About viruses and fetishists

Günther Moewes 21/03/2020
The Corona crisis shows it once again: the same patterns of action prevail everywhere – and they do nothing good.

Tradotto da Fausto Giudice
What tiger mosquito, SARS, Zika and swine flu could not do, the coronavirus does: the final declaration of bankruptcy of globalization. With it, nature strikes back against its worst enemies: cruise passengers, long-distance tourists, flight shame refusers, trade fetishists.
Particularly piquant: even economic institutes and globalisation supporters are now realising that it is not particularly wise to make themselves dependent on countries where bats, armadillos or rhinoceros horn powder are eaten, for the production of car accessories, antibiotics, protective suits and disinfectants.
A large national German newspaper actually headlined: “Germany well positioned against coronavirus.” And by this he did not mean civil protection, but rather the reserves and compensation payments envisaged by the Minister of Finance to affected industries and majority shareholders.
How come? The discrepancy between economic liberalism and population interests has already been reflected upon several times in this column. This pattern now runs through all areas of life, as well as the associated ironic contradictions, eyewash and the measures that are always too lax and too late following it. Nobody dares to close borders, restrict travel and trade in good time, because it violates growth fetishism.
Take the example of the climate catastrophe: Economic interests are diametrically opposed to natural and population interests. Everything too late and too lax. Take the example of fan protests at football matches: “Chaos makers against patrons” was the phrase used by the conservative majority media. Or perhaps rather: young people in hangers-on against “majority shareholders”? Undoubtedly, there were some unseemly insults. But here again, n eyewash: Who unleashed this faecal language? Answer: The “majority shareholders” from Silicon Valley with their cynically so-called “social networks,” against which the States not only hardly do anything, but whose representatives are received submissively by the German Chancellor and ministers like guests of state.
How many more viruses, droughts, hate mails, floods and hurricanes must there be before the irresponsible realize that their economic and working ideology is the cause?