of covid-19, such as how it highlights the class divide, and many articles take a deeper look at issues such as ‘where do pandemics come from’?
The Corbett Report – hosted by James Corbett, an awared winning independent journalist. A good alternative news source focusing on global geopolitics and how ‘covid-19’ may be part of a longer term globalist agenda to establish a world government
The Last American Vagabond – Lots of interesting critical commentary on Covi-19 – focusing on evidence that it was here well before the China breakout and a focus on the really important issues of how governments around the world are using the pandemic to impose social control and remove human rights.
@Vforvapid over at Hive.blog is producing some interesting, well referenced material on how large Corporations are benefitting from the Covid-19 bail-out – check out this post as an example: America reaps egregious sums. Also check the rest of his feed for more.
You might have heard about the The David Icke Covid-19 Interview which was live streamed and then censored on (i.e. disappeared from) YTube. That link will take you to the same video on ThreeSpeak – an anti censorship, pro free speach video platform. Unlike YTube they allow people to post videos with contentious content (but not anything which is racist/ incites violence etc.).
I read a very interesting article called in Dissent online magazine which seems to be a ‘Marxist-Feminist‘ analysis of the Coronavirus.
The article’s called ‘Social Reproduction and the Pandemic, and consists of a Q and A session with Tithi Bhattacharya, a professor of history at Purdue university and co-author of a book: Feminism for the 99%, which hints pretty strongly at her left-leaning and Feminist views!
I’ve included a summary below, but if you’d like to read the whole thing yourself, then I’ve included a link below.
Social repdoduction theory
Bhattacharya is a ‘social reproduction theorist’ – social reproduction theory sees the real source of wealth and value in our society as coming from human labour associated with ‘social reproduction activities’.
Social reproduction activities are those required for making and maintaing life, such as producing food, education, maintaing health, transportation, caring for people and various ‘domestic chores’ such as cleaning. The institutions associated with such ‘life making’ activities are the health-care sector, education and public transport. Typical ‘life-making’ jobs inlcude nursing, teaching, caring, and cleaning, sectors dominated by female workers.
Bhattacharya suggests that the capitalist system does not value ‘life-making activities’ because the capitalist system emphasises the importance of ‘thing-making’ and ‘profit-making’ rather than ‘life making’. Thus ‘life-making’ jobs such as nursing and teaching are undervalued and the workers poorly paid.
Social reproduction theory aims to analyse social events keeping in mind the fact that the really important work in society is ‘life-making work’, work currently done by women!
How Coronarvirus criticizes Capitalism
The coronavirus has been tragicially clarifying in two major ways:
It highlights that care work and life-making work are the really essential work of society – in lockdown we are keeping the essential services going such as nursing and refuse collection, no one is clamouring for stockbrokers or the leisure industry to be kept running.
It also highlights how incapable capitalism is when it comes to dealing with a crisis – once again we require the public sector to come to the rescue, the sector that’s been undermined by cuts for a decade.
Many of the jobs in America that are on the essential services list (the ones that are allowed to stay open) are paid at minimum wage, or $10 an hour, and many workers have no paid sick time or health insurance.
One suggestion is for ‘pandemic pay’ – pay these workers more as they are now being called on to risk their lives.
The uneqal response in India
Bhattacharya also focuses on the unequal response to the virus in India (her home country) – there is a lot of poor migrant labour in India, and because of lockdown closing public transport, millions of such workers are now literally having to walk home hundreds of miles to their home villages.
Meanwhile the Indian government allowed wealthy middle class Indians stuck abroad to come home on special flights, despite the borders being closed to everyone else.
She goes on to suggest that capitalist governments in the global south might well use the virus as a means to clear out the slums of the unwanted, i.e. just let it kill a lot of people.
Coronavirus and the domestic sphere
Battacharya thinks that this is a positive time for us to reconnect with families, and we might even see a rebalancing of domestic labour with men doing more housework than usual, but she also reminds us that there will probably be a spike in domestic violence for those unfortunate enough to be caught in absuive relationships.
‘War-footing’ not an appropriate analogy…
Some really interesting thoughts on why the ‘war footing’ isn’t an appropriate analogy:
Firstly, we need to ramp-down production rather than ‘ramping it up’ (like we normally would in a war) – because we need to think of minimising the social contact through global supply lines.
Secondly, we need to redefine ‘troops’ – they are not soldiers, but our care-sector and essential service workers.
Coranavirus and climate change
An interesting final thought – we need to deal with climate change with the same sense of urgency as we are dealing with this pandemic!
The societal reaction to Coronavirus is certainly a very stark illustration of the context dependency of crime and deviance…..
The recent emergency legislation which put the country into lockdown has made a whole swath of previously ‘normal activities’ deviant, if not criminal, and it’s changing the nature of what we think of as both criminal and deviant.
The Emergency Legislation in the UK: Grey Areas
The ‘government advice’ is that no one is allowed to go out of doors without good excuse, which includes:
Buying essential food and medical supplies for you own household and vulnerable people
Getting money, to exercise and for essential work
To avoid injury, illness or risk of harm.
Social gatherings of more than two people are also banned except from within the same household.
Emergency legislation gives police the powers to enforce lockdown laws, by insisting people go home and by issuing fines of up to £60, arrest, or dispersal using reasonable force.
However, it’s unclear about what actually constitutes deviance with the above advice and legislation: the law doesn’t state how many times people are allowed out, what constitutes food, and while advice says stay local when doing exercise, it doesn’t specify what local means!
As a result, there is room for interpretation over what constitutes ‘deviant behaviour’, and the police in some areas have been more rigorous in enforcing the lockdown than in others.
So what counts as deviant in the age of the lockdown?
There is some uncertainty, but clarity seems to be emerging as the agents of social control offer more explicit guidelines on what people can and cannot do, hence why this bizarre situation is such a wonderful example of the context dependency of deviance…..
Deviant: Sunbathing, picnicking and playing sports
For example Liverpool Council have made it clear that you can go outside if you keep moving (the ticks below) but not to stop or play sports…..
The police’s reaction to various people flouting lockdown rules also gives further clarification:
Deviant: Not social distancing
People are now being fined for getting too close to other people.
Fair enough I say, just being a thoroughly unpleasant individual.
Coronavirus: making it easier for some ‘normal’ criminals
Meanwhile there is one criminal activity you’re less likely to be prosecuted for – watching your T.V. without a licence because enforcement letters and visits have been stopped. I guess it makes sense keeping in mind how crucial TV is for social control!
Finally, trials for all non serious crimes have been put on hold, so I guess some criminals are actually getting some extra free time to enjoy their ‘softer’ variety of lockdown (rather than jail)
While Coronavirus is no doubt a real-life event, with real-life social and (for an extreme minority tragic) individual consequences, it is also very much a media event, especially since isolation is correlated with a significant increase our media consumption with news sites especially seeing a surge in visits (U.S. data)…
Social media usage (Facebook, Twitter, Whatsapp) is seeing a similar 75% increase in user engagement.
The News is a Social Construction
The spread of Coronavirus, and the societal reaction to it are media-events, they are socially constructed – that is to say we do not get to see every aspect of reality, only that which is selected by media professionals.
Because Coronavirus was so unexpected, and because the consequences are potentially so horrendous (millions could die from it globally, so we are told), it’s tempting to think that the reporting around this global event are ‘true’ or, at least as accurate as can be given the lack of any actual real data.
HOWEVER, it is precisely because this event is so ‘massive’ ( global, and with a range of different responses), and because there are so many unknowns (missing data on how many people actually have it), that this event in particular is possibly the most ‘media constructed’ in world history.
Add to this the fact ‘ordinary people’ have a reduced capacity to get out and see what’s going on for themselves (because of emergency social isolation legislation), then this is also the most hyperreal event in world history. One might even ask if it’s actually happening at all, as this person does here:
Give all of this, we really need to ask ourselves how the story of Coronavirus is being constructed, and to my mind I see several core narratives which haven’t so much emerged rather than just blasted all of a sudden onto the media scene:
The 11 media narratives of Coronavirus
Panic and Risk based around uncritical use of statistics
Enforcing the importance of social control
‘The War footing’
Celebrities ‘like us’ in isolation
Sharing ‘isolation coping strategies’, while staying isolated
Victims: Private tragedies made public
New heroes (frontline workers and volunteers, especially NHS workers)
The importance of trusting medical experts/ technical solutions to Covid-19
The economic impact/ bailout of covid-19/ ‘pulling through this together’
Blame other countries or poor migrants
This is very much a first-thoughts run through of this, and I might rejig it later. Below I provide a few examples for some of these themes.
NB – I am not saying that we shouldn’t take this virus seriously, and I do accept that this is a highly contagious bug and potentially deadly for some (like the flu, that’s also deadly!), and the challenge we face is the rapidity of the spread of it. But at the same time, I just think we also need to aware of uncritical reporting of the death rates and social responses…
NB for a ‘content analysis’ challenge, scroll down to the bottom of this post!
Media Narrative One: Panic and Risk based around uncritical use of statistics
At time of writing (April 1st 2020) you get this theme from doing a basic Google search for the term ‘Coronavirus’:
The panic is in the language in the ‘top stories’: ‘record surge of cases’, ‘fatality rate shoots up’, but also in the images – you’ve got The Army, the Prime-minister with a lab technician (themes 2 and 10 above there) and then just a sea of red in the next image.
This could all be contextualized instead – things get worse before they get better, in China the cases are coming down:
Theme Two: Reinforcing social control
In case you missed it, same picture as above, search return Number One: Stay At Home: Save Lives| Anyone Can Spread Coronavirus, and this is from the NHS.
If you think such a simple statement doesn’t require analysis, then you do not have a sociological imagination.
Coronavirus is the most searched for term atm (NB that is an assumption, but I think I’m pretty safe making it!), and Google is the most used search engine in the world: so these are the nine words which people in Britain are the most exposed to.
There’s a rather nasty psychological manipulation technique going on here – social control through the internalizing of potential guilt: if you go out, you could kill someone.
However, the fact that this advice comes from the trusted and loved NHS makes us think (maybe) that while dark, this must be ‘good advice.
Confused yet, terrified? I’m not surprised!
NB: Keep in mind that this advice is reinforcing government emergency lock-down legislation, legislation that is not based in hard statistics on the actual chance of people dying from Covid-19 – there’s every chance that the real mortality rate from the disease is the same as the flu, but here we are in lockdown for three weeks.
On the theme of social control, I found this from The Sun especially interesting…
Here we have the perfect way of reinforcing the stay at home method – a 19 year old female nurse (although I don’t know how she can be qualified at age 19?) crying because people are flouting the stay at home rules – the perfect hero and victim, all rolled into one!
If that doesn’t make you feel guilty for going out, nothing will, I mean look at that face, how could you hurt her?
Theme Three: The War Footing
President Trump has declared himself a war time president, and he’s far from the only one using the ‘War Footing’ narrative – besides using war related language (fight against, achieving victory, the national effort), a lot of commentary harks back to WW2 analogies – I heard one lab technician today saying how his small lab, testing for Covid-19, was like one of the boats from Dunkirk, for example.
Theme Four: Coronavirus Villains
You really don’t have to look far, and probably no newspaper does a better of job of singling these out for us than The Sun, which tells us that going out for a too long walk is now deviant (top right hand corner below)
Anyone who now goes out for anything but emergency health reasons or going to the supermarket for essential food shopping is now a deviant!
Theme Five – Celebrities like us in Isolation
I present you my man Gregg Wallace – getting buff while in isolation in his Kent Farm House… coping with isolation, just like us! (Except he’s probably in a very large farmhouse in a very exclusive part of of Kent with several acres surrounding him, and a couple of million quid in the bank to fall back on in tis of crisis, like every other celebrity.
Theme 6: Coping Strategies
Here’s a nice middle class example from The Guardian. I’m sure there are plenty of other social media sharing strategies going on out there!
Theme Seven: Victims: Private tragedies made public
This example from Sky News is interesting – it shows how the media is lining up to report on ‘the most extreme’ cases… even before Covid-19 is confirmed as a cause..
Theme 8: New Heroes
The NHS front line workers appear to have emerged as the new heroes, as well as other essential key workers, but it’s mainly NHS workers who are getting the praise – the weekly clap for the NHS has become a media event with extreme rapidity (clapidity?)
Theme nine: The importance of trusting medical experts/ technical solutions to Covid-19
This is an emerging theme, which I expect we’ll see a lot more of in coming weeks. Not much to say on this atm, but it is there – at the bottom of the BBC News links – I might be overanalysing this, but the fact that it’s at the bottom, or at the end, does suggest implicitly that such technologicla drug trials are the way out….
Theme 10: The economic impact/ bailout of covid-19/ ‘pulling through this together’
The Italian covid-19 mortality rate is so high because they record the number of people dying with the disease RATHER than deaths from the disease.
According to news reports Italy is the epicenter of Coronavirus deaths in Europe. Take this extract from today’s BBC News report as an example:
When you look at the Covid-19 death rate in Italy compared to other countries, the death rate is around 10-20 times higher compared to some other countries, if we look at deaths per million of the population. This to my mind is suspicious, by which I mean ‘possibly invalid’, as indicated below…
The graph below, of Coronavirus cases rather than deaths makes me no less suspicious of the validity of the Italian Covid-19 death rate. Admittedly Italy has the most cases, but not that many more than France or Germany, which have much lower death rates.
So how do we explain the high Italian Covid-19 mortality rate?
In case you can’t be bothered to watch the whole thing (although I recommend it!) the gist is as follows:
The Italians record the deaths of people with Coronavirus as deaths from Coronavirus. Dying with Coronavirus is NOT the same thing as dying from Coronavirus.
Most people in hospital with Coronavirus have 3 other diseases (yes that is MOST, as in over 50%), such as cancer, heart disease, and other fatal diseases. Many more have two or one other diseases.
Since most people who have already died during this phase would have done so before the lockdown measures were in place in Italy, the chance are that everyone permanently in a hospital with a would have contracted Coronavirus.
Long story short – many of the people who are recorded as having died from Coronavirus would have probably died of something else, e.g. Heart Disease, but IF they happen to also have Corona, they are recorded with that as the cause of death when it probably isn’t!
Other good stuff in the Corbett Report
This is an excellent source of ‘alternative news’ on the Coronavirus. This particular report is full of evidence of more than 20 experts (reported in The Guardian) questioning the official figures we are getting on Covid-19.
The current lockdown situation was based on projections of literally millions of people possibly dying of Covid-19, up to 500, 000 in the UK, BUT the ‘experts’ who made those projections have since retracted them, in other words admitting they got them wrong, but the lockdown remains in place.
There are plenty of people out there suggesting that the Corona statistics are meaningless, such as Steve Goodman, professor of epidemiology at Stanford University.
This is partly because of what I wrote about in this post – there are possibly millions of people who have already had it, but they had such mild symptoms, they never even really noticed, thus we don’t know how many people have had it, thus we don’t really know what the actual mortality rate is!
So why are we really in Lockdown?
This is something you need to think about very carefully. Possibly this is all about social control – through fear and using ‘protecting the health of others’ as ideological justification (hard to argue with that). The reasons why authorities might feel the need for more control is something I’ll come back to later.
In the meantime, please do watch that video.
And rather than staying safe, stay critical, society needs that more.
While our national response to CoronaVirus has been couched
in terms of ‘working together to beat this’, ‘solidarity’ and ‘social responsibility’, I
don’t think our collective response to this virus can be characterised as ‘acting
in solidarity’ or ‘enhancing social integration’.
Rather, I think the short- and long-term result of the Virus
and our response to it is leading to more social fragmentation and division.
There is a lot of case study and statistical evidence you
can use to back up this analysis:
In the initial phases of the ‘emergency response’ there was plenty of evidence of people not obeying the government advice of ‘social distancing’ – plenty of photos of people in buys Parks and crammed tube carriages for example, duly shared on twitter and other social media sites.
Then there’s the most recent government’s orders that we should all stay indoors, with a handful of exceptions such as for exercise and food shopping, during which time we all need to keep 2 metres apart from each other.
You might interpret this as ‘solidarity’ – all ‘distancing together’, but TBH I don’t think we can characterize us NOT doing things as solidarity. For the most part, people are staying indoors, isolated in their private life-worlds.
Yes, we can stay connected via social media and our Smart
T.V.s, but this is a very selective kind of social interaction, we aren’t ‘rubbing
up against’ people in public space anymore, at least not for the foreseeable future.
What we are seeing are new norms about social interaction –
people view each other as potential carriers of the virus and thus a potential
threat to their own health.
Maybe there is a new kind of uniting against the social pariahs who do not social distance? This article outlines how there have been social media campaigns shaming people ‘not doing their bit by keeping their distance’…. But that strikes me as a very weak kind of solidarity, at about the same level as online petitions.
Then of course there’s the evidence of so many people just looking out for themselves – by stockpiling food, leaving the shelves empty for others!
The response the Virus is set to be even more divisive
Public sector workers (bizarrely) do quite well (at least
for now) by keeping their pay, private sector workers get 80%, but the self-employed
seemed to have been left to their own devices.
Those on lower incomes and in precarious employment are
likely to suffer the most of course, as these do not have the funds to tied
them over a reduction income in the short term and maybe further cuts to hours
and pay in the long term as a recession is likely.
Meanwhile I have no doubt that there will be a massive bail-out coming for the banks and
Corporations, again, like in 2008.
All of this means that the young will probably pick up the
tab as decreasing tax revenues and increasing government debt in future months
will be managed by cuts to public services and probably pensions.
Finally, from a global perspective, I don’t imagine
travelling abroad is going to be easy or welcomed by people in other countries –
there may be more hostility towards tourists, let alone asylum seekers after this.
To make this sociologically relevant, I think CoronaVirus is
a great example of an event that suggests Functionalist analysis is no longer
relevant to understanding late-modern society.
TBH I’m not sure what perspectives are relevant to understanding
this – I guess it’s an extreme example of how we manage Risk, so maybe Beck’s
Risk Society thesis, maybe also Giddens – I think it was him who said Nation
States were too small to tackle global problems, and this seems to be the case
Unless this current situation is the best we can do?