“We’ve got to be judged by how we do in times of crisis” –  Johnnie Cochran

Coronavirus pandemic has turned the world upside down. It is causing widespread concern, fear and has had a deep impact on the way we perceive our world -in short it has trapped every spectrum of our lives. But history as documented or experienced tells us that ,crisis situation like this brings out the best and the worst in people .This article emphasis on different facets of humanity in these times of hardships and what should be the vision after conquering it .

Humanity in the gloom of corona

The virus has brought our lives to standstill. Empty roads, masked civilians ,sanitizers have become part of our lives .Time may be smiling to itself ,everything is uncertain ,nothing can be  planned – our lives is just revolving around the question of survival .All these happenings are a mirror to homosapiens .There is need to examine ourselves and ask where we were moving .All the day just busy in our works ,giving too less emphasis on our personal relationships -the foremost reason of increase in cases of domestic violence amidst lockdown ,dividing the society on the basis of cultural hierarchies ,political ideologies ,economic immunities ,considering ourselves as the master of universe and treating nature as our private property ,all this has filled our world with hatred ,lies,isolation,crime and greed .In this wake of capitalism and consumerism humankind, compassion has lost its place somewhere .This virus has made us realize that petty divides doesn’t matter at all. The choices which we will make in these times will not only contribute to our economy and political system but also to the state of humanity.

Scenario of humanity and the way ahead

These days has not only appreciated the need of progress in science and technology but there is also a need of progress in humankind and we have to accept that the  law of nature is paramount. The public perception towards police personnel and doctors has improved drastically ,they are working tirelessly just to save our world despite knowing the consequences .Some Ngos and organizations are trying their best to feed stray animals ,helping economically downtrodden people in maintaining their livelihood .We shod be grateful to the every individual who is  working in these tough times be it a vegetable vendor or a ration shopkeeper or the medical staff members , they are providing services so  that we can stay safe .But when we look at the flip side it shakes the abstraction of humanity ,compassion and fraternity .Some people are not getting themselves treated so that they can spread the disease among the doctors whereas some staffers are taking the advantage of the scenario, molesting women patients and in this wake of “cool capitalism” the situation of migrant labourers are getting worse day by day which clearly displays the economic divide in our country ,the instances of xenophobia ,racism, discrimation ,communal hatred has seen an escalation .Are all these, the signs of a mature society what kind of socialization is this ? but as it is said that hate the evil not the evil doer and to get rid of these evils there is a need to comprehend society from different lenses and then reaching out to the mutual solutions.

With the flashes of hope, positivity and with the efforts of our covid-19 warriors  one day we will definitely conquer covid-19but post Covid -19  we need to assure that this world is of human beings ,fractions should have no place in this world ,humanity must spread to every country ,every city ,every street .The infrastructure ,strong economy ,systematic political system cannot give safety and justice to all .Everything has a reason attached to it, may be it’s a nature attempt to create harmony and balance in this world .Now post Covid -19 ,it will all depend on our rational thinking ,understanding ,the way we transform and interact with the world .To annihilate our inner viruses is the prerequisite for a better world .there must be a belief that one day our hands will get locked ,hearts will be united and before believing on anything we must restore our full faith on humanity. Thus, humans can be locked down but humanity can never ever be.

Authors: Sajad Abedi and Mohammad Amin Zabihi

Up to this point, 1,765,500 cases, 108,000 deaths; and still no peaks and no promising solution. The situation is significantly disastrous in almost every corner of the planet and the best hope to develop a vaccine is one year ahead. Many epidemiologists believe that the world is facing a situation similar to Spanish Flu, which appeared in January 1918 and lasted for almost two years.

But after almost exactly one century, we are living in a very different world; a globalized, extensively interconnected world in which, you may leave London and land in New York in less than 9 hours. A viral disease like Corona with a possibly two-week latent period should be considered as a real threat to the wellbeing of whole world.

Nevertheless, in such circumstances we are dealing with, states have limited options in this regard. First, to quarantine the predisposed regions, or the whole country under strict regulations. Second, to regulate a social distancing protocol in order to prevent the spread of the disease – in this scenario, the whole system will continue its routine duties. China adopted the first approach in Wuhan in order to prevent the pandemic and recently has claimed that it could successfully contain the disease. Considering the socio-economic structure of the latter, the setting was relatively compatible with such approach; but it doesn’t seem to be the case for the rest of the world. Italy, also, decided to quarantine the country, but US – let’s say, as the world’s (capitalist) economic leader – is placing a huge bet on the second scenario – the latter has considered a $2 Trillion Coronavirus Relief Package, however. 

Given the nature of the Coronavirus – the long latent period – and also the fact that some states didn’t take the threat serious enough at first, many states have faced a very unpleasant dilemma at this point: whether to strictly quarantine the whole country and to stop a significant part of their economy, or to adopt a social distancing protocol and continue their semi-normal routines and not stopping their economy.

What are the implications of each? From the hygienic point of view, states should adopt the first approach in order to save people’s lives as much as possible, which seems to be the moral and right decision. But on the other hand, any country who is playing this scenario, is actually walking on a very dangerous path which may lead to the bankruptcy of the whole country. Considering the fact that this contagious disease has resulted from a virus, it will not be wiped out simply by using some drugs or antibiotics (because it’s a virus and not a bacteria); it means that as long as there is no vaccine (or at least a reliable, proven medicine), there will be more cases each year, just like a common flu. Should we close the whole country, we will not be able to end it, rather we will just postpone another pandemic for some time; at the same time, we are causing a gargantuan economic loss, the system may not bear for a long time. Some specialists believe that, having not developed a vaccine, next autumn and subsequently winter, the whole world will face another wave of the spread of this virus. And should we not quarantine, a considerable part of the population will be infected, but the economy will most probably survive the challenge.

There are other aspects should be considered as well. For instance, having the whole population stayed at home, people will not be able to pay their rents and instalments (let alone their first needs) which subsequently will bankrupt the banks and government and finally create a financial crisis like 2008 in US – in this situation all the interconnected gears of the economy will be crushed. Thus, it will be a lose-lose situation for everyone.

On the other hand, by adopting the second solution, up to 70% percent of the population will probably get infected and a considerable number – especially those with background diseases –will perish. Although, the system will probably replace these vacancies with fresh work forces and most likely the economy will survive.

Should we speak about the unsaid or should we not, it’s completely obvious that every government will consider all the parameters involved in such scenarios. Therefore, it’s clear that they weigh the costs-benefits in every option. It’s not moral, nor immoral for any state to consider these details; for example, having played the second scenario, the vulnerable population which probably have already some background issues – who also pose significant expenses at insurance companies and the government itself – will be replaced with fresh (and mostly young) work forces; the government will not pay salaries and benefits to unemployed; it will save a huge amount of resources; it will prevent most of future chaos; and etc.

These are the very basic facts and also implications of these two options before the states. There is no right or wrong decision in this situation and everything is placed on a very thin edge. Remember that SARS have started in 2008 and still there is no vaccine developed for it.

Bangkok – The global pandamic of COVID 19 has hit the world in a way nobody has foreseen, let alone prepared to respond. It shakes the core of humanity – no matter how far we have progressed scientifically, we are a speck of dust in the universe trying to understand nature and be a part of it rather than “own it”.

The lock down disrupts everyone’s lives and also destroys many lives. Six weeks on, at least 30 million of American are registered unemployed. That happens in the world richest country and this is just the figure we know. What about the ones we don’t? what about the rest of us?

Enough has been said in every news outlet of how bad everyone is hit, hard. While most of the world are trying to survive this crisis, many great minds across the globe have put their thought and intellect together of how best we can respond to this pandemic in a way that ensure our survival. Scientists, researchers, business leaders and politicians have given their fare share of two cents on the topic.

The most worrisome unintended consequence of this crisis is the prospect of students’ learning, their trajectory and their growth. When the traditional school is closed and no teachers can deliver in front of the class, education as we know it faces the kind of challenges that never happened since the first mass education was created a couple centuries ago. 

To respond to such calamity, the world has jumped on the global bandwagon of online learning as the perfect panacea to address this. One can argue that this crisis creates the window of opportunity that reinforces the importance of online learning and the potent role technology plays in modern day education.

Rightly so.

Children with smart phones, tablets and laptops can access the world of unlimited knowledge through myriad of websites and applications making available for free and for fee, while they remain at home.

Students of the twenty-first century are required to not just be literate, but digital literate. This crisis proves that without the access to technology and ability to use it, children will be left behind in their learning.

But millions are being left behind as we speak. When we look at the reality of rampant poverty and inequality across the globe, it is evident that access to smart phone and technological gadget is not equal. One can not take for granted that everyone “has gotten one”.

We wish.

This crisis creates the wake up call for governments across the globe to take the issue of digital divide seriously. The question is in Ministries of Education everywhere is how to ensure that every student at least as an equal access to tool that will ensure they have a chance at learning.

Providing a smart phone, a tablet, a computer was what tech optimist thought in the end of 2000s when One Laptop Per Child was launched. With “access” – everything will be fine.

We hope.

But access is only the beginning of learning, not the end of it.

Students with access to technology now do not maximize its use for learning – rather – they are mostly spent for conspicuous consumption and entertainment. Of coursedigital literacy is a byproduct of intensive training, conducive environment and close proximity of mentorship from parents and teachers.

It takes time to master the use of technology. It takes patience.

The global pandemic reminded us of the post-modernist thought on learning. How can we be “students” in the age of uncertainty? When knowledge is not absolute, when everyone makes sense of their own meaning and when new idea is disrupting the status quo on a minute by minute basis.

The book by Professor Ronald Barnett: A Will to Learn provides a solace and straightforward answer to learning. In light of this crisis, the most important thing, perhaps, is not just a click in the smart phone. The most important thing for students of all ages is the vision to “focus” and “the will to learn”.

Learning can happen in every place, at all time. In the locked down, learning can happen when parents and children have a conversation and engage with each other. Learning can happen from the books inside the house – assuming they are. Learning can happen from existing resources around us – from listening to stories of the neighbours in the refugee camps.

The small screen of the smart phone can link us up to the world, but perhaps the lock down is giving us the much needed solitude to learn from within. It is a good time to revise what we have studied, theories we have heard and idea we have learned previously.

Making the dots.

Learning is not about regurgitating what has been said. That is just the entry point. Learning is a constant engagement with idea, repeatedly. Again and again. Through such engagement, can one rise above what was told, said and written to actually – think for themselves.

An independent mind.

Lock down or not, the clock is ticking and only those who notice and adapt to change – can survive.

This is not about being Darwinism.

This is just a matter of fact.

The sooner the students know that they can start learning – with or without the crisis – only then can we wither this change in the age of uncertainty in style.