The coronavirus pandemic: Danger, risk or threat?

Abstract

ABSTRACT The coronavirus pandemic has sparked a heated debate both in political and academic terms. A dialectic has been revealed between the Left and Right. Progressive governments resort to containment measures which are an expression of a ‘collectivist’ position, while conservative governments adopt policies of tolerance which are an expression of an ‘individualist’ laissez faire orientation. Another dialectic is reflected in a disciplinary difference between the inductive approach of sociologists and the deductive approach of philosophers like Giorgio Agamben. Sociology views the harms provoked by the coronavirus as a matter of fact, without, however, excluding the social construction of the pandemic. It is misleading on the part of governments to present the containment of the disease as a ‘war’ and the virus as an ‘enemy’. The confusion between real threats, (originating in malicious intentionality), and dangers, (unintentional phenomena of natural origin), is being exploited. This is even more true concerning the confusion between threats and risks, i.e. possible harms (as well as possible benefits) coming from ‘our’ decisions. It must be recognised that the pandemic is a danger as regards its origin, but its development is magnified by other processes, such as environmental degradation. It means shifting responsibility from an external agent to the responsibility of an internal decision-maker. This should inspire policies no longer focused on an exaggerated concern with external threats, but aimed at redirecting material and intangible resources towards structural and situational prevention of dangers.