Disagreements between government measures and the social response to the Covid-19 pandemic in Peru
Dr. (c) Enver Vega Figueroa[1]
A sociological approach to understanding the disagreements between government measures and the social response to the Covid-19 pandemic in Peru from a macro-structural analysis
Summary
This paper analyzes some aspects of the new social reality generated by the pandemic, a crisis that, for now, raises many questions but offers very few answers. Sociology faces epistemological and scientific dilemmas that demand an evaluation of the dominant paradigms governing both macro-social and micro-social life. A meta-analysis of the theoretical and methodological framework with which sociology addresses social order in general is urgently needed. Urgent issues have arisen that will occupy the attention of the social sciences, and fundamentally, sociology itself. In this context, and with the aim of approaching reflections on this complex phenomenon, the research undertaken sought to understand, from a sociological perspective, and to construct meaning from the discrepancy between government measures and the social response to the crisis generated by the Covid-19 pandemic in Peru. The analysis is based on macro- and micro-sociological observation from the perspectives of Comte, Durkheim, Weber, and Goffman, and on a macro-structural analysis.
Introduction
The social sciences are those sciences that study the behavior of people, their interaction with the community or society, social relations, and the forms of social organization. Sociology, economics, anthropology, political science, geography, demography, among others—depending on the theoretical perspective that classifies them—are social sciences (Vega, 2019).
Puga (2009) points out that “it is worth noting, in any case, that when we talk about social sciences we are referring to a set of disciplines that, based on an explicit interest in different aspects of collective life, have formulated general theories and analytical approaches (para. 3). This research presents sociological observations.
Amid the debate of sociological currents discussed by Burawoy, Martinelli and Wieviorka (2008), the assumptions developed in this research article are channeled by an “academic sociology […] open to deliberation, to the exchange of viewpoints and to the possibility of its appropriation by society itself” (Puga, 2009).
In keeping with the previous paragraph, and as a warning to the reader, what follows is a systematic exercise in sociological reflection, a theoretical approach to and empirical understanding of a specific reality. These are not definitive truths, but rather provisional assumptions; a set of assumptions supported by empirical observation and grounded in the general theory of macro and micro sociology, from a macro-structural analysis.
The problematic situation
In Peru, after the first case of Coronavirus was reported and the subsequent spread of the disease, the State's response mechanism was to declare a health emergency followed by the declaration of a national state of emergency.
The authorities imposed quarantine as the main measure, which involves mandatory social isolation; mandatory social immobilization; restrictions on freely moving about the streets and attending places with large concentrations of people; control of public roads by the armed forces and police; all activities that generate concentrations of people are prohibited, such as academic activities, public and private meetings; constitutional rights are suspended, and fines and sanctions are issued for violators of the provisions, etc.
The government is asking the population to avoid contact between people, recommends practicing physical distancing or personal distancing; and to stay at home to avoid contagion and the spread of the disease, because it has been scientifically proven that the disease is contagious, lethal for a certain population group, the main means of contagion has been identified, and it is recognized that the capacity of the health system is limited.
The set of measures for social control—borrowing this term from Edward Ross (1901)—had to be complied with by the population; that is, from that moment on, in addition to confinement, individuals had to drastically adapt their daily lives and behavior to the new rules of coexistence, human interaction, and social and cultural organization. And the social response began. All of this unfolded within an ongoing structural crisis.
Research questions
Therefore, the following complementary questions arise to guide the development of the research:
- What knowledge is to be generated as a process of subjective and continuous construction to understand and give meaning to the disagreement between government measures and the social response around the crisis generated by the Covid-19 pandemic in Peru, based on the analysis resulting from the systematic observation of that concrete reality from the perspective of the macro Sociology of Comte, Durkheim and Weber, and the micro Sociology of Goffman?
- What are the mechanisms, conditions, or aspects that facilitate or hinder the social acceptance of government measures, and how can we understand them from the categorical structures of macro and micro sociology?
During the process of methodological analysis and reflection on the investigated reality, questions were broken down to enrich the theoretical-empirical dialogue with each of the sociological theories, under a macro or global view.
Objectives and purpose of the research
- Understanding from sociological theory to obtain knowledge through a subjective and continuous construction process that allows building a sense of disagreement between government measures and the social response; around the crisis generated by the Covid-19 pandemic in Peru; based on the analysis resulting from the systematic macro and micro sociological observation of that concrete reality, from the perspective of Comte, Durkheim, Weber and Goffman.
- To identify and understand those mechanisms, conditions or aspects that facilitate or hinder the social acceptance of government measures from the categorical structures of macro and micro Sociology.
Theoretical fundament
Figures 1 and 2 present the various categories from sociological theory under which the analysis was conducted and which formed the basis for the theoretical-empirical dialogue between sociological theory and the investigated reality. The analysis and discussion section provides a detailed explanation of each of the theories used.
Research design and observables
According to Vargas (2011), the methodological design of this research is of an interpretive epistemological stance and adopted the hermeneutic-interpretive paradigm within the qualitative methodology.
From this epistemological-methodological structure, knowledge was generated as a subjective and continuous construction to give meaning to the investigated reality (pp. 15-16).
The research is of the theoretical-empirical type because first “the empirical and categorical structure of the [object of study] was found and the dialogue was established with different [sociological theories]” (Barajas, 2010, p. 25).
The methods used were primarily hermeneutic-interpretive, as proposed by Vargas (2011):
The techniques used for gathering information were: (i) direct observation, (ii) recording of discourse, and (iii) documentary inquiry (Vargas, 2011, pp. 16-17).
Among the aspects that were the subject of systematic observation and reflection are the various events, multiple occurrences, varied phenomena, and not necessarily sequential processes associated with the social, political, economic, and cultural effects of the global pandemic and its local repercussions. As Vargas (2011) suggests, the analysis is based on observables (p. 16), which for this research are: (i) government measures and (ii) the social response.
As a provisional frame of reference for the analysis, the government measures –among others– also include the restrictions and sanctions that are published on the Peruvian State's Single Digital Platform; and the forms of social response observed by citizens can be classified as social acceptance and rejection, which we know from digital television, the press in WEB format and the new digital social media.
Analysis. Theoretical-empirical discussion
Social order: between “universal consensus” and government measures
Auguste Comte (France, 1798–1875) postulated that sociology should be scientific and should concern itself with social statics and social dynamics; that is, with social structure and social change, respectively (Ritzer, 1995a, pp. 15–18). While statics, or the theory of order, studies the conditions of existence in society, dynamics, or the theory of progress, refers to the laws of progress: the theological stage, the metaphysical stage, and the positive or scientific stage. For now, we will only address social statics.
By observing the concrete reality and based on its hermeneutic interpretation, we verify in the governmental provision the presence of social statics altering the social structure stimulated by the presumption that it will allow an order to be achieved in the social conditions in order to preserve the health of the population.
However, the result of systematic observation of reality allows us to anticipate some breaches and violations of the provisions as a social response that rejects government measures, jeopardizing the effectiveness of social control measures. In this regard, echoing Comte's postulate, Timasheff (1965) points out that “every particular order may contain many, and sometimes serious, deficiencies, but this situation can be rectified by the rational intervention of human beings” (p. 40).
What conditions lead to public disregard for the measures? What mechanisms cause noncompliance with the regulations? What factors contribute to the population's disregard for the quarantine, which is intended to protect their health? Why is there disorder in markets and banks? Why is the mandatory social isolation order, known as the "curfew," being violated? Why is physical distancing, or personal distancing, often incorrectly called "social distancing," not being respected? And we can continue to problematize the reality of the social response. In addition to exploring the conditions or factors that facilitate social rejection, for example, we can ask about social acceptance: Why are the regulations followed and order maintained in other cases? What are the mechanisms, conditions, or factors that facilitate the social acceptance of government measures?
To make sense of this social rejection, it is necessary to incorporate the category of consensus into the analysis: universal consensusComte called it that. Timasheff (1965) reminds us that for Comte, “social order is established according to the laws of nature” (p. 40). That is positivism applied to the social sphere. Is it under the influence of this philosophical current that the Peruvian state acts toward its citizens?
Therefore, since the expected order is not reflected in reality as a consequence of government measures, it is necessary to explore the practices of individual freedom in the community and the practices of compliance with extreme measures, and contrast them with the sociological theory of Auguste Comte.
“Order is only possible on the basis of a certain community of ideas held by those who form a society; therefore, absolute freedom of opinion cannot be granted” (Timasheff, 1965, p. 40). This is a fundamental point. That is to say, in a society with characteristics like Peru's, where restrictions are not common, it was not enough to dictate restrictive measures, but rather to enforce compliance with them, because “the fundamental fact of social order is the universal consensus, [this means]the necessary correlation between the elements of society” (Timasheff, 1965, p. 40).
"The universal consensus “It is the very basis of solidarity,” Comte asserted. Furthermore, he pointed out that “society is capable of immense improvements if it is guided according to scientific principles.” In this regard, Timasheff (1965) clarifies that “this statement reflects Comte’s faith in progress and his conviction that human society can only be improved on the basis of positive social science,” and adds that “the universal consensus For Comte, it is the very basis of solidarity, as well as the basis of the division of social labor” (p. 41).
So, as the prohibitive measures came into effect, the government also granted permits or licenses to a sector of workers in certain specialized services (allowing them to travel with authorization), although this caused disorder and overcrowding at mass transit stations, for example, to illustrate one point. In other words, instead of enforcing the restrictive measures, licenses were added, which are, or were, misused.
If we pay attention to the following: “The social division of labor is the fundamental cause of the increasing complexity of society” (Timasheff, 1965, p. 41), we will find three categories associated with this premise: solidarity, cooperation and altruism, conditions that do not characterize Peruvian society.
This approach to understanding the social response of rejection to government measures raises discussions around questions such as: Is social statics the frame of reference for local political decision-making in the context of the global crisis caused by the pandemic? Are consensus, solidarity, cooperation, and altruism—understood as universal compliance with government measures—possible in a community that is socially, culturally, economically, and politically complex and structurally unequal?
Instead of designing crisis management by subordinating it to elements of political power that stimulate reaction and contradiction, would it have been more efficient to design it with socio-cultural elements that stimulate reflection and, above all, the recognition of the citizen's condition among citizens?
From this perspective, it would be justified to increase the State's capacity for violent repression to establish order: the military in the streets and in “activities supporting the health sector”, as we will see in Durkheim and Weber.
Social fact: 'curfew', social isolation and economic punishment as elements of balance and functional integration of society?
Émile Durkheim (France, 1858-1917) marked the shift from organicist-positivism to structural-functional analysis; that is, he moved from philosophical argumentation to logical-scientific reasoning. His thought was influenced by Comte's relativist positivism and Spencer's organicist interpretation of society (Vega, 2007). Durkheim adopted from Comte "the importance of the group in determining human behavior" (Timasheff, 1965, p. 141).
Structural-functional analysis considers that societies are composed of interconnected parts, forming a system of organs that, in turn, constitute a social structure with specific functions. Any change in the structural elements can produce significant changes in the others due to their reciprocal dependence (Ritzer, 1995b).
The central issue of functionalism concerns the maintenance of social order. If equilibrium and functional integration of the community are achieved, social health prevails, and society lives in a normal state. Society lives in an abnormal state when there is a lack of interfunctional regulation of the parts in relation to the whole; that is, society suffers from a social illness (Ritzer, 1995b). Do fines for non-compliance with government regulations facilitate the equilibrium and functional integration of Peruvian society in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic? Is the presence of the armed forces and police—controlling the streets and access to basic service and supply facilities—the part of the whole that produces interfunctional regulation of Peruvian society in response to government measures?
The reality under investigation raises several questions, such as: Why does social disorder occur in places that are supposed to be empty, for example, public streets and plazas? How does disorder develop in food distribution centers and around banks? Why is the mandatory social immobilization order, known as the "curfew," being violated? What factors trigger the violation of voluntary social isolation, given that regulations clearly define who is authorized to be out and about and that the justifications for exemptions are known? Why is physical distancing, or personal distancing, often incorrectly called "social distancing," not being respected? Will imposing fines to penalize non-compliance with the regulations issued during the national health emergency establish order in the streets? Does a financial penalty exert greater social control than the presence of a military or police authority? These are just some of the questions that characterize this analysis.
The State's management of population organization with the purpose of reducing the likelihood of people's exposure and preventing them from becoming infected with Covid-19 has resulted in open and defiant non-compliance with government measures by a significant sector of the population.
For the State, “Those who violate mandatory social isolation and restrictive measures are considered a threat to public safety”Therefore, the security forces are equipped with [non-lethal] weapons to suppress such “offenders”.
To attempt to answer this set of questions, we will examine and reflect upon some categories from Durkheim's sociological theory, such as: mechanical solidarity, organic solidarity, primitive society, modern society, anomie, and dynamic density. Two other fundamental categories are also essential: social fact and collective consciousness.
Durkheim feared and hated social disorder or anomie. The driving force behind his work was the disorder produced by social changes, such as labor conflicts, the overthrow of the ruling class, discord between Church and State, and antisemitism (Vega, 2007).
The crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic is occurring in Peruvian society – as in other countries of the world, due to the global and local reach of the infection – which is a complex society, let's call it an organic society, where collective consciousness is diminishing, which is why it does not unite individuals in the face of the health threat or government regulations; on the contrary, the social response that is based on social rejection.
For the same reason, the suggestion –understandably a requirement– to practice physical distancing or personal distancing to avoid the reach of droplets that an infected person may emit and cause a network of contagion, encounters resistance in the collective forces of social life.
Durkheim coined the terms mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity to give meaning to the different mechanisms of social cohesion. Although central, another term emerged from both: social distance, which was not as significant in Durkheimian thought, but, developed by Simmel, later acquired its own history, as a concept closely linked to the term social cohesion (Arteaga and Lara, 2004, para. 3).
In accordance with the previous paragraph: On the one hand, it is necessary to point out that attempting to incorporate features of mechanical society into organic society, or attempting to reorganize an organic society by forcing its configuration towards a mechanical society in order for social control to be efficient, brings about results that are already known; and, on the other hand, it is necessary to clarify immediately why we maintain that there is a misuse of the category of social distance.
Indeed, the concept of social distance would be outlined by Durkheim in his work The social division of labor and, later, in his work The elementary forms of religious lifeIn both texts, the concept refers to profound processes of social disorganization, produced by a lack of sufficient or sufficiently prolonged contact between the segments or groups that make up a society. From this perspective, social cohesion and solidarity would be unable to develop if the distance between social groups is profound. The most pernicious effect would be the creation of a breeding ground conducive to the development of violence and aggression (Arteaga and Lara, 2004, para. 3).
Therefore, the health requirement refers to physical distancing or personal distancing, which consists of maintaining a separation of approximately one and a half to two meters between person and person.
En The social division of labor[For example] criminal behaviors constitute “the very negation of solidarity and are therefore made up of so many special activities. But, strictly speaking, there is no division of labor here, but pure and simple differentiation, and both terms ask not to be confused” (Durkheim, 1987, pp. 433-434).
On the other hand, social facts are ways of acting, thinking, and feeling that are external to the individual and have the power to exert coercion upon them. Social phenomena are rooted in the collective aspects of group beliefs and practices (Timasheff, 1965). Durkheim argues that social facts cannot be reduced to individual facts (Vega, 2007).
Therefore, the social events caused by the pandemic and observed in the concrete reality of Peru pose limitations to the maintenance of social order. “Because social events can be described in two ways: first, by their coercive power over individuals, frequently evidenced in the sanctions applied to various types of conduct; and second, by their general diffusion within the group” (Timasheff, 1965, p. 142). Are we facing the basis for fines for non-compliance with government regulations? Is this measure of economic punishment for transgressing government regulations evidence of forcing the incorporation of features of a mechanical society into an organic society, or vice versa?
Another aspect is the physical distance between people – approximately one and a half to two meters – which is suggested to be practiced when waiting in line to enter a commercial establishment or workplace to avoid possible contagion when interacting with a person who is already infected but does not show symptoms of having the disease, which in Durkheim's terms is the dynamic density.
These days we observe that in some urban areas of certain districts, local governments have marked sidewalks or streets with squares or circles to encourage people to maintain social distancing. “Dynamic density is the number of people in a society and the degree of interaction among them” (Ritzer, 1995b, p. 214). Do these measures find their sociological basis in dynamic density?
Social action: between the mental construction of social control and the sense of intentional transgression
Max Weber (Germany, 1864-1920) is the intellectual who made important contributions to Sociology, “contributions that cannot be understood separately from the intellectual climate, especially philosophical and scientific, of early 20th century Germany” (Timasheff, 1965, p. 214).
Although it is in his work Economy and Society where he proposes a general theory, Weber's system of ideas can be modeled from the set of his sociological works (Vega, 2007).
Timasheff (1965) states that “Weber’s sociological system makes the following proposition: 'The highest level of understanding of social phenomena is achieved if that understanding is both causally adequate and adequate in the sphere of meaning.' This requires that three questions be analyzed: What is causally adequate understanding? What is meaningfully adequate understanding? How are the two related?” (p. 216).
Weber defines sociology as a science that attempts the interpretive understanding of social action in order to arrive at a causal explanation of its course and effects. He adds that the specific task of sociology is the interpretation of action and that this discipline should focus its attention on subjectively comprehensible phenomena. He maintains that the specific function of sociology is the understanding of typically differentiated individuals, and that it should try to formulate concepts of type and generalizations of processes (Timasheff, 1965).
Among others, some fundamental categories of Weber's sociological theory are: ideal type and social action. To understand the disagreement between government measures and the social response in the context of managing the Covid-19 pandemic crisis, we must place the various restrictions and sanctions decreed by the Peruvian government for social control within the ideal type, and the population's rejection or acceptance of these measures within social action.
If we ask ourselves questions such as: What conditions favor this disagreement? What conditions contribute to a social response of acceptance in some groups and rejection in others? What aspects are omitted from the reflective process of governmental decision-making in crisis contexts like the present one? Do such omissions lead to incorporating static aspects into dynamic realities?
To understand this disagreement, we must first explore the intersubjectivity of the ruling social group. This exploration reveals that the set of measures and sanctions imposed by this group constitute the expected parameters for the government as observed in a reality with effective social control. For the ruler—a representative of the State influenced by the capitalist macrostructure—those who do not comply with mandatory confinement, social isolation, and social immobilization, as well as other restrictive measures, are considered a threat to public safety.
“The ideal type is a mental construct resulting from the exaggeration or accentuation of one or more observed traits of society” (Vega, 2007). In this case, it serves as an analytical tool for static entities such as regulations or orders, and for dynamic entities such as the population's social response to government measures.
Secondly, we must explore the intersubjectivity of the population subject to social control, because it is from the process of their action or response that the manifestation of such disagreement is constructed.
“By action we must understand a behavior (whether it consists of an external or internal doing, or of omitting or permitting) provided that the subject or subjects of the action attach a subjective meaning to it. (…) Social action, therefore, is an action in which the meaning intended by the subject or subjects is related to the behavior of others, being oriented by it in its development. (…) By meaning we understand the intended and subjective meaning of the subjects of the action. (…) Meaning is the intentional activity of a subject to do or refrain from doing something; social action will be that linking of meanings of the various subjects, at different times and in different social environments” (Gutiérrez, 2000, p. 29).
In the current phase of managing the crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, contradictions are intensifying, both among the ruling (dominant) and governed (dominated) classes. The state's capacity for violent repression is increasing, equipping the armed forces to act and exert social control.
Therefore, the conditions that foster such disagreement are inherent to the differing interests of the groups. Consequently, the conditions that contribute to a social response of acceptance in some groups and rejection in others cannot be managed globally, but rather specifically. From this, relevant aspects are identified that are omitted from the government's reflective process for enacting restrictions and sanctions in the context of the pandemic crisis.
Symbolic interactionism: measures of social control and social interaction
Erving Goffman (Canada, 1922-1982) is a sociologist who belonged to the Chicago School –post World War II– of which he was one of its leading representatives, and influenced the school of thought of symbolic interactionism, and is considered the father of microsociology.
Goffman (1993) defines interaction, in general terms, “as the reciprocal influence of one individual on the actions of another when both are in immediate physical presence. Total interaction takes place on any occasion when a given set of individuals are in continuous mutual presence” (p. 27).
“Symbolic interactionism—a term coined in 1937 by Chicago School sociologist Herbert Blumer (1900–1987)—focuses on the human element and constructs the social world based on human consciousness and agency. (…) From symbolic interactionism, we have a set of basic elements for a theory of social movements, the main element being the freedom of consciousness navigating social interaction. In relation to organizational theories, symbolic interactionism maintains that organizations are not exclusively the result of the external action of 'others' different from the members that compose them, because it disregards individual participation in organizational action” (Núñez, 2018).
The preceding statement prompts us to question why a particular social group is violating government regulations related to the restrictions imposed by the state of emergency. How does the State influence the construction of citizenship? Can citizenship, built upon interactions within the social context, be influenced by dominant power structures? Why are quarantine, isolation, and social distancing measures not being respected, given that such violations increase the likelihood of contracting Covid-19?
Núñez (2018), citing Maldonado and Zaragoza (2011), specifies that the central point of Goffman's proposal is the analysis of social realities based on the interactions that arise in social situations, placing social structures, systems, and functional relationships in a secondary role. He studies the world of symbolic meanings within which subjects act as the primary element and generator of all others.
So, do attacks against members of the security forces, the circulation of fake news on digital social networks, fear, among other social situations, correspond to symbolic references?
According to Goffman (2001), all social interaction is a performance: any activity of an individual that takes place during a period marked by their continuous presence, before a particular set of observers and has some influence on them.
Acting is a process comprised of several phases: defining a situation, choosing a setting, recruiting actors and rehearsing their roles, and the performance itself. The key principles or terms used by actors are: act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose (Gallego & Amparán, 2000).
Under this framework, some aspects of individual socialization are appropriate for analysis in light of symbolic interactionism: greetings and family, for example, under the following approach.
Having identified the main means of transmission of the disease, the World Health Organization (WHO, 2019) made public that “a person can contract Covid-19 by contact with another person who is infected with the virus. The disease can spread from person to person through droplets from the nose or mouth that are expelled when an infected person coughs or exhales. These droplets land on objects and surfaces around the person, so other people can contract Covid-19 if they touch these objects or surfaces and then touch their eyes, nose or mouth. They can also become infected if they inhale droplets that have been spread by a person with Covid-19 when coughing or exhaling” (para. 8).
In response, the Peruvian government declared a health emergency, followed by a national state of emergency. Authorities are controlling public spaces and urging the population to stay home to prevent the spread of the disease. These measures, such as lockdowns and physical distancing, are disrupting the daily lives of individuals, families, and social groups; altering customs and aspects of culture; and impacting family life, thus creating a landscape of changes in customs and social relationships.
“In the last decade, the percentage of dysfunctional families has been increasing rapidly throughout the world, and especially in developing and underdeveloped countries. The main causes of this psychosocial phenomenon are the economic crisis and growing unemployment, which also leads to the emigration of one or both parents in search of better jobs that offer higher incomes” (Morla, Saad de Janon and Saad, 2006, para. 1).
Therefore, the processes of family breakdown could now be impacted by a new imposed dynamic, which forces household members to remain together in the home for longer than usual. This is to gain insight into the family group and its adaptation to government regulations.
And to have a look at the cultural traits affected or modified –temporarily for months or perhaps years–, the custom of greeting is formidable, because it constitutes one of the basic forms of social interaction and contributes to the social construction of many social processes and phenomena (Vega, 2020a).
“The greeting is the gesture that begins and ends the encounter between people. It is the first form of verbal and non-verbal communication and constitutes a valuable tool to promote the bond between [people: family, friends, colleagues, clients, etc.]” (Eymanna, Ortolania, Moroa, Oteroa, Catsicarisa and Wahrena, 2011, Introduction, para. 1).
Undoubtedly, Covid-19, in addition to affecting the economic and political structure, is also affecting the nature of social relations: the social kiss, the hug and the handshake, are some examples of our characteristics of sociability; and also various customs and aspects of our social identity, in short: cultural changes (Vega, 2020a).
In a study on preferred greetings (Eymanna et al., 2011), researchers found that, “regarding how to be greeted: 72,6% of women and 29,9% of men preferred a kiss on the cheek, and 7,8% and 36,2% preferred a handshake.” As for hugs, 4,9% of women and 9,5% of men preferred this form of greeting. And 12,8% of women and 19,7% of men were indifferent.
Therefore, the foundations of symbolic interactionism are relevant, even in complex crises such as the one posed by the pandemic, where the governing group responsible for managing the crisis must consider elements that are socially structured from individuals in ordinary, routine or everyday activities.
Results
This research is a first approach to the sociological study of the pandemic at the beginning of the 21st century, as an unprecedented process of global and local health crisis with diverse multidimensional repercussions: in the economic, political, social, cultural, environmental, and technological spheres; but also in the legitimacy of political power that germinates in individual actions and interactions and is built in collective perceptions.
From a sociological perspective, knowledge can be constructed that contributes to understanding phenomena associated with the objective and subjective manifestations of a structural or hegemonic crisis that was unfolding before the pandemic. For the hermeneutic and interpretive epistemological-methodological framework, knowledge is the result of a continuous, subjective process of construction aimed at understanding and making sense of the disagreement between the state and society, identifying the mechanisms, conditions, or aspects that facilitate or hinder the social acceptance of government measures.
From a macro-sociological perspective, the disagreements between government measures enacted to address the Covid-19 pandemic and the various forms of social rejection cannot be understood in isolation from the context of the structural crisis that was unfolding in Latin America, the hemisphere, and the world before the pandemic. This structural crisis manifests itself in economic and political crises, factors that stem from a global order that shapes the regimes of government and the social systems that, in turn, sustain and reproduce the development model. In other words, they constitute the objective conditions for the quality of the State-Society relationship. The pandemic accelerated the visibility of these crises.
Therefore, a historically absent state, when it finally makes its presence felt, cannot expect respect or compliance with its mandates; worse still, if it adopts a repressive attitude, disregarding the country's social and cultural realities. The aggravating factor is that the national development model views reality as static rather than dynamic and diverse. Furthermore, this development model has never prioritized health, education, or security.
From a micro-sociological perspective, these disagreements between the positions of the State and government on the one hand, and the population on the other, show the little or no credibility in Democracy, the distrust in institutions, the breakdown of the principle of authority; in short, they show a delegitimized political power and an economy perceived only as functional to the market, not as facilitating development or well-being.
Crises can be: cyclical crises, which is not the case here; structural crises, like the current one, during which the pandemic occurred; and systemic crises, which lead to structural changes and changes to the system itself, with their consequent collateral effects. The duration of the crisis, as well as the duration of the economic, political, and social restructuring, is unknown.
The integration of the objective manifestations or evidence of the structural crisis, and the subjective manifestations or evidence of the crisis of legitimacy, anticipates a critical scenario of capitalist globalization, which is called an organic crisis, not caused by the pandemic, but generated by the very dynamics of said capitalist globalization.
What the pandemic could facilitate is accelerating an acute contradiction by integrating the economic crisis, the political crisis, the social crisis and the crisis of legitimacy, giving way to the outbreak of a systemic crisis, putting the State in serious strategic difficulties, with collateral effects on security and development.
Therefore, in light of this disruptive scenario and complex convergence of digital technologies and physical capabilities, which anticipate changes from the macro structures, the disagreements between State-Society in the Third World place us in the status of an organic society very close to a mechanical society; that is, these disagreements end up being irrelevant.
Final reflection as an integrative conclusion
Sociology is a fundamental discipline in managing crises as complex as the one we are currently experiencing, because the subjective construction of knowledge helps to understand the new social reality and generates the social scientific evidence for government decision-making based on sociological evidence in matters of security and development, as well as in matters of culture and technological changes.
Although some approximations of the magnitude of the crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic are already being heard—for example, the estimates from multinational organizations regarding the growth of the global, regional, and local economies—the environmental, social, economic, cultural, political, scientific, technological, and security consequences of this pandemic still need to be assessed. Furthermore, the post-pandemic restructuring of transnational capitalism being planned and implemented by the global hegemonic power must not be overlooked.
For example, just as an exercise consistent with the previous paragraph: Is teleworking becoming more established? Does the increased use of information and communication technologies in healthcare, politics, academia, labor, and production processes, coupled with government regulation of remote work, foreshadow mass layoffs during and after the pandemic? Has the time come for the replacement of humans by the technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, as part of the restructuring of capitalism? This worrying industrial revolution will indeed fundamentally alter how we live, how we work, and how we relate to one another.
The fundamental task, then, is to generate knowledge to strengthen social capacities and confront the restructuring of the new post-pandemic capitalist globalization, which will undoubtedly be violent. In other words, post-pandemic, there will be no “new normal” as the conventional and digital media and information systems would have us believe, claiming that this new normal will be characterized by romanticism, solidarity, respect and recognition of others, honesty in public service, love for the environment, greater sensitivity, a rescue of humanity, among other conjectures with ideological objectives to mold minds and control bodies. False.
What will emerge after the pandemic is a shift towards greater precarity for the individual, increased deregulation of labor and the job market, a consolidation of digital technology in production processes, and reduced benefits for the population. All of this is because transnational and local economic powers always exploit crises to gain advantages during restructuring. At the same time, all of this presents significant concerns and challenges to security from the perspective of the State.
[1] Sociologist. Master's degree in National Development and Defense. PhD in Strategic Development and Security. Postgraduate studies in Multidimensional Intelligence and Security at the Center for Advanced National Studies – Graduate School of Peru (CAEN-EPG). Postgraduate studies in Strategic Management of Research, Science, and Technology in Higher Education Institutions at Cayetano Heredia University. Postgraduate studies at the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO) in Ecuador and Costa Rica. Professor and researcher at the Peruvian Air Force Officers' School. Researcher at the CAEN-EPG Simulation Center. Speaker at national and international scientific events. Member of the Research Network of the Electoral and Governance School of the National Elections Board. Member of the Network of Collaborators of the Center for Strategic Studies of the Peruvian Army.
Highlighted
Aron, R. (1953). Contemporary German Sociology, chap. IIIBuenos Aires: Ed. Paidós. Translated by Carlos A. Fayard.
Arteaga, N. and Lara, V. (2004). Violence and social distance: a review. Population Papers, 10(40), 169-191. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1405-74252004000200010&lng=es&tlng=es
Barajas, E. (2010). The 14 steps to begin qualitative research. S.l.: S.e. Recovered from: https://www.academia.edu/24824187/Los_14_pasos_para_comenzar_una_Investigaci%C3%B3n_Cualitativa
Comte, A. (1942). First trialsMexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Translated by Francisco Giner de los Ríos.
Durkheim, E. (1987). The Division of Labour in SocietyMadrid: Akal Publishing House.
Durkheim, E. (2001). The rules of the sociological method, 2nd reprint. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Eymann, A., Ortolani, M., Moro, G., Otero, P., Catsicaris, C., and Wahre, C. (2011). Preferred greeting methods of patients in outpatient pediatric consultation. Argentine Archives of Pediatrics, 109(1), 14–17. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.ar/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0325-00752011000100005&lng=es&tlng=es
Giddens, A. (1996). In Defense of SociologyCambridge: Polity Press.
Goffman, E. (1961). Encounters: Two Studies in the Sociology of Interaction – Fun in Games & Role Distance. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
Goffman, E. (1993). The presentation of the person in everyday lifeBuenos Aires: Amorrortu.
Gurvitch, G. (1955). Three chapters in the history of Sociology: Comte, Marx, and SpencerBuenos Aires: Galatea Publishing House. Translated by Horacio Crespo.
Gutiérrez, G. (2000). Methodology of the social sciences – IMexico: Collection of university texts in social sciences.
Marvin, F. (1941). CountMexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Translated by Salvador Echevarría.
Ministry of the Interior of Peru (2020). Supreme Decree No. 006-2020-IN. Supreme Decree approving the regulations of Legislative Decree No. 1458, Legislative Decree to sanction non-compliance with the provisions issued during the National Health Emergency and other regulations issued to protect the life and health of the population from COVID-19 contagion.19. Lima: Official Gazette El Peruano. Retrieved from: https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/normaslegales/decreto-supremo-que-aprueba-el-reglamento-del-decreto-legisl-decreto-supremo-n-006-2020-in-1865551-1/
Morla, R., Saad de Janon and Saad (2006). Depression in adolescents and family breakdown in the city of Guayaquil, Ecuador. Colombian Journal of Psychiatry, 35(2), 149–165. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0034-74502006000200003&lng=en&tlng=es
Núñez, D. (2018). Symbolic interactionism and its contributions to contemporary social theory. Journal of Contributions to the Social Sciences, (February 2018)Retrieved from www.eumed.net/2/rev/cccss/2018/02/interaccionismo-simbolico.html
Single digital platform of the Peruvian State (2020). What is mandatory social isolation and mandatory social immobilization? Retrieved from: https://www.gob.pe/8789-presidencia-del-consejo-de-ministros-que-es-el-aislamiento-social-obligatorio-y-la-inmovilizacion-social-obligatoria
Presidency of the Council of Ministers (PCM, 2020). Legislative Decree No. 1458. Legislative Decree to sanction non-compliance with the provisions issued during the national health emergency and other regulations issued to protect the life and health of the population from Covid-19 contagionLima: Official Gazette El Peruano. Retrieved from: https://busquedas.elperuano.pe/normaslegales/decreto-legislativo-para-sancionar-el-incumplimiento-de-las-decreto-legislativo-n-1458-1865516-1/
Puga, C. (2009). Social Sciences: A New Moment. Mexican Journal of Sociology, 71(spe), 105–131. Retrieved from: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0188-25032009000500005&lng=es&tlng=es.
Ritzer, G. (1995a). Contemporary sociological theorySpain: McGraw Hill Publishing.
Ritzer, G. (1995b). Classical sociological theorySpain: McGraw Hill Publishing.
Ross, E. (1901). Social control. A Survey of the Foundation of OrderNew York: Macmillan.
Sciulli, D. (2005). Continental Sociology of Professions Today: Conceptual Contributions. Current Sociology 6, vol. 53 (November, 2005): 915–942.
Timasheff, N. (1965). Sociological theory: Its nature and development, 3rd edition. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Vargas, X. (2011). How to do qualitative research? Mexico: ETXETA.
Vega, E. (2007). Notes on Sociological Theory I. Huacho: School of Sociology of the National University José Faustino Sánchez Carrión.
Vega, E. (2019). Social sciences and strategic intelligence. Notes from a national security perspectiveArticle published on Medium. https://medium.com/@investsocperu/ciencias-sociales-e-inteligencia-estrat%C3%A9gica-56768983a061
Vega, E. (2020a). COVID-19 pandemic: kisses and hugs, no; quarantine and isolation, yesArticle published on Medium. Retrieved from: https://medium.com/@investsocperu/pandemia-covid-19-besos-y-abrazos-no-cuarentena-y-aislamiento-s%C3%AD-ba71f66e2dee
Vega. E. (2020b). A state of emergency is in defense of human life and to ensure healthArticle published on Medium. Retrieved from: https://medium.com/@investsocperu/estado-de-emergencia-es-en-defensa-de-la-vida-humana-y-para-asegurar-la-salud-c1cca917d74a
Weber, M. (1944). Economy and society. Mexico: Fondo de Cultura Económica. Translated by José Medina Echavarría, Juan Roura Parella, Eduardo García Máynez, Eugenio Ímaz and others.
If you would like to receive more information about CLACSO's training programs:
[widget id=”custom_html-57″]
to our email lists.
