Now that we are in a lockdown again and emotions are sometimes running high, there is not only fear of the virus, but also fear of the disintegration of society.
Six months ago, we looked ahead with our corona think tank, because the end of the third wave was in sight. Now that we have reached a fourth wave, we are not only dealing with high patient numbers and lockdown measures again, but also with an even stronger polarization in society. And now that politicians are reflecting on a 2G policy (the proposal has been postponed to next year for the time being), the vaccinated and unvaccinated are increasingly confronting each other. We therefore asked members of our corona think tank the following question:How do we keep society together?
Marc Slors, cognitive philosopher
“Basic trust in each other is a minimum requirement to keep a society together. We don't have to agree on everything for that. Differences of opinion — for example about the need for corona measures or vaccination — do not have to undermine a society if there are enough things about which we do not question each other. For example, sharing trivial matters such as daily routines, customs, conventions and manners can contribute to a certain predictability of the other. That predictability can curb feelings of fundamental mistrust. That is why it is essential that we continue to see each other in person. Also because we keep encountering enough people with whom we do not necessarily agree. Live contact prevents the other from becoming anonymous. That's crucial. Because we can see how much anonymity promotes distrust and aggression on the highway.”
Rina Knoeff, medical historian
“I see three big problems that are difficult to solve. The unrest and polarization are indeed worrying, perhaps even worse than the virus itself. The first problem is that solidarity has become an eroded concept. It usually concerns solidarity with care, but this has insufficient meaning to make a difference. It should be much more about solidarity with the neighbor, and with the community of which you are a part. Historical (and also recent) research shows that close-knit local communities can best deal with illness, setbacks, care and grief. We must therefore invest 'bottom-up' in local initiatives, activities for young people and the neighborhood mediator. A second problem is that the government has lost its moral authority, as a result of which it can no longer enforce rules of conduct. Because why would citizens trust a government that demonstrably fails to fulfill its promises and makes pieces disappear if it is convenient?”
“Finally, too often people are threatened with 'code black', without actually thinking about the meaning of 'code black' and the difficult choices that underlie it. This is about moral questions that concern us all. Humanities scholars (philosophers, ethicists, historians) should therefore be invited to the table in talk shows much more often. They are best placed to explain the moral dilemmas and initiate a necessary discussion.”
Marie Rosenkrantz Lindegaard, anthropologist
“I see this question as a form of moral panic with the assumption that society is falling apart, which I don't think it is. Our video-observation study into compliance with corona measures has shown that most citizens comply with the measures properly. Even when you look at the vaccination rate, it is extremely high and comparable to the vaccination rate in Denmark, where interestingly enough people talk about unity, solidarity and 'world vaccine champion'."
“The group of citizens who are unwilling or unable to comply with the measures is relatively small and does not actually say much about society as a whole. If you look closely, you can see unity and the commitment of citizens to defy the pandemic. This is also apparent from our research into the so-called COVID-19-related riots of the past year. What struck us most in the videos we studied was how active citizens were in preventing these riots. Several people were present on the street to reduce the tension and to show understanding for the prevailing frustration. By highlighting what they had in common with the rioters, they were able to prevent the riots.”
“My answer to the question 'how do we keep society together?' is therefore:we must emphasize unity, connectedness and our common identity as 'vaccine world champion'. That image is more in line with empirical reality.”
Kenny Meesters, disaster management specialist
“It is a well-known phenomenon that as we 'progress' in a crisis, our interests diverge. In the first phase after a disaster there is solidarity, a shared suffering and a clear goal. We applauded en masse for care then. As a crisis progresses, interests begin to clash. The pressure in healthcare, events, education, social contact:these are all things that now have to be weighed up against each other. Choosing one has negative consequences for the other. Even 'after' the crisis there are still questions about who gets what support, whether we go back to the old system or change things structurally, and of course an analysis of the decisions that have been taken (question of guilt).
This is always difficult. But you can cultivate understanding by clarifying which dilemmas there are. Information therefore plays an important role. Not only making information available, but above all making it accessible. Information must therefore be presented in such a way that people recognize it and can link it to their own situation. In this way we also make it easier for people to empathize with someone else. What is the impact of corona and the corona measures on a 'typical' local catering operator? What does a 'typical' corona patient experience? And an employee in a nursing home?
Despite what we often see in the media, the world is not black and white. And luckily most people don't think that way. But it is important that we help people to put themselves in the shoes of others. The NOS, for example, once published a voting guide, showing videos of people who chose the opposite. Something like that can help bring back the nuance and mutual understanding."
Reint Jan Renes, behavioral scientist
Under the heading of 'only together we can get corona under control', people stayed at home en masse in the first weeks of the pandemic, kept their distance and washed their hands. Support for the 'intelligent' corona policy of the Dutch government was high before the summer of 2020. People were happy to be able to do something for each other and everyone clapped en masse for care. However, as the crisis lasted longer, the power of working together turned out to be more fragile than expected. Doubts about the government's approach grew. The resistance in society grew. The feeling of 'alone together' eroded with time.”
“For effective change and management of collective behaviour, it is sometimes important to slow down the policy process and to take the time to make real contact with society. Changes are almost always accompanied by people's fear of losing their existing identity and familiar routines, and for this reason they usually meet resistance. With regard to major social issues, thinking in terms of individual senders and receivers (see the press conferences) and information campaigns (#only together) falls short when it is crucial to connect as many people as possible and make them co-owners for the solution. In short, to keep society together, more attention is needed for an undervalued aspect of strategic policy:real contact and real conversations.”
“Connection and broad ownership for policy and measures can only arise when there is an open dialogue and a procedurally fair participatory process in which (very) critical citizens have a fully and equal 'skin in the get a game. This means that citizens and businesses are intensively involved in the policy process. That everyone is given full scope to contribute their perspective on the problem and everyone is given the opportunity to invest their own time and effort to arrive at well-informed solutions in interaction with others. Major social issues such as the corona crisis (but also the climate) require governments, companies and citizens to be prepared to listen to each other and to invest a lot of time in each other. That doesn't happen automatically. You have to organize that. Create encounters, show that you are listening and do something with what you hear.”