It has been widely speculated that the world will never be the same again after the Covid-19 pandemic. Perhaps so, but, then again, perhaps not. After all, the political, economic and social system that has matured globally in various forms over the past few centuries, has shown a remarkable ability — like viruses — to adapt, mutate and survive.
Perhaps the future will see the spread of the authoritarian, statist model of China, meaning more of the same, only more rigid. Or it could herald the early dawn of a more democratic and caring social order. What will be lies in the realm of speculation.
But such speculation has arisen because the pandemic has brought to the surface a number of reasons why the present system requires change if we are not to repeat the same cycles all over again. In the first place, it has been more clearly highlighted than ever before, how integrated the world is; how, within hours, let alone days, travellers can reach the furtherest corners of the globe, carrying with them more than they bargained for.
And Covid-19 has shown itself to be no respecter of class, caste or social position, being carried, for the most part, from its apparent source in China, by members of the jet-set and cruising class. Government ministers, diplomats, sports idols and domestic workers have all fallen prey to the disease.
However, it has also been officially estimated that probably 98% of those who contract it will survive; most at risk being the elderly and those with compromised immune systems. But, in the absence of a vaccine, all that can be done is to try to limit the spread of the virus.
At national and international levels, with the exception of the buffoonery in the United States and the attempts at denialism in countries such as Turkey there has been generally sound advice given, centred on hand washing, the use of sanitisers, avoidance of close contact and self isolation. But such advice only makes sense for those individuals with a decent roof over their heads and who are fit, healthy and well nourished. And they are likely to survive even if they fall prey to the disease.
Unfortunately, this is not the lot of the working class in much of the world, including South Africa. Sanitisers, soc9al distancing and self isolation would simply be beyond the capacity of families living cheek by jowl in even scrupulously clean one-room shacks where there is often no regular — or even any — access to clean water and grossly inadequate ablution facilities are shared.
Similar conditions apply in many rural areas where the crippling burdens of poverty and neglect are clearly evident. In many instances, these areas also share the ongoing experience of epidemics, with the classic example in South Africa being tuberculosis (TB).
Every year, TB alone kills more than 20 000 mainly poor, South Africans and the disease has been rampant for decades. If the number of deaths of people with both TB and HIV (they are recorded as HIV deaths) are added, the mortality figure is probably close to 60 000.
Yet this bacterial and air borne infection is both treatable and curable. But there are inadequate facilities and the conditions in which the poorest of the working class poor live, ensure that the epidemic continues, with some 350 000 new cases reported in the past year.
Among the new cases recorded are a number of reinfections, mainly people who, because of their circumstances, were unable to complete treatment regimes. This is one of the causes for the evolution and prevalence of multi-drug resistant (MDR) TB and the extreme (XDR) form of this disease.
Ideally, individuals infected with XDR TB should be isolated to limit the spread of this most dangerous form of TB. But there are not enough facilities; not enough beds, so XDR patients, while being treated, continue to live in their communities and to use — even drive — taxis.
Unlike Covid-19 where no vaccine yet exists, TB could have been all but eradicated given a more just society that valued equally all human life. Perhaps the one good thing to come out of present pandemic — apart from the development of a vaccine — will be a willingness to eradicate the conditions that needlessly kill millions of working people the world over.
Posted in: Inside Labour Column
Cape Town, South Africa-based journalist commentator and author specialising in political and economic analysis and labour matters. 
sylviahammond4gmailcom
March 22, 2020
As a child I recall the saying: “if ifs and ands were pots and pans, there would be no need for tinkers”. Anyway, here are some “ifs” – after COVID-19.
If we could work out how to re-order the world – rather than reinstate everything that was there before.
If all the measures that are taken in emergency situations – soap donations etc. could be the standard.
If the majority lived in circumstances where they do not need donations.
If those who do have, could understand that it is in their interests that no-one lives in the desperate poverty, without basic services of water and sanitation that so many do.
Terry Bell
April 5, 2020
What can I say, Sylvia? Apart from: I agree. And why should we not have such a world since there are clearly enough resources to provide for it? Perhaps what we need is for the majority to finally have a real say? For true democracy to flourish? How to get there is the challenge. But an example of the goal certainly seems to exist in the SA Bill of Rights.
sylviahammond4gmailcom
April 5, 2020
The Bill of Rights is interesting – just as people are starting to query their right to privacy & maybe accessing the Constitution for the first time. That can be the key to moving forward with education on the rights, & pursuing for implementation. Housing being one place to start.
Di Oliver
March 22, 2020
Hi Terry
You make very valid points about the appalling conditions in which so many South Africans live, thank you. I would like to convey, however, that in my limited experience since being retired, I have come across very remarkable examples of hospital care for those with TB and excellent follow up mechanisms for those who fail to sustain their commitment to completing their course of treatment. Sadly, excessive drinking and alcoholism are the root cause of much irresponsible behavior giving rise to sexual indiscretion, the transfer of HIV infection and the continued prevalence of TB. The government’s decision to decide on the ban of liquor sales after 18.00 in bars, tavern,s shebeens and restaurants makes sense when it comes to irresponsible behaviour giving rise to the potential transfer of the Covid-19 virus.
I cannot speak for follow-up medical intervention in our rural areas at large, but am aware of careful follow-up research in Boland ‘townships’ like Zwelethemba, Worcester.
Terry Bell
April 5, 2020
Thank you Di. And I join you in commending those — especially MSF and their local support — who do such sterling work on the TB front. But there is a root cause to many of the behaviours you list (the root to the root, if you will). Banning the sale of liquor after 18:00 hours or — as is now the case — completely, is no answer. Look not only to the USA and prohibition, but also to New Zealand which, certainly before the 1970s had 6 o’clock closing for pubs. This led to what became known as the “6 o’clock swill” and to the fact the NZ pubs installed pressure hoses to deliver beer into jugs in very short order. It seemed to create a binge drinking culture that continued in later, longer opening hours, years with the “10 o’clock swill”. This is a complex matter that involves not only alcohol and nicotine (cigarettes etc), but also other drugs and how we should best deal with them.
Enis the Penis
March 26, 2020
The problem is that “they” breed more than they can feed, and then they turn to the hated
West with the begging bowl outstretched….Personally, I think that Covis is a fantastic idea, ridding the world of the aged and other non-productive parasites.
There never was – or will be – a “just” or “equal” society. The Russain’s tried it, and where did they end up???
Maybe you could ask the World Council of Churches to intercede with JC to stop this shit…..
Terry Bell
April 5, 2020
Another of those pseudonymous bigots that we should flush out to let them reveal the paucity of their arguments and the nastiness of their views. Also, the sheer lack of imagination in their pseudonyms. This was is (to use an Emnglish exxpresion) trule a dick.
sylviahammond4gmailcom
April 5, 2020
Lacking not only the moral courage to speak in their own name, but also the insight to realise the inconsistency between the foundational values of the quoted religious order & their behaviour.