After reading the weekly news, a question I think many of us have asked ourselves during these past weeks has come to mind once again. When do you think the world will go back to normal with all this agitated policymaking that hasn’t prioritized the most important matters at hand globally?
We have been horribly wrong at predicting social and political behaviour in 2020. Just like we never thought Donald Trump would beat Hillary Clinton in 2016, we never thought that the world would react the way it did over these past four months. As such, we may not be the best people to ask to make predictions about the future. Then again, past failure has never stopped us before, so we’ll give it a shot anyway! In the end, nobody remembers when we were wrong but only when we are right for once.
Let’s start with two premises that seem obvious, at least to us:
- The world will not return to normality any time soon, at least not in a 2019-kind-of way. All the political talk of a “new normal” (which really sounds like an Orwellian parody) is laying the foundation for semi-permanent changes to our societies.
- The main challenges our world faces remain unchanged: environmental decay and exploding income inequality, with every year more relative resources in the hands of very few.
Beyond these two major existential threats, there is of course a host of other significant challenges: continued local violence and protests, the future of transnational organisations, Brexit and the EU, the US vs China, regional tensions, etc. Domestically, states will increasingly redefine their purpose. Their political systems are fragile, torn between failing neoliberalism and destructive populism.
The question is what the impact will be of Covid19 and the “new normal” (read 1984, people!) on our ability to deal with these issues. It’s not just a matter of “when”, but also of “how”. Over the course of these next few months, the hysteria is likely to make way for sobering realisations about the damage we’ve done. A crippled world economy, overspending with less tax income and millions more in poverty. Much like a drunken man waking up the following morning to notice he has wrecked his own house in delirious rage, the world will start seeing the trouble we’re actually in.
The main variables to look at are (1) political realities, (2) international context, and (3) economics/finance. Zeitgeist goes into political realities but, frankly, the perspectives of people in 2020 do not display particularly powerful policy impact.
Scenario 1: domestic leaders push for radical change based on the Corona events. These could include UBI, anti-globalization policies and permanent anti-pandemic measures such as limiting large social events.
Scenario 2: domestic leaders slowly get back to usual priorities but without reversing major policies taken in 2020. In other words, return to business as usual without deeper reflection on recent events and mistakes.
Scenario 3: domestic leaders slowly start reflecting on events and decisions taken, possibly spurred on by an increasingly critical media and population at large. They recognise mistakes and reverse policy and actions taken during the hysteria.
Note that S1 and, say, S3 are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The difference is, however, that in practical terms it will be difficult to do both at the same time. For S1, the legitimization must be that hysteria was valid and the post-Covid world is rightly a different place. S3 is based on the idea that the ideal 2022 is very similar to 2019.
Which is likely to happen? Our money is on S2 with some S1 symbolism thrown in. Perhaps some emphasis on protecting the domestic food and medication industry, etc.
The original question was “when will we go back to normal and prioritise the most important matters at hand globally”. To the extent that the most important things are ever prioritised, this return to reasonable policy making will be severely hampered by the damage done. Most importantly, the economic consequences of our current actions will not make governments particularly open to caring about long-term challenges. They will be looking at the horrified faces of their accountants and then start talking about austerity measures and “tightening our belts”.
Right now this may be difficult to imagine, with politicians currently falling over themselves to dole out money left and right and the media acting as if there are no problems with any of that. But there is no serious economist in the world who believes that current patterns are sustainable. Keynesian spending is fine, and often necessary. This is especially the case in times of economic downturn. The problem is that we’re only at the beginning, with medium and long-term consequences only slowly becoming apparent. Financial flexibility- especially at a political level- will soon end.
What does this mean? No money for ambitious plans such as the UBI. No money for green investments. No money to support the economically vulnerable. No money for large infrastructural projects. In other words, no money for the issues that genuinely matter aka the most important matters at hand.
Meanwhile, international politics will have taken a significant blow. One of the main observations of the current crisis is how little international cooperation there is. Transnational organisations are being torn apart by their individual members, supposed allies are throwing each other under the bus in order to get vaccine patents, Corona tests, and mouth masks. These issues will sour long-term diplomatic efforts to look for more universal solutions.
When will we get back to normal? Possibly never. When will governments start prioritising those issues that truly matter? In a few years time, if they get their finances in order and international antagonism calms down. Meanwhile- and even though the environment will have benefited from the economic downturn- our long term capacity to avoid disaster through investment in economic fairness and environmentally sustainable capitalism will have shrunk quite significantly.
