Finding joy in 2020? It’s not such an absurd idea, really
Amid such suffering, people need some joy.
19 October, 2020
Dan Kitwood/Getty Images
The year 2020 hasn't been one to remember – in fact, for a lot of people it has been an outright nightmare. The pandemic, along with political turmoil and social unrest, has brought anxiety, heartbreak, righteous anger and discord to many.
<p>Amid such suffering, people need some joy.</p><p>As a <a href="https://www.baylor.edu/truett/index.php?id=927922" target="_blank">scholar who has investigated the role of joy</a> in day-to-day life, I believe that joy is an incredibly powerful companion during suffering.</p><h2>Speaking at funerals, teaching joy</h2><p>This is more than academic work for me. In late 2016, less than a year after I was hired to be on a team researching joy at Yale University, three of my family members unexpectedly died within four weeks: my cousin's husband Dustin at 30 by suicide, my sister's son Mason at 22 of sudden cardiac arrest, and my dad, David, at 70 after years of opioid use.</p><p>While researching joy, I was speaking at funerals. At times, even reading about joy felt so absurd that I almost vowed to be anything but joyful.</p><p>In 2020, many people can relate to this.</p><p>I want to be clear: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2019.1690669" target="_blank">Joy is not the same as happiness</a>. Happiness tends to be the pleasurable <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2019.1685571" target="_blank">feeling we get from having the sense that life is going well</a>.</p><p>Joy, on the other hand, has a mysterious capacity to be felt alongside sorrow and even – sometimes, most especially – in the midst of suffering. This is because joy is what we feel deep in our bones when we realize and feel connected to others – and to what is genuinely good, beautiful and meaningful – which is possible even in pain. Whereas happiness is generally the effect of evaluating our circumstances and being satisfied with our lives, joy does not depend on good circumstances. </p>
<h2>An illumination</h2><p>A couple of days after my cousin's husband died, a small group of family members and I were shopping for funeral items when the group decided to go to the place where Dustin had died by suicide. It was getting dark and the sun had almost set. As we were taking in the landscape we suddenly noticed a star above the trees. Standing next to one another in a line, we looked across the sky and one of us asked whether any other stars could be seen. There were none. We realized that there was just this one exceedingly bright shining star in the sky.</p><p>Gazing at the star, we felt as if Dustin had met us there, that he'd allowed that single star to be seen in the sky so that we would know he was all right. It was not the kind of relief we wanted for him. But for a few minutes we allowed the tragedy of what had occurred in this very space just two days before to hang in the background, and we instead focused on the star. We were filled with a kind of transformative, quiet joy. And we all gave ourselves over to this moment.</p><p>As <a href="https://www.wm.edu/as/english/facultystaff/potkay_a.php" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">scholar Adam Potkay</a> noted in his 2007 book "<a href="https://academic.oup.com/res/article-abstract/59/242/815/1586259?redirectedFrom=fulltext" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Story of Joy</a>," "joy is an illumination," the ability to see beyond to something more.</p><p>Similarly, <a href="https://education.asu.edu/inside-the-academy-of-education/honorees/nel-noddings" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Nel Noddings</a>, Stanford professor and author of the 2013 book "<a href="https://www.ucpress.edu/book/9780520275706/caring" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Caring</a>," describes joy as a feeling that "accompanies a realization of our relatedness." What Noddings meant by relatedness was the special feeling we get from caring about other people or ideas.</p><p>Joy is also the feeling that can arise from sensing kinship with others, experiencing harmony between what we are doing and our values, or seeing the significance in an action, a place, a conversation or even an inanimate object.</p><p>When I teach about joy, I use an example from my family to explain this. When my sister looks at a Mason jar now – whether in someone's hand filled with tea or bursting with flowers on a friend's coffee table – it reminds her of her son Mason. It is not just an object she is seeing, but a relationship imbued with beauty, goodness and meaning. It gives her a feeling that can be described only as joy.</p><p>We cannot put joy on our to-do lists; it does not work that way. But there are ways we can prepare ourselves for joy. There are "gateways" to joy that help us to become more open to it.</p><p>Gratitude involves bringing to mind the good that is in the world, which makes rejoicing possible. The feeling that follows contemplating nature or art that we find inspiring is often joy, as these are experiences that help people feel connected to something beyond themselves, whether to the natural world or to others' feelings or experiences. Since "hope," as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s04zdvrBz-c" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">theologian Jürgen Moltmann</a> has said, is "the anticipation of joy," writing out our hopes helps us to expect joy.</p>
<h2>Three types of joy</h2><p>In my book, "<a href="https://www.eerdmans.com/Products/7794/the-gravity-of-joy.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">The Gravity of Joy</a>," I identify multiple kinds of joy that can be expressed even in today's troubled times.</p><p>Retrospective joy comes in vividly recalling a previous experience of unspeakable joy. For example, we can imagine in our minds an occasion when we helped someone else, or someone unexpectedly helped us, a time we felt deeply loved … the moment we saw our child for the first time. We can close our eyes and meditate on the memory, even walk through the details with someone else or in a journal and, often, experience that joy again, sometimes even more acutely.</p><p>There is a kind of joy, too, that is redemptive, restorative – resurrection joy. It is the feeling that follows things that are broken getting repaired, things that we thought were dead coming back to life. This kind of joy can be found in apologizing to someone we have hurt, or the feeling that follows recommitting ourselves to sobriety, a marriage or a dream we feel called to.</p><p>Futuristic joy comes from rejoicing that we will again glimpse meaning, beauty or goodness, and seemingly against all odds feel that they are connected to our very life. This type of joy can be found, for example, through singing in a religious service, gathering at a protest demanding change or imagining a hope we have being realized.</p><p>In the midst of a year in which it is not difficult to stumble onto suffering, the good news is that we can also stumble onto joy. There is no imprisoned mind, heartbreaking time or deafening silence that joy cannot break through.</p><p>Joy can always find you.</p><p><a href="https://www.ats.edu/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">George H. Truett Theological Seminary is a member of the Association of Theological Schools.</a><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/145993/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation"></p>The ATS is a funding partner of The Conversation US.<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/angela-gorrell-1154982" target="_blank">Angela Gorrell</a>, Assistant Professor of Practical Theology, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/george-w-truett-theological-seminary-at-baylor-university-4850" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">George W. Truett Theological Seminary at Baylor University</a></em></p><p>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com/" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/finding-joy-in-2020-its-not-such-an-absurd-idea-really-145993" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Ambassadors from 50 nations sign letter supporting LGBTQ rights in Poland
Poland has become an increasingly unwelcoming place for the LGBTQ community. 50 diplomats hope to change that.
30 September, 2020
Credit: Sentemon/Shutterstock
- An open letter, signed by 50 ambassadors and NGO leaders, asked the Polish government to respect LGBT rights.
- The Polish Government responded by denying the implied discrimination exists.
- Poland has been deemed the "worst place to be gay" in the EU in spite of this.
<p> Of all the countries in Europe to have a right-wing, authoritarian turn over the last few years, one would have thought Poland to be one of the least likely candidates.</p><p>After enduring a brutal invasion by Nazi Germany, suffering under the military regime imposed on them, and seeing millions of their countrymen die, Poland experienced fifty years of soviet-style dictatorship which ended only with the revolutions of 1989. Few nations have endured so much in living memory. </p><p>Despite these hard-won lessons, Poland has taken a turn towards authoritarianism over the last few <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/world/europe/poland-hungary-coronavirus.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">years</a>. As with all such turns, an enemy is designated as the implausible source of potential national decline and a threat to a decent way of life. In this case, it is LGBT+ individuals. </p><p>The stigmatization of LGBT+ individuals in Poland has been increasingly vicious, with several provinces, covering nearly a third of the country, having declared themselves "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT-free_zone" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">LGBT Free Zones</a>." While of dubious legality and mostly unenforceable, the declarations seek to limit things such as pride parades by declaring the polity in opposition to "LGBT ideology." Despite the limited legal ramifications of these declarations, life for LGBT people in these zones can be <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-54191344" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">unpleasant</a>. <br> <br> In response to this, more than 50 signatories, consisting primarily of ambassadors to Poland, have endorsed an open letter speaking to the need for all people to be able to enjoy their rights and the duties of governments to protect them. </p>
Strongly worded letters, the weapon of champions.
<p> Organized by the Embassy of the Kingdom of Belgium in Poland, the <a href="https://pl.usembassy.gov/open_letter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">open</a> <a href="https://pl.usembassy.gov/open_letter/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">letter</a> was signed by the Ambassadors of 43 nations representing most of Europe and all of continental North America, as well as several countries from Asia, Africa, and South America. Representatives of various international organizations, including the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, also signed. </p><p>The letter pays tribute to those working for LGBT+ rights in Poland and affirms the dignity found in each person "as expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights." It goes on to remind the reader that "respect for these fundamental rights, which are also enshrined in OSCE commitments and the obligations and standards of the Council of Europe and the European Union as communities of rights and values, obliges governments to protect all citizens from violence and discrimination and to ensure they enjoy equal opportunities."</p><p>It ends with the declaration, "Human rights are universal and everyone, including LGBT+ persons, are entitled to their full enjoyment. This is something that everyone should support."</p><p>The American Ambassador to Poland, Georgette Mosbacher, <a href="https://twitter.com/USAmbPoland/status/1310276250993405954?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1310276250993405954%7Ctwgr%5Eshare_3&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.them.us%2Fstory%2F50-countries-sign-letter-condemning-polands-lgbt-free-zones" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">retweeted</a> the letter and added, "Human Rights are not an ideology - they are universal. 50 Ambassadors and Representatives agree." </p>The Response of the Polish Government
<iframe width="730" height="430" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EBthKt2Of9U" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe><p>The Polish Government was less than pleased with the letter and its implications. <br> <br> The Prime Minister of Poland, Mateusz Morawiecki, rejected the letter and its implications, saying "nobody needs to teach us tolerance, because we are a nation that has learned such tolerance for centuries and we have given many testimonies to the history of such tolerance."<strong></strong></p><p><strong> </strong>This sort of rebuttal is nothing new; just last week, when American Presidential Candidate Joe Biden <a href="https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1307831910089990144" target="_blank">tweeted </a>that "LGBT-free zones' have no place in the European Union or anywhere in the world," the <a href="https://wyborcza.pl/7,173236,26327279,polish-embassy-to-biden-no-lgbt-free-zones-exist-in-poland.html?disableRedirects=true" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Polish Embassy in the United States </a>was quick to say the tweet was based on inaccurate information, to reassure the world that there are no such zones, and to restate their belief there is no place for discrimination in society. <br> </p><p>A quick fact check demonstrates otherwise. Several places in Poland have declared themselves to be "<a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-54191344" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">LGBT free zones,</a>" violence inspired by anti-LGBT+ propaganda has taken <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/27/world/europe/gay-pride-march-poland-violence.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">place</a>, l<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/world/europe/LGBT-free-poland-EU-funds.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">eading government figures</a> have declared homosexuality to be a "threat to Polish identity, to our nation, to its existence and thus to the Polish state," and the President of Poland, Andrzej Duda has declared the LGBT movement to be more dangerous than <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54317902" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Communism</a><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-a-gender-conspiracy-theory-is-spreading-across-the-world-133854" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">. Surveys</a> show nearly a third of Poland's people believe in a grand conspiracy against them involving "<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-gender_movement" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">gender ideology.</a>"</p><p>It is also worth repeating that Poland has been declared the worst place in the European Union for <a href="https://notesfrompoland.com/2020/05/14/poland-ranked-as-worst-country-in-eu-for-lgbt-people/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">gay</a> <a href="https://notesfrompoland.com/2020/05/14/poland-ranked-as-worst-country-in-eu-for-lgbt-people/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">rights</a>. Same-sex unions of any kind, including civil unions, are still illegal, and gay couples have no right to adopt children. Laws against hate crimes and conversion therapy are also notoriously lacking. Though to their credit, gay men and bisexuals can donate blood in Poland with greater ease then they can in the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_donation_restrictions_on_men_who_have_sex_with_men#Europe" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">United States. </a> </p><p>Despite having a first-hand understanding of the dangers of authoritarianism and intolerance than most nations, some in Poland continue to use the LGBT+ community as a boogeyman. While it is not the first time such things have been done, perhaps it will be one of the last. </p>
Keep reading
Show less
US, Russia, China won't join global initiative to offer fair access to COVID-19 vaccines. Why not?
The U.S., China, and Russia are in a "vaccine race" that treats a global challenge like a winner-take-all game.
25 September, 2020
<ul class="ee-ul"></ul>
<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic_(board_game)" target="_blank">board game "Pandemic"</a> tasks players with stopping deadly diseases as they spread across the world. But what separates "Pandemic" from its winner-take-all peers is that it's a collaborative endeavor. Players either pull together to stamp out their microscopic foes, or they all lose.</p><p>Commentators have naturally drawn comparisons between the game and <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/pandemic-the-board-game-series-for-the-age-of-the-coronavirus" target="_blank">the COVID era it has become emblematic of</a>, and those parallels have become more fitting lately. On September 21, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced that <a href="https://www.gavi.org/sites/default/files/covid/pr/COVAX_CA_COIP_List_COVAX_PR_23-09.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">156 countries</a> had joined the COVAX Facility, a worldwide collaboration to develop a vaccine and distribute it strategically and equitably.</p><p>But as any "Pandemic" fan will tell you, there are always <em>those</em> players: the ones who cut ties with the others, who play to be the most powerful, who reinterpret the goal as domination in a zero-sum game of their own devising. Unfortunately for WHO and its allies, three big global players have refused to play cooperatively: China, Russia, and the United States.<u></u></p>
All for one (vaccine)
<p>Launched this April, <a href="https://www.who.int/initiatives/act-accelerator" target="_blank">the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator</a> brought together a panoply of governments, scientists, businesses, and global health organizations with the goal of accelerating the development, production, and distribution of an efficacious COVID-19 vaccine. The "vaccines pillar" of this initiative is <a href="https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/covax-explained" target="_blank">the COVAX Facility</a>.</p><p>COVAX is coordinated by the WHO, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. The program maintains a diverse portfolio of COVID-10 vaccines, monitoring each to identify promising candidates. It has also partnered with manufacturers to ease investment risks and serves as a purchasing pool for self-financing countries, while offering fundraising efforts to poorer ones.</p><p>"[G]overnments from every continent have chosen to work together, not only to secure vaccines for their own populations, but also to help ensure that vaccines are available to the most vulnerable everywhere," Seth Berkley, CEO of Gavi, <a href="https://www.gavi.org/news/media-room/boost-global-response-covid-19-economies-worldwide-formally-sign-covax-facility" target="_blank">said in a release</a>. "With the commitments we're announcing today for the COVAX Facility, as well as the historic partnership we are forging with industry, we now stand a far better chance of ending the acute phase of this pandemic once safe, effective vaccines become available."</p><p><a href="https://www.vox.com/21448719/covid-19-vaccine-covax-who-gavi-cepi" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">In an interview with Vox</a>, Berkley noted that the ACT Accelerator is the largest global collaboration since the Paris Climate Agreement. He added, "This type of solidarity is critical because otherwise what you're going to end up with is just a constant reintroduction of infections and the inability to go back to normal."</p><p>As of Monday, 64 higher-income countries and 92 low- and middle-income countries—representing nearly two-thirds of the world's population—<a href="https://www.gavi.org/news/media-room/boost-global-response-covid-19-economies-worldwide-formally-sign-covax-facility" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">have signed commitments to COVAX</a>. Thirty-eight more are expected to sign soon.</p><p>COVAX's goal is to have 2 billion doses by the end of 2021. Experts estimate this amount will cover high-risk and vulnerable people, as well as healthcare workers, worldwide. Participating nations must cover those populations before administering vaccines according to national priorities. As part of the agreement, countries agree to support equal access to the vaccine once it becomes available, a move aimed at preventing hoarding and price gouging. </p><p>Currently, CEPI is supporting nine candidate vaccines, of which eight are in clinical trials.</p>Why has the U.S. backed out?
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7167e0bf1593a7cb29c1a116041116e3"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LUAsKbH7yeY?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>The United States is gambling that its bilateral deals with various pharmaceutical companies will win the "<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/coronavirus-vaccine-trump/2020/09/01/b44b42be-e965-11ea-bf44-0d31c85838a5_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">vaccine race</a>." This U.S.-only initiative, named (sigh) <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/06/16/fact-sheet-explaining-operation-warp-speed.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Operation Warp Speed</a>, has already spent <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/14/the-us-has-already-invested-billions-on-potential-coronavirus-vaccines-heres-where-the-deals-stand.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">approximately $10 billion</a> and is pushing to deliver 300 million doses by January 2021. Many experts worry this speedy push through the regulatory path could result in <a href="https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/08/here-s-how-us-could-release-covid-19-vaccine-election-and-why-scares-some" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">premature and dangerous approvals</a>.</p><p>China and Russia have likewise bet on their own high-priced ponies. Russia is touting <a href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/09/russia-offers-its-untested-covid-19-vaccine-for-free-to-un-officials/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">an unvetted vaccine</a> nicknamed (double sigh) "Sputnik V." This vaccine has only concluded <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30402-1/fulltext" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">phase 1 and 2 trials</a> with a small number of participants, yet Russia claims to have already received international requests. Meanwhile, China has administered <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-vaccines-foc/in-coronavirus-vaccine-race-china-inoculates-thousands-before-trials-are-completed-idUSKBN26705Q" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">tens of thousands of doses of a vaccine</a> before completing phase 3 clinical trials. </p><p>An additional barrier to the United States' participation: COVAX is a WHO-led initiative. Earlier this year, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/865685798/president-trump-announces-that-u-s-will-leave-who" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">President Donald Trump admonished the WHO as a corrupt organization</a> and claimed it assisted China in covering up the coronavirus outbreak and its severity. Though he presented no evidence for the accusation, Trump has used it as the basis for <a href="https://www.statnews.com/2020/09/21/64-high-income-nations-join-effort-to-expand-global-access-to-covid-19-vaccines-but-u-s-and-china-do-not/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">his threat to cut ties with</a>, and funding for, the agency.</p><p>"The United States will continue to engage our international partners to ensure we defeat this virus, but we will not be constrained by multilateral organizations influenced by the corrupt World Health Organization and China," said Judd Deere, a spokesman for the White House, said <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-who/white-house-slams-who-over-criticism-of-push-for-covid-19-vaccine-idUSKBN25S62T" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">in a statement</a>.</p><p>He added, "This president will spare no expense to ensure that any new vaccine maintains our own FDA's gold standard for safety and efficacy, is thoroughly tested, and saves lives."</p><p>By shirking COVAX, these countries hope to gain peerless access to a vaccine. Each could secure large numbers of doses for its citizens while also reaping the political boons to follow. In the United States, President Trump has pinned his re-election bid on a timely vaccine, while Chinese officials seem posed to use a vaccine <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/11/business/china-vaccine-diplomacy.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">to repair diplomatic ties</a>. </p><p>But the loss of such rich economies will prove a blow to COVAX and the ACT Accelerator. Vaccines are notoriously expensive and risky to develop; the costs to manufacture doses at scale will be immense. <a href="https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/08/1070162" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus</a> stated the ACT Accelerator would cost roughly $30 billion, and the final bill for the tools to combat novel coronavirus would be at least $100 billion. But that's a pittance compared to the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-imf/imf-says-10-trillion-spent-to-combat-pandemic-far-more-needed-idUSKBN23I27P" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">$10 trillion already spent on the pandemic</a> so far.</p><p>"COVID-19 is an unprecedented global crisis that demands an unprecedented global response," <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/21-09-2020-boost-for-global-response-to-covid-19-as-economies-worldwide-formally-sign-up-to-covax-facility" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Tedros said</a>. "Vaccine nationalism will only perpetuate the disease and prolong the global recovery. Working together through the COVAX Facility is not charity, it's in every country's own best interests to control the pandemic and accelerate the global economic recovery."</p>The winner won't necessarily take all
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDQzNzY2My9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NjExMzA1M30.2kF2U_8veNWxmaxOnSned_WTQMRtscbB5dmT5efJHsc/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C180%2C0%2C181&height=700" id="55cd7" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c56717cda300a40edc23795c8ee23c2f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="SARS-CoV-2 vaccine" />SARS-CoV-2 vaccine
<p>By COVAX's count, there are 170 COVID-19 vaccines in development. None have been approved, few have reached phase 3, and most will fail to exit clinical trials. While one or two may be ready by year's end, they probably won't be a corona-cure-all. They will likely be similar to flu vaccines, reducing the contraction risk and the severity of symptoms.</p><p>"We all recognize that flu vaccine, in a year when it's efficacious, you have what, 50% protection? And in a year when it's poor you have 30% or less than that—and still we use that," Marie-Paule Kieny, WHO assistant director-general of Health Systems and Innovation, <a href="https://www.who.int/blueprint/about/marie-paule-kieny/en/" target="_blank">told Stat</a><em>.</em></p><p>That means any country to pass the approval finish line won't necessarily win it all. After approval, it will still take a global effort to manufacture and distribute doses. Without blanketed protection, even countries with a high inoculation rate will risk reintroduction of the virus from those still struggling to contain it. </p><p>As any player of "Pandemic" will tell you, when a player decides to go it alone, they don't just make the game more difficult. They diminish the trust and cooperation for many games to come.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Why the simple life is not just beautiful, it’s necessary
Living simply now strikes many people as simply boring.
31 August, 2020
Oli Scarff/Getty Images
The good life is the simple life. Among philosophical ideas about how we should live, this one is a hardy perennial; from Socrates to Thoreau, from the Buddha to Wendell Berry, thinkers have been peddling it for more than two millennia.
<p> And it still has plenty of adherents. Magazines such as <em>Real Simple</em> call out to us from the supermarket checkout; Oprah Winfrey regularly interviews fans of simple living such as Jack Kornfield, a teacher of Buddhist mindfulness; the Slow Movement, which advocates a return to pre-industrial basics, attracts followers across continents.</p><p>Through much of human history, frugal simplicity was not a choice but a necessity – and since necessary, it was also deemed a moral virtue. But with the advent of industrial capitalism and a consumer society, a system arose that was committed to relentless growth, and with it grew a population (aka 'the market') that was enabled and encouraged to buy lots of stuff that, by traditional standards, was surplus to requirements. As a result, there's a disconnect between the traditional values we have inherited and the consumerist imperatives instilled in us by contemporary culture.</p><p>In pre-modern times, the discrepancy between what the philosophers advised and how people lived was not so great. Wealth provided security, but even for the rich wealth was flimsy protection against misfortunes such as war, famine, disease, injustice and the disfavour of tyrants. The Stoic philosopher Seneca, one of the richest men in Rome, still ended up being sentenced to death by Nero. As for the vast majority – slaves, serfs, peasants and labourers – there was virtually no prospect of accumulating even modest wealth.</p>
<p>Before the advent of machine-based agriculture, representative democracy, civil rights, antibiotics and aspirin, just making it through a long life without too much suffering counted as doing pretty well. Today, though, at least in prosperous societies, people want and expect (and can usually have) a good deal more. Living simply now strikes many people as simply boring.</p><p>Yet there seems to be growing interest, especially among millennials, in rediscovering the benefits of simple living. Some of this might reflect a kind of nostalgia for the pre-industrial or pre-consumerist world, and also sympathy for the moral argument that says that living in a simple manner makes you a better person, by building desirable traits such as frugality, resilience and independence – or a happier person, by promoting peace of mind and good health, and keeping you close to nature.</p><p>These are plausible arguments. Yet in spite of the official respect their teachings command, the sages have proved remarkably unpersuasive. Millions of us continue to rush around getting and spending, buying lottery tickets, working long hours, racking up debt, and striving 24/7 to climb the greasy pole. Why is this?</p>
<p>One obvious answer is good old-fashioned hypocrisy. We applaud the frugal philosophy while ignoring its precepts in our day-to-day lives. We praise the simple lifestyle of, say, Pope Francis, seeing it as a sign of his moral integrity, while also hoping for and cheering on economic growth driven, in large part, by a demand for bigger houses, fancier cars and other luxury goods.</p><p>But the problem isn't just that our practice conflicts with our professed beliefs. Our <em>thinking</em> about simplicity and luxury, frugality and extravagance, is fundamentally inconsistent. We condemn extravagance that is wasteful or tasteless and yet we tout monuments of past extravagance, such as the Forbidden City in Beijing or the palace at Versailles, as highly admirable. The truth is that much of what we call 'culture' is fuelled by forms of extravagance.</p><p>Somewhat paradoxically, then, the case for living simply was most persuasive when most people had little choice but to live that way. The traditional arguments for simple living in effect rationalise a necessity. But the same arguments have less purchase when the life of frugal simplicity is a choice, one way of living among many. Then the philosophy of frugality becomes a hard sell.</p>
<p>
That might be about to change, under the influence of two factors: economics and environmentalism. When recession strikes, as it has done recently (revealing inherent instabilities in an economic system committed to unending growth) millions of people suddenly find themselves in circumstances where frugality once again becomes a necessity, and the value of its associated virtues is rediscovered.
</p><p>
In societies such as the United States, we are currently witnessing a tendency for capitalism to stretch the distance between the 'have lots' and the 'have nots'. These growing inequalities invite a fresh critique of extravagance and waste. When so many people live below the poverty line, there is something unseemly about in-your-face displays of opulence and luxury. Moreover, the lopsided distribution of wealth also represents a lost opportunity. According to Epicurus and the other sages of simplicity, one can live perfectly well, provided certain basic needs are satisfied – a view endorsed in modern times by the psychologist Abraham Maslow's '<a href="http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm" target="_blank">hierarchy of needs</a>'. If correct, it's an argument for using surplus wealth to ensure that everyone has basics such as food, housing, healthcare, education, utilities and public transport – at low cost, rather than allowing it to be funnelled into a few private pockets.
</p><p>
However wise the sages, it would not have occurred to Socrates or Epicurus to argue for the simple life in terms of environmentalism. Two centuries of industrialisation, population growth and frenzied economic activity has bequeathed us smog; polluted lakes, rivers and oceans; toxic waste; soil erosion; deforestation; extinction of plant and animal species, and global warming. The philosophy of frugal simplicity expresses values and advocates a lifestyle that might be our best hope for reversing these trends and preserving our planet's fragile ecosystems.
</p><p>
Many people are still unconvinced by this. But if our current methods of making, getting, spending and discarding prove unsustainable, then there could come a time – and it might come quite soon – when we are forced towards simplicity. In which case, a venerable tradition will turn out to contain the philosophy of the future.
</p><p><a href="https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10821.html"><em>The Wisdom of Frugality</em></a><em> (2016) by Emrys Westacott is published via Princeton University Press.</em><img src="https://metrics.aeon.co/count/839ab61b-7b15-4daf-8af3-a1c7ead64c41.gif" alt="Aeon counter – do not remove" width="1" height="1"></p><p>This article was originally published at <a href="https://aeon.co?utm_campaign=republished-article" target="_blank">Aeon</a> and has been republished under Creative Commons. Read the <a href="https://aeon.co/ideas/why-the-simple-life-is-not-just-beautiful-it-s-necessary" target="_blank">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Is a capitalist-socialist economy inevitable?
The American economy may be locked into an unhealthy cycle that only benefits a select few. Is it too late to fix it?
31 August, 2020
- What will the economy of the future look like? To answer that we must first consider the current trajectory and the ways in which modern capitalism operates, who it benefits, and if it is sustainable.
- In this video, historians, economists, and authors discuss income and wealth inequality, how the American economy grew into the machine that it is today, the pillars of capitalism and how the concept has changed over time, and ways in which the status quo can, and maybe even should, change.
- "It's not that hierarchy is bad," says John Fullerton, founder of Capital Institute, "it's that hierarchy where the top extracts from below is definitely bad and unsustainable." He says that the modern capitalist system works this way, and that it perpetuates the cycle of growing inequality.
Popular
