The Post-Pandemic World: A Virtual Talk with Jacques Attali

Although we are still in the midst of it and have our day to day worries of not catching this dreadful, dangerous and rapidly spreading virus and while we are also looking toward the best means of protecting ourselves and our loved ones via social and physical distancing as well as washing hands and wearing masks, one of the nagging fears and concerns is also what will happen once this nightmare comes to an end. There will be evidently relief, joy, and celebration at first, but what will be the long-lasting effects and consequences of this pandemic. What will the post-pandemic world look like?

It was French intellectual Jacques Attali who managed to give me some answers to that ominous question. Yesterday morning (Pacific Time), I had the pleasure to attend my first webinar / Zoom talk. 

It was organized by FIAF, the French Institute of the Alliance Française and was occurring simultaneously from New York while Jacques Attali was in Paris (presumably in his living-room) at the same time. I was hoping the interview would be conducted in French, but alas it was all in English.

I had my cup of coffee in hand as I connected to the provided link from the comforts of my home. I have been to many lectures and very much enjoy them, but something seemed awkward and amiss with this virtual talk. 

Of course, I appreciated the fact that the world was intricately connected and that I was part of a talk that I would never been able to attend by any other means (both New York and Paris were simply out of reach for me), but while it created a virtual connection and get-together, I also felt oddly disconnected. But more on this later.

Jacques Attali was not the only guest, as there was also the Zambian economist and author Dambisa Moyo, and it was moderated by the host Claude Grunitzky. Yet it is Attali’s thought, insight and contribution I would like to focus on here. 

Jacques Attali is a French economist and social theorist who has worked closely as an adviser with the French government, namely with François Mitterrand and later also with Nicolas Sarkozy. He has published more than fifty books, and Foreign Policy considers him one of the top 100 global thinkers in the world.

One of the threads among his prolific and diverse writing output, which even includes fiction and theatre, has been the focus on the future, and he has correctly predicted and foreseen trends and issues, such as the Internet and YouTube and has written about surveillance and trans-humanism about four decades ago. 

In fact, he has talked about the threat of pandemics more than two decades ago. The virtual talk itself began with a look back at history. How did other pandemics play out and what was their outcome?

The Great Plague of the 14^th century was touched upon. One of the outcomes of the plague was a changing perspective of and relationship with science. Many started moving away from superstitions and religious beliefs and embraced science instead; it was science that could give them more effective protection from diseases. 

It is ironic that our current hope is that a similar outcome will take place in this so-called modern world of ours, namely a massive movement toward and (re-)acceptance of science and medicine as opposed to populist movements that are characterized by misguided information and uninformed skepticism towards scientists and scientific experts.

As a rule, pandemics tend to create disruptions in political systems. This can go in two opposite directions. On one hand, there could be a new risk for more instances of protectionism and populism. Governments would then use non-democratic means to manage their people. 

Human rights and privacy rights could be undermined via the uncontrolled and unchecked use of tracing. Although tracing would be a necessary component of dealing with and controlling the pandemic, it could, like anything really, be also misused and abused by certain malicious governments.

These would be strong governments but for bad reasons; nonetheless, other governments might take a strong stance and come out of this pandemic with a new vision. In that case, the system would not be abused but would work for the benefit of the citizens. This would lead to strong self-sufficient and self-reliant governance that follows up its vision with a clear strategy and plans as well as realistic designs for the future.

Such a government would also strengthen instead of weakening and undermining its democratic ties. Monsieur Attali gave South Korea as an example of how the government uses technology to improve upon current conditions, and he claimed that neither the United States nor China have followed suit (although there is still a chance and some hope that they could engage on a more strategic approach and a more democratic path).

Neither country, however, would come out victorious out of this pandemic; on the contrary, they would be weaker as a result. Although some pandemics would set the stage for a new global power and take-over, this would probably not happen under our current circumstances. Monsieur Attali wished that Europe would rise to fill the void, but realistically he did not think that the crumbling Union would be strong enough for such an ambitious undertaking.

Indeed, the economic fallout of the novel Coronavirus would create an economic crisis that would be worse than the Great Depression of 1929. Certain countries, however, might be better equipped and positioned than others to deal with the economic consequences. All the countries that have been investing in and mastering digital and biotechnology will come out less scathed than nations that did not or refused to do so.

One of the consequences of the economic recession would be a de-globalisation that could potentially lead to isolation and a global trade crisis. In that case, a lack of trade and more protectionism could be the unfortunate breeding ground for war. 

As countries will have lack of trade with subsequent deficits, they may seek armed conflict to gain and usurp economic resources to better their position and standing. There are, unfortunately, various historical precedents for such types of belligerent actions and behaviors.

Yet the silver lining is in what he called an ethics of altruism. This would be in governments that actively choose to invest in the “economy of life,” which entails sectors that are deemed of vital importance, especially in (but not limited to) the post-pandemic world. 

That would include the health and education sector as well as agriculture and many other domains. Since these fields are altruistic in nature, that is they intend to help and provide care, knowledge, and services to others, they would also spell a way out of this crisis.

These types of good and well-meaning governments would highlight the importance of self-reliance without delving into its dark cousin, that is debilitating and harmful protectionism. By being able to provide necessities for its population, those nations would indeed thrive and not be dependent upon others. 

Attali mentioned that many countries of the African continent are buried in debt; their best solution going forward after this global crisis would be to rely on their own skills and resources instead of depending upon aid and asking for help from others. For instance, Morocco is one of the few countries that decided to create its own masks during this crisis, hence finding a way to focus its economy on what is needed the most by its people while becoming independent from foreign shipments of simple protective wear.

One of the other impacts of the Covid-19 would be technological connections. People had already started to move out of metropolitan areas, a kind of de-urbanization, to work remotely from smaller rural cities instead. This trend was already occurring, and now it is accelerated as many more people are working remotely from their homes. There would be little need to continue living in cities as one could now connect from any place to do most of the tasks.

Yet this has also negative effects on the individual, the company as well as the nation. As each of us continue working in our respective bubble isolated from other colleagues and supervisors, it will also lead to fewer, if any personal interactions. This will have various side effects on our psyche. On one hand, there is the issue of loneliness as we may not have enough physical contact with others and might just live and work inside of our abodes.

But more importantly, it would also eliminate important connections we used to have with our co-workers and bosses. This would be the brief chat at the water fountain, the coffee machine, or even in the hallway. In fact, some of the most productive and effective business meetings occur in restaurants. 

It is the personal touch, the face to face interaction, which leads to positive outcomes in many of those interactions. What’s more, it is the physical and psychological connections with the company that create a sense and feeling of belonging.

In a similar vein, both communities and nations would miss out on important features and aspects when most of their interactions are undertaken from and limited to a confined space. We would need to reach out and connect with others, in a personal way and manner to feel part of a community and to see ourselves as an effective and contributing member to a nation.

And this brings us to my initial observation. As much as I enjoyed this virtual talk, and it was indeed most stimulating and thought-provoking as you can see in this post, something did not feel right. What was missing was the personal human touch. 

In a lecture hall, I would often go up to the speakers and shake their hand and ask them a question or make a comment. This was completely lacking, and it could be another unfortunate consequence of this pandemic that has shaken and uprooted our world.

Finally, there is another often unspoken issue or unacknowledged fear, psychologically speaking, and that is our direct confrontation with death. Death is now more visible, and it could be potentially happening to each and everyone of us. It is indiscriminate. 

Although we kept telling and comforting ourselves that it would “only” affect the elderly or those with underlying conditions, we are slowly learning and realizing that none of us is indeed immune and we are all in peril. And this lack of immunity of death is putting everything into perspective, and it makes it harder to keep our fragility and mortality at bay.

Death is not something that happens to people who live elsewhere in poverty or war-torn countries. It is not something that only happens to the sick and elderly. It is not just happening to those who drive carelessly, nor does it come down to a matter of sheer luck, such as an act of terrorism or a mass shooting. This is something that is occurring in our own communities, and to our neighbours, friends, and family members.

Once we have effectively defeated this virus and we have entered the post-pandemic phase, we may also learn to face the reality and truth of and about life, simply that life cannot exist without death. 

Knowing this, that our lives are fragile and may potentially come to an end at any moment, that time is our most precious commodity, more so than any possession or money set aside in the bank, then we may spend our time and our being more wisely with the ones that matter to us most instead of wasting it indiscriminately on all those things that do not matter, especially when push comes to shove.