Toilet paper

Much of the mainstream commentary on Coronavirus has focussed on its global economic impact, and this seems reasonable enough at first sight. GDP forecasts have been downgraded, share prices are down and governments have been scrambling to both reassure their publics whilst at the same time finding themselves sowing the seeds of panic (which is a narrative about trust in government these days). The whole issue has been framed, in other words, in classic fatalistic capitalist terms, which is to say we must protect the model, now extended globally, which through its in-built strength will learn how to extract value added (i.e. profit) from this epidemic of fear and return us to normality. As with the so-called credit crunch, it’s a case of ‘bear with us’ rather than ‘change the system.’ For this system, like water, knows how to find the natural level of profit and thus our future success in all that we do.
 
Let’s be a little more imaginative and suggest that Coronavirus is nature’s way of saying ‘we’re having a general strike.’ For what is happening is not dissimilar to a general strike. On an increasingly massive scale, labour has been withdrawn. It is not those temporarily untapped natural resources left underground that bothers the international finance markets (I’m sure such hiccups can be corrected with futures trading), it is the withdrawal of labour, and indeed the interruption of spending power of workers that is upsetting the global economy. It is the potential for worker rebellion in the aftermath of this virus that will be worrying the capitalist ruling classes of China and elsewhere. Periods of economic upheaval always sow the seeds of dissent.
 
Perhaps then we should welcome the overwhelming media hype being given to this latest global reminder of our vulnerabilities as a species. The more we are fed a 24/7 diet of impending doom, the more people might be encouraged to ask what were the critical steps that led us to this particular calamity and how often might it be repeated? Or is that wishful thinking? Err, well it is wishful thinking. Individuals have, by and large capitulated to the powers that control their lives, and don’t/won’t grasp the power of their collective strength. Hence the decline in trade union membership. Hence the impotent fretting over whether my individual actions might make any difference. There are of course counter examples where collective action is being taken. But such altruism, whilst commendable is no match, e.g. to your desire to being well stocked up on toilet paper. It is my rather depressing view that societal collapse is only two or three notches down the scale of what we may call ‘trust in the system’ which is to say not very much. But on the more hopeful front, such collapses can eventually lead to positive outcomes, after the pain barrier has been conquered. I cite the election of a Labour government in 1945 as evidence of that. The trouble with today’s challenges is that they are more incipient and stem from our own behaviour, not an outside ‘other.’ The transition to an effective response is thus far harder to achieve.  None of which is very helpful to our next Clem Attlee, whoever she or he may be.