Jon Parsons Profile picture
Jun 16 8 tweets 2 min read
The "learning to live with it" phase of the pandemic functions through widespread denial of the reality of ongoing harm.

That denial is paradoxically enabled by a basic tendency toward optimism, which although a positive trait gets in the way of effective action.
Lauren Berlant calls this "cruel optimism," in the sense that the desire to always look on the bright side stops people from recognizing the harms being done to them, or doing anything to address those harms. The tendency is to believe "everything will work out for the best."
For example, mass infection means exposing young people to the virus over and over again. While parents may intellectually realize the risk, the intellectual realization is suppressed by the overwhelming need to believe their children are happy, healthy, and have bright futures.
Likewise, people may intellectually know there are significant risks from infection, not just of hospitalization and severe outcomes but also risks associated with long covid.

The optimistic impulse encourages them to believe it can't happen to them - until, that is, it does.
On the broader social level there is an optimistic tendency to believe in grand narratives of overcoming. Good inevitably triumphs and the righteous prevail.

In their day-to-day lives, people are obliged to act happy-busy-good, and to do otherwise is to be labelled a malcontent.
Optimism is a positive trait in many ways. It can help us see the best in others and to strive to achieve great things, even in the face of adversity.

But it is also something that can enable enormous harm when it functions as a mechanism of denial.
To say optimism as it relates to the pandemic is cruel is not a call for pessimism, but rather for a hard-nosed realism. It is a call for a clear recognition of the enormous harm being done, followed by reasonable and readily available measures to stop unchecked mass infection.
As it relates to the current stage of the pandemic, optimism is getting in the way of many people recognizing the harm to themselves, their loved ones, and their communities.

And it is getting in the way of doing anything to stop those harms.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jon Parsons

Jon Parsons Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jwpnfld

Jun 14
The failed response to the COVID-19 pandemic is caused in part by a lack of social solidarity, a concept that is almost inconceivable to many in our society.

Here is a social solidarity thought experiment: Why would anyone wear a mask when driving in a car alone?
Thinking back to earlier stages of the pandemic when masking was actually a widespread practice, it was not uncommon to see a person alone in a car, wearing a mask.

It became a subject of speculation, and there are thousands of hits online referring to this.
Read 11 tweets
Jun 11
The failure to adequately respond to the COVID-19 pandemic is in large part caused by a lack of social solidarity.

Those who have never experienced social solidarity are ill-equipped to enact it, and since our society discourages social solidarity, we are set up to fail.
At the outset of the pandemic, there was at first a great flourishing of social solidarity. Communities came together to form mutual aid networks. People figured out ways to support one another. They were literally singing from the rooftops, cheering for frontline workers.
But social solidarity quickly faded. Within weeks it became apparent that we did not have the tools necessary for collective action.

That is not exactly the fault of regular people. The past 40-odd years have seen a purposeful disruption of social solidarity.
Read 9 tweets
May 30
The failed response to the COVID-19 pandemic is best understood as an ethical failure, not a scientific or technical one.

It is rooted in the abdication of responsibility on the part of those in authority, but of everyday people as well. It is a failure of common decency.
On the one hand, leaders gave up on the duty of care they owe the public. Some leaders capitulated to economic interests. Some to political pressure. Some to simple weakness and expediency.

In the worst cases, they actively undermined basic notions of moral responsibility.
But on the other hand, it is an ethical failure that implicates everyday people, too.

Everyone is responsible for the predictable consequences of their actions. It is no excuse that the government said it was okay or to be ignorant of the harms when it is easy to be informed.
Read 9 tweets
May 28
The failed pandemic response is not about bad people doing bad things. If there was a nefarious group acting to harm our communities it would be easier to do something about it.

The pandemic failure is banal, perpetrated mostly by people who see themselves as essentially good.
That is not to say no one is responsible. Some people have done great damage, and everyone is responsible for the predictable consequences of their actions.

But many of those who have done the most harm truly believe they are acting with the best interests of the public in mind.
It is also not about some flaw of human nature and things do not have to be this way. People are perfectly capable of acting for collective well-being and rising to the challenges posed by the pandemic.

In many countries, people are doing so to good effect.
Read 7 tweets
May 26
The best predictor of future behaviour is past behaviour, and so the failure to adequately respond to the COVID-19 pandemic foreshadows an inability to deal with other significant issues.
It could be other infectious diseases, worsening consequences of ecological collapse and climate change, issues of social and political injustice, and any ongoing COVID-related concerns.

Realistically, none of this can be addressed or even correctly understood at present.
It is shocking to see precisely the same failures repeated and to see that nothing has been learned.

But when nothing changes, nothing changes.

And before anything can change, there needs to be an acknowledgement that what has happened is a failure.
Read 6 tweets
May 24
The absurdity of the "learning to live with it" phase of the pandemic is not just the denial of the reality of the situation, but that denial hinges on the pretense that everyone is "happy-busy-good."
They must be happy about being back to in-person work, school, and public life.

They must be busy with events, holidays, and socializing of all kinds.

They must be good with how things are going and with the removal of public health measures.
It is not enough to have ongoing mass infection, but people must joyfully embrace this "new normal."

Happy-busy-good is signalled through the things people say (i.e. "you have to live your life") and through the way people act (i.e. without "restrictions").
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(