V šesté kapitole se Horton vyjadřuje k roli vědy v (západní) společnosti, hodnocení rizik, svobody a surveillance, a obecně společenským otázkám. Cituje i některé filosofické autory (dle mého ne zrovna příli vhodné, totiž kontinentální, levicové jako je Žižek, Foucault či Marcuse ). Z kapitoly uvádím pár postřehů, zčásti ne zcela integrálně propojených:
Pohodlné přenášení zodpovědnosti na jiné u některých západních politiků:
„As the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the U.S. soared past 1 million … with over 64,000 deaths … President Trump was clear about where the blame should be put. On China. The US administration, after decades of confidence-buidling between the two nations, began a programme of systeamtic disengagement with its most important strategic competitor. (s. 99-100; dále Horton popisuje situaci).
Souhlasný citát z knihy Ulricha Becka z r. 1986 Risk Society, dle níž hrozbou není „ignorance“ ale „knowledge“:
„overspecialized division of labor, their concentration on methodology and theory, their externally determined abstinence from practice – the science are entirely incapable of reacting adequately to civilizational risks“ (s. 101, Beck 183)
Horton:
„These words seem strikingly apposite for understanding what went wrong in the Western response to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. The risks we faced, and continue to face, are not only from the new virus. Those risks are also embedded in the system we have created and put in place to review and adjudicate on the threat of pandemic – the régime of science policymaking.“ (s. 101)
„What constitutes knowledge about a risk, the assumptions we make about that risk, which evidence is ruled in and outof scope for consideration, who is invited to the table to discus risks, and what type of science is used to shape advice to politicioans. …UK’s SAGE …. Did not consider research published at the end of January which set out the magnitude of the threat … did not reach out to those with first-hand experience of what was taking place in Chine … did not include espxerts in intensive care medicien and respirátory medicine“ (s. 102)
Pak Horton poukazuje na nerovnou distribuci záteže (větší smrtnost v chudinských čtvrtích)
„WHO moved quickly to declre a PHEIC . Daily press briefings and situation reports kep the world informed about the evolution of the pandemi. But, looking back, I think WHO could and should have done more. For example, why didn’t the organization convene nations at an emergenc COVID-19 summit immediately after it had declared a PHEIC?“ (s. 103)
Dále se Horton kráte zabývá problematikou lepší surveillance nových a „emergentních“ infekčních chorob a imunitních pasů. Uvědomuje si ale rizika, zmiňuje Foucoultovu knihu Discipline and punish.
„How do we reconcile the need for greater surveillance to diminish risks of future pandemic – the biopolitical disciplinary society – with a demand to protect the freedoms we have so come to také for granted? Does greater surveillance sand in opposition to our right to privacy?“ (s. 108)
„I don’t fear greater state intrusion into our lived – the panopticonization of society – provided that we insist that this instrusion is guided by some agreed principles, standards and values“ (s. 109)
Vlády tedy musí mít závazek k tomu, že jejich postupy sledují hodnoty jako:
(1) universality and inalienability – privacy protection must be afforded by everyone, without exception (2) individibility, our rights are interdependent, it is not for the state to determine which rights it will and will not guarantee (3) equalty and non-discriminatory – all human beings are equal in their dignity (4) transparency – governments must be open about information and their decision-making (s. 109)"
Je třeba „vigilant society“:
„Eternal vigilance truly is the price of freedom. We cannot afford to repeat the cycle of cirsis, harm, action, complaceny, neglect and subsequent vulnerability that followd SARS in 2002-3“ (s. 110)
----
Dále Horton mluví o nejistotách, která provázela od počátku mnoho aspektů epidemie a neschopnosti adekvátně se v rámci těchto nejistot rozhodovat. (s. 112) Nezmiňuje dle mého rychlost s níž je třeba toto rozhodování činit.
----
Dále mluví Horton o různých negativních fenoménech provázející karantény (zvýšené domácí násilí), ale i pozitivních (čitší ovzduší). Jak má společnost navigovat mezi těmito ztrátami a zisky?
Jednou možností je Slavoj Žižek, dle Hortona „first serious respons to Covid-19’s implications“.
„He suggests that … the responses of governments have made us all communists now … [not] in the Soviet sense. He means communist as an expression of ‚new forms of local and global solidairty‘, ‚abandoning market mechanisms‘ to solve social problems, and avoiding a ‚new barbarism‘. (s. 113)
Ulrich Beck pak zdůrazňuje potřebu rozvinou „vigorous culture of self-criticism“ v rámci jednotlivých disciplín (s. 113) ale i o otázka „what kinds of people we want to be, about the kind of society we wish to inhabit, and what we owe to one another“ (s. 114)
Horton zmiňuje častý pokus o umlčení kritiky apelem, že „hodnocení je předčasné“, např. při pokusech srovnávat (neúspěšný) přístup britský s (úspěšnějšími) přístupy jiných zemí. Např. slovy jednoho profesora veřejného zdraví, kterého universita vybídla k mlčení: „I just don’t understand why academic can’t speak freely. Freedom of speech? So many senior people sitting quiet. While thousands die.“ (s. 115)
Jakkoli je optimismus zdrojem pozitivní silou, má své problémy:
„can also blind us, imbue with a sens of power and overconvidence, and mask real dangers that to to be embradece, understood and addressed with humility and care. Human beings are condemned to suffer form opotimis bias. We tend to oversetimate the likelihood that good things will happen in life. … An appeal for greater pessimis in our dealings with the worl may not feel like an inspiring call to arms to avert the next pandemic . But if the scientist and politicsians who gave advice and took decision on our behaflt had adopted a little more pessimis in theri preditions and policies, the deaths of hundersd of thousands of their fellow citizens around the world would have been avoided. … We can protect and, indeed, intensity our hope through a perspective that does not mask the works that can happen to us.“ (s. 117)
(Závěrem Horton cituje krypticky Herberta Marcuse, s. 117)
Žádné komentáře:
Okomentovat