Economic and ecological rationalities: uses and abuses of the political exceptionality in the COVID-19 pandemic
Abstract
Introduction. This article discusses some anthropological and sociological slight reflections about the uses and the abuses of the political exceptionality in the Covid-19 pandemic. The relevance is connected with questions about the "New Norm", permeated with the daily destructiveness of antisocial metabolic practices of an even more predatory capitalism, whose social control cannot regulate violent neoliberal extraction in a mode of accumulation.
Aim and tasks. The purpose of the article is to study the gradual resumption of interrupted social activities as a policy measure to combat the New Coronavirus Pandemic is placed from the perspective of its economic and ecologic rationalities as well as from the perspective of the new moral, emotional, cognitive, and behavioral demands directed to the common social actor and agent of big and small cities.
Results. The article substantiates the context of the so-called "new norm", permeated by the daily destructiveness of antisocial metabolic practices of even more predatory capitalism in a violent neoliberal form. Therefore, due to this discrepancy between legality and legitimacy, the level of authoritarianism and further growth of inequality and indifference among people increases. In the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, there is a mismatch between legality and legitimacy, as well as the legitimization of the interests of individual actors in the market as opposed to the adoption of legislation and for pro-capital interests. The principles of legitimacy were limited by bureaucratic rationality and the genocidal legalism of neoliberal politics.
Conclusions. The pandemic has disrupted economies, has mainly punished the poorest and most underserved and has destabilized governments of various ideological nuances. Participants at all levels of the economy will suffer the most severe and immediate consequences of all losses. This is the controversial logic of capital and one of its main contradictions is revealed.
Keywords:
Covid-19 pandemic, economic rationalities, ecological rationalities.References
2. Antunes, R. (2020). Coronavírus: o trabalho sob fogo cruzado. São Paulo: Boitempo.
3. Arendt, H. (2016). Entre o passado e o futuro. São Paulo: Perspectiva.
4. Barbosa, R. B. (2019). Emoções, Lugares e Memórias: um estudo sobre as apropriações morais da Chacina do Rangel. Mossoró: Edições UERN.
5. Castel, R. (1998). As metamorfoses da questão social. Petrópolis: Vozes.
6. Damatta, R. (1986). O que faz o Brasil, Brasil? Rio de Janeiro: Rocco.
7. Damatta, R. (1997). A casa e a Rua: espaço, cidadania, mulher e a morte no Brasil. Rio de Janeiro: Rocco.
8. Davis, M. (2020). A crise do coronavírus é um monstro alimentado pelo capitalismo. In: Davis, M. et al. Coronavírus e a luta de classes. Brasil: Terra sem Amos.
9. Durkheim, É. (1995). As regras do método sociológico. São Paulo: Martins fontes.
10. Durkheim, É. (1996). As formas elementares da vida religiosa. São Paulo: Martins Fontes.
11. Giddens, A. (2002). Modernidade e identidade. Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar Editora.
12. Giddens, A. (2013). Goffman: um teórico social sistemático. In: Coelho, M. C. (Org. e tradução). Estudos sobre interação: textos escolhidos. Rio de Janeiro: EdUERJ.
13. Harvey, D. (2020). Política anticapitalista em tempos de COVID-19. In: Davis, M. et al. Coronavírus e a luta de classes. Brasil: Terra sem Amos.
14. Honneth, A. (2018). Reificação: um estudo de teoria do reconhecimento. Tradução de Rúrion Melo. São Paulo: Editora Unesp.
15. Merton, R. K. (1936). The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action. American Sociological Review, 1(3), 894-904.
16. Mills, C. W. (1965). A Imaginação Sociológica. Rio de Janeiro, Zahar.
17. Santos, B. S. (2020). A Cruel Pedagogia do Vírus. Coimbra: Almedina.
18. Standing, G. (2014). O precariado: a nova classe perigosa. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica.
19. Thomas, W. I. (1923). The unadjusted girl: with cases and standpoint for behavior analyses. Boston: Litlle, Brown and Company.
20. Thomas, W. I.; Thomas, D. S. (1928). The child in America: Behavior, problems and programs. New York: Knopf.
21. Velho, G. (1987). Projeto, emoção e orientação em sociedades complexas. In: Velho, G. Individualismo e Cultura, 2ª. Ed, Rio de Janeiro: Jorge Zahar.
22. Žižek, S, (2020). Um golpe como o de “Kill Bill” no capitalismo. In: Davis, M. et al. Coronavírus e a luta de classes. Brasil: Terra sem Amos.
If the article is accepted for publication in the journal «Economics. Ecology. Socium» the author must sign an agreementon transfer of copyright. The agreement is sent to the postal (original) or e-mail address (scanned copy) of the journal editions.
