Blog

Today, we received the sad news that Crossing Borders Patron HE Ambassador Zindzi Mandela of South Africa to Denmark has made the transition in a Joburg hospital early today 13 July 2020.   As someone who was born and grew up in the forefront of the struggle against the racist apartheid system, Zindzi’s life was defined by and a true embodiment of the struggle for freedom. Her father Nelson Mandela was snatched away when she was only 18 months and kept behind bars for 27 years. Her mother Mama Winnie was constantly in and out of apartheid detentions, including repeated banishments to remote areas. To attend school, she was sent to Swaziland along with her sister Ambassador Zinani. When the two sisters came for school holiday the apartheid police would make sure to detain Mama Winnie until they had to return back. The day her father was released in 1990, the apartheid police murdered her partner. This experience made her more determined to fight for fredom, equal rights and justice for all anytime and anywhere. Thus, as Ambassador to Denmark, she was unapologetic and undiplomatic when it came to people´s freedom and justice. Ambassador Zindizi unprecedently committed a lot of her time in Denmark to visiting, comforting, empowering, listening to, cooking, baking for and serving those who have been pushed to the margins of society: homeless persons, refugees, asylum seekers, victims of violence, deportees who were languishing in deportation centres. She also arranged family days and took part in International Women’s Day. She served as a true human rights ambassador and activist. As we join millions of others in paying tribute to her life, we at Crossing Borders say thank you dear Ambassador Zindzi N. Mandela for your inspiration, determination and couragous example in being the ambassador of the voiceless. We promise to continue your struggle for a better world for all.  In this heartbreaking moment, our sincere condolences and thoughts go to the entire Madikizela-Mandela Family and all those who were fortunate to be touched by you.  On behalf of Crossing Borders Mariano Davies, Chair Advisory Board, Sara Omar, Life Ambassador, Vibeke Quaade, Chair Executive Board and Garba Diallo, Executive Director  

Check out the full article here: Interview with Garba Diallo

Crossing Borders’ International Programme Coordinator Andrew Bende discusses CB’s approach to the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals for ‘a better and more sustainable future’ and, in doing so, articulates why it is so important for these to be put into context.  The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were introduced in 2015 with the aim of achieving them by 2030. They have ambitious aims like ending poverty in any form everywhere, conserving and sustainably using the oceans and empowering all women and girls but inevitably, such grandiose goals draw criticism in a world that otherwise doesn’t offer much hope when it comes to sustainability. Even the UN’s 2019 Financing for Sustainable Development Report acknowledges that despite improvement with the SDGs increasingly being incorporated into public budgets and development cooperation efforts, this is not happening at nearly the pace it needs to. The fact that the goals exist on this high-up, policy level is not necessarily such a bad thing. Reflecting on a Crossing Borders project in Ghana which utilises local radio stations to debate the SDGs at a grassroots level, Andrew explains that awareness of the issues the goals want to achieve is already underway in many forms, thanks to the UN goals offering a comprehensive framework.   With environmental issues for example, it is easy to pass on the message of the goals. As Andrew says, “because local communities know there is an environmental breakdown, there is deforestation around them”, they can easily relate such happenings to the messages of the SDGs. Instead of spending time debating whether the goals will be reached, it makes better sense to start acting.   The project, named the Right to Communicate, was fundamentally intertwined with Crossing Borders’ central aim to educate global citizens, raise awareness of educators and create space for dialogue, all acting towards creating a peaceful and sustainable world. The Right to Communicate focuses on local radio stations in Ghana, which take centre stage in localizing the SDGs by articulating them into local contexts and bringing them to the grassroots level. In many regions, these radios are the single most reliable way of updating information and promoting local communities’ engagement in social, cultural, and political discourse. They are key stakeholders in local development and an example of channels through which the SDGs can be localized. Moreover, these community radios are themselves a space where power is contested among religious groups, the government, corporate interests and local groups, all vying for control of the airwaves. They are thus a true representation of a local and organic democratic context.   On these media outlets, local issues are discussed in a way that contrasts to large-scale news about global politics and they are often the subject of restrictions. They have the capacity to function as a breeding ground for collective discussion and present a direct challenge to the process of powerful groups funnelling dialogue in undesired directions. Because of this, community radios in Ghana are now restricted to a radius of only 5km, forty times smaller than some of the state radios. This is another thing The Right to Communicate advocates against. Andrew points out though that if on the ground level, the SDGs aren’t fitted to different contexts, there is a significant danger they will become “an added activity”, a restraint on the aspiration of improving local conditions. He recounts the response to him asking why the SDGs are so important in an interview with one of the community radio representatives: “It’s not a matter of whether they’re important – we know they are – but a question of whether we understand them.” It is thus essential not to use the SDGs on their own, but as a kind of guiding principle to add to work already being done on the ground level. “Do you see the effects of climate change happening? Do you see changes in how your environment is behaving in relation to your agricultural yields? If the answer is yes, then the solution becomes the most important and interesting thing in a discussion like that, not the continued pointing out of failures”. Where perhaps others can’t, Andrew lays bare the fundamental disjuncture between global policy and local context. His discussion of the Right to Communicate clarifies why it is so important to localise the UN’s SDGs, and puts frustration at seemingly far-fetched and high-level UN policy into perspective. As he stated, those goals are produced at UN level, and will inevitably reflect that process. “But at the same time, the SDGs offer a guide for augmenting local discussion and bringing it back to the wider world”.   According to Andrew, “nobody wants to be poor, neither for the world to be unequal. Instead, everyone is striving for a better future, but sometimes taking illogical decisions as a result”. He recalls a debate on a local TV station where the SDGs were tactically introduced – in this, the double standards of early marriage culture were discussed where parents favoured curtailing their daughters’ education and marrying them early to a seemingly rich man in the hope that this would give them a better life. Andrew argues that this in fact makes young women far less likely to end up in a high income band. When these parents were asked if they were “aware of the Sustainable Development Goal where everyone should have access to education? Do you have an awareness of SDG8 on gender equality and those that are marginalised from a gender perspective?”, they had no answer, but they wanted to hear more and to reflect on what equal opportunities for both genders meant. Such a fusion of the local and the global can also help to avoid Eurocentric or Western ideas of what it is for a country to develop and improve. Although he is from Uganda, Andrew says he is far separated from the specific situations in other locations of Crossing Borders projects, like Sierra Leone or Kenya. Every country is different, and developing sustainably in each will inevitably be different too. Each needs

We start by thanking the BLACK LIVES MATTER Movement for their brave actions to heal the world of the pandemic of racism. We applaud their powerful push to restore the dignity of black people and other people. We consider the Black Lives Matter as a way for our inner and outer emancipation and that of our cultures and other aspects of life. The 25 May assassination of George Floyd under the sadistic knee of Derek Chauvin and his brothers in crime has once again reminded us that the cries of the Black Lives Matter movement are not only natural. They are necessary absolutely necessary in order to liberate humanity from the pandemic of racism. Therefore, as Crossing Borders organisation whose mission is to create spaces for dialogue on equal terms, it is only natural that we join the Back Lives Matter to condemn in the strongest possible terms the systemic police brutality and its underlying historical, cultural, linguistic, media, economic and power structures. We condemn these structures as they inspire and fuel the mental and emotional infrastructures that justify having cruel supremacist knees on the necks of the black people for so long. We recognise that these knees on the necks of the black are the pandemic that has prevented black people from breathing for the past 401 long years. During these years, black people endured kidnapping, enslavement, forced labour, colonisation, apartheid, and ongoing exploitation of their bodies and economies. We recognise that these infrastructures are the root causes of the daily racism and discrimination that black people and communities of colour are systematically subjected to in our international relations, academia, museums, movement across borders our borders, on our streets, schools, and workplaces. We also recognise that the history of racist abuse has run so long and so deep that even the black victims have internalised and applied it on themselves, as manifested in self-denial and abuse. Thus, we hope that the momentum that the murder of George Floyd has generated will be escalated and sustained until these underlying structures are dismantled and replaced with the recognition of the fact that there is only one human race and that the cultural and other human diversities are not only what makes the human race survive and thrive, but, cultural diversity is as necessary as the biological diversity of planet earth. As a contribution toward restoring trust and healing, we propose the following measures: Recognise, apologise, and cleanse the historical crime of enslavement, colonialism, apartheid, and the still ongoing discrimination, exclusion, and exploitation of black people and other communities of colour. Cleanse our education, media, language, museums and amusement parks of racist legacies just like we have done with the bundling and burning of smart women and pulling down of the monuments of Nazi war founding fathers Launch an honest cultural exchange and spaces for dialogue for youth, educators, artists and schools and university to learn not to repeat the past Replace development aid with fair trade and knowledge sharing partnership with Africa and the countries of people of colour Include black and brown people in our schools, workplaces, parliaments, company boards, and other key positions wherever possible. The public and civil society sectors should walk the talk by taking the lead on this front The nations whose economies were built on black blood and bodies should set up museums and memorials to recognise and honour the vital contribution of black and brown people to their countries Launch campaigns of public education to put an end to the degrading abuse of black people’s pictures by our charities/ development industry for fundraising purposes

That most countries, including the most advanced ones, are ill-prepared for the sudden COVID 19 outbreak proves that the world has not invested in where it matters the most: relevant education, public health, decentralized provision of vital goods and services. The result is the panic and uncoordinated and fragmented responses we witness right now. Responding to and defeating an invisible global enemy calls for global coordination and cooperation and solidarity. In other words, solidarity, and sharing of information, knowledge, expertise, and resources within and across countries and continents. The absence of solidarity and collaboration makes each country grapple with the outbreak within its confines. For populist leaders, the easiest response is resorting to quick fix: closing their borders as if the COVID 19 could be shut out by shutting the borders. During his solitary prayer in the Vatican at the peak of the COVID 19 pandemic in Italy, Pope Francis urged the world to see the coronavirus pandemic as a test of solidarity and a reminder of basic values” and that the health crisis put everyone “in the same boat”.[i] The lesson here is that we need to shift our priorities away from the notion of bigger is better toward small and decentralised units. The orthodox notion of bigger is better that has driven the modern development toward over-centralization has proven itself to be ineffective. The results are mega metropolis with mega glass towers, high ways for mega lorries transporting endless chain of necessary and un-necessary products, a complex web of mega metros and airports, mega power plants dominated by polluting coal, gas, nuclear and hydro plants, mega monoculture-agri-business, mega ports for mega ships ploughing the seas with mega containers and mega fishing trawlers to feed mega markets owned by fewer and fewer mega transnational corporations. The inevitable results include stress and pollutions of various kinds including air, noise, light, water, and stench which breed outbreaks of diseases as we witness today. Other harmful consequences can be seen in the growing mental ill-health, depression, and a general sense of identity crises, unhappiness and satisfaction, and human insecurity.  Therefore, that we have been grounded and provided with ample time by the coronavirus we should be able to reflect about and chart a new direction toward more solidarity and cooperation on global issues like the current COVID 19. Writing in the Financial Times on 25 March 2020, the prime minister of Ethiopia and the 2019 Nobel Peace laureate Aby Ahmed warns that “..if the virus is not defeated in Africa, it will only bounce back to the rest of the world. That is why the current strategy of uncoordinated country-specific measures, while understandable, is myopic, unsustainable, and potentially counter-productive. A virus that ignores borders cannot be tackled successfully like this. We can defeat this invisible and vicious adversary — but only with global leadership. Without that, Africa may suffer the worst, yet it will not be the last. We are all in this together, and we must work together to the end.”[ii] Small could be beautiful and more efficient more sustainable Thus, one of the many lessons we should learn from the corona crisis is to shift the direction from bigger is better toward smaller and decentralized economic models with smaller and self-reliant units of production, supplies, and services. This is not about going to back hunting and gathering mode of society. As can be seen in the global growth of transition towns and eco-villages, reinventing smaller units is the new modern way of leapfrogging back to living with and not apart from nature. Reflecting on the COVID-19 pandemic, the Indian earth scientist Dr. Vandana Shiva asserts that “With the health emergency engendered by the coronavirus we need to look at systems that spread disease and systems that create health in a holistic, systems approach. A systems approach to health care in times of the corona crisis would address not just the virus, but also how new epidemics are spreading as we invade into the homes of other beings. It also needs to address the comorbidity conditions related non-communicable chronic diseases which are spreading due to non-sustainable, anti-nature , unhealthy industrial food systems” She continues “…we need to discard “policies and practices that lead to the physical and moral degradation of the food system while destroying our health and endangering the planet’s ecological stability, and endangering the biogenetic survival of life on the planet.”[iii] Thus, it is high time we turn toward a new sustainable form of production and consumption. A form that is more efficient, healthier, safer, and sustainable than the currently dominant, extractive, and destructive forms. Toward this kind of utopian society, I propose the following seven strategic steps. Decentralise the mega citifies and sectors in order to localise the control over their vital sectors of education, health, production, and energy supply units. In such smaller communities, people will be able to walk and bike in green parks with small schools, clean energy plants, solar and heat pumps Focus on enlightenment and entrepreneurship education to prepare collaborative and job creating citizens rather than frightened job seekers Shift our economic system toward green and cradle to cradle zero economic production, processing and consumption systems that are in harmony with the environment Shift investment from the destructive militarised economy, commercialised public health to life giving and regenerative economic activities  Reform from post-WWII world order to a more democratic global forum with equal representation of the different regions of the world according to proportional democracy with no veto to power on global issues Promote intercultural contacts, exchange, and collaborations to reduce harmful old and prevent new stereotypes Foster and reward international peaceful and climate-friendly joint ventures by providing tax-free to such ventures    Already we see all over the world people volunteering to help, offering food and sharing within and across communities. We also see doctors, nurses, caregivers, and social workers from multicultural backgrounds putting their lives at risk in order to save the lives of fellow humans. This heroic dedication shows the corona

I was once driving down a highway on my own and my cell phone was out of battery. After a while, the engine of my car began to sputter and eventually came to a halt. I checked that there was still fuel in the car. So, I tried turning on the ignition a couple of times in the hope that the car would start. But it didn’t. I had no idea where the nearest petrol station was, I hadn’t seen a car go by since I stopped and I didn’t know how much longer it would be until the sun went down and it became dark. But, I sat in the car and kept turning the ignition on again and again in the hope that the car would start and allow me to go on. We all know that in a situation like that, we try the ignition a couple of times, and if it doesn’t work, accept the fact that something is wrong with the engine and try different ways to fix it. And in the worst case, if we are unable to make any difference under the hood, throw in the towel and leave the car behind and hitch a ride or walk to the nearest place with a mechanic. When stuck in situations like the metaphorical broken car, we tend to keep turning the key hoping to get out of the situation we are in and fail to accept that something is broken and needs fixing. This could be for a host of reasons — we don’t want to accept that we made a bad decision, we don’t want others to come back and tell us “We told you so”, we don’t want to face the reality of having to start all over again from scratch, we don’t want to tell ourselves that all the effort that we have invested in it so far is a total waste. But sitting there and waiting for the car to start is only prolonging this realization and the eventual fix. We can lie to ourselves all we want and feel good and optimistic about it for a relatively short period of time, but eventually, we have to find a way to move forward once the sun goes down. Accepting painful truths about ourselves is what helps us make significant transformational changes. Only then can we hope to get better! Written by: Pareeksha Chadaga Karanth Crossing Borders Admin & HR Coordinator

Will we see a “new normal” after COVID-19? History has shown that behavioural change, when a majority of people within a culture recognise a positive need for change, will cause effective changes to take place and often remarkably quickly. In comparison, for example, dictatorship and the fear of reprisal can secure behavioural change such as accepting that only one political view is correct or what dress codes are permissible and which are not. However, in such cases, once the controlling element has been removed, it is very unlikely that such change will be lasting. The oppressed society will tend to revert to a form of diversity that was normal before the oppression. I would argue that this tends not to be the case when behavioural change is driven from within as opposed to the force of external law or dictatorship. For example, when Sweden became an extremely anti-smoking nation and its Government also limited many other individual rights, a Danish journalist, Mogens Berendt, in 1982 wrote a much-discussed article “Luk Sverige” (Close Sweden) in Berlingske Tidende, and followed up with a book called “Tilfældet Sverige” (The Swedish Way) – a book that painted a picture of an extremely authoritarian and somewhat dictatorial Swedish Government.  Danes at first seemed in general to put this all down to Swedish authoritarianism. However, not too many years later, Danish society began a very serious public debate about the health dangers of smoking for both smokers and non-smokers (passive smoking). Today, the result of this behavioural change has been widespread acceptance of the rules and regulations that followed in the wake of this health discussion – even among smokers, who have been forced to accept a smoking ban in most public areas, where it had been customary to accept smoking. Yes, not all smokers are impressed with the social stigma that smoking has become, but they are nevertheless driven to accept that “Danish society” has evolved into a “new normal” with new written and unwritten rules about smoking. Not long ago, smoking in Denmark was an integral part of accepted cultural behaviour. Smoking was normal behaviour in the street, in public buildings, in cars and in planes. One could even go as far as saying that smoking was a generally accepted social habit giving status. Now, cigarette packets and cigar boxes carry very clear health warnings, and, in some countries like Denmark, they are no longer visible in shops – they are hidden in draws or behind curtains. The power and effectiveness of this “new normal” has been that the changed behaviour came from within. The rules and regulations came as a result of a behavioural change. Post COVID-19, in potentially 18-24 months’ time, we may well see new examples of such “new normal” behavioural changes, where the public debate about this pandemic (especially within social media) will evolve into new behavioural changes. Perhaps this evolution will be exacerbated by this being a massive wake up call to the dangers of biological threats. For example, although global travel is cheaper than ever before, I expect that very many will think twice about where they travel, how far they travel and how they travel. As a behavioural reaction to COVID-19, we could see a dramatic fall in travel and a significant increase in the use of the many of the digital communication tools available. Just six months ago, could we seriously have imagined that a majority of commercial planes globally would be grounded for an unknown period of time, that countries would close their air space, that borders would be closed globally and that everyone would be sent home for a significant period of time as a protection against a deadly virus. My prediction is that this “perfect storm” crisis will result in new long-term behavioural patterns. I predict that it will have a social and economic impact that none of us can imagine with massive changes in global travel, global production and social interaction. People will err on the side of caution and those that don’t will risk paying a heavy price for blindly ignoring that this may be a game changing “new normal” with new behavioural challenges.  Republished with permission, this article was first published by the author on 8 April 2020 on his LinkedIn page

Was it necessary from the appearance of the first case of Coronavirus in Lebanon to suspend flights from Iran or to protect the vulnerabilities of Hezbollah? Give the reins to the army? Count on the civic spirit of the Lebanese people? Was it necessary to preserve access to care? Or was it pivotal to prioritize the need to eat? Around the world, States are faced with delicate trade-offs between health risks and political-economic imperatives, to which particular dimensions and sensitivities are added in Lebanon. A sectarian/political dimension, which raises fundamental questions about public service, national interest, and community-driven imperatives is also a firm reality. In other words, how does the Diab government decide, and according to what criteria? In most Western Countries, the answer is simple: the state acts in the name of the general interest, and in service of where it derives its legitimacy from its people. But when the state is deeply rooted in Confessionalism, and therefore in the defense of sectarian interests, citizens are faced with the delicate task of questioning the merits of the decisions taken by its representatives. Especially when the system in place, which is deeply clientelist, has led the country into the financial abyss which amplifies the health crisis and complicates its management. How do you import medical supplies when you run out of US dollars? How do you equip public hospitals when you have spent years gradually sucking them dry? How do you protect the most disadvantaged when government reserves are emptied? How do you ask for international aid when you are unable to aid yourself?   And at one of the most critical stages in our country’s history, all the state has found to do is ask the Lebanese to be what they have never been (and what they have never been requested to be): united – while politicians strengthen their grip on an increasingly destitute population. The pandemic is provoking reflections all over the world on the economic model, public policy priorities, and the role of the state. And amidst these debates, Lebanon is currently confronted with yet another major obstacle towards the annihilation of this epidemic: the 10,000 Lebanese expected to fly back to Lebanon between April 5 and 12, 2020. The plan for the repatriation of Lebanese from abroad who wished to return was adopted during the March 31, 2020 meeting of the Council of Ministers. According to ministerial sources, the adopted plan will be implemented in two phases. The first will take place from April 5 to 12, 2020 and the second from April 27 to May 4, 2020. The idea is, therefore, to carry out the first phase, to wait two weeks to study the curve of the epidemic and then to fill in any gaps. The plan is designed to allow those who wish to return home to do so without endangering the lives of residents in Lebanon. For this purpose, everything from screening and testing before the flight, to isolating infected individuals in separate planes has been taken into account. As the treasury is practically empty, the return journeys will be made at the passengers’ expense. Banks have subsequently been asked to facilitate transfers. On a more positive note, difficult times have proven time and time again that the Lebanese people are willing to step in when the government does not. In a true surge of solidarity, Lebanese living abroad have offered to help those who cannot afford their tickets according to multiple media sources. The fundamental obstacle toward the containment of the virus is, however, not how these Lebanese return but rather, the risk that Lebanese returnees will not strictly comply with the instructions they are given. The plan provides for medical monitoring by hospitals, under the supervision of the Ministry of Health, to verify that the confinement instructions are followed, knowing that the Lebanese may be ‘unruly.’ This was also the reason why, without ever questioning the right of Lebanese who are abroad to return to the country, the government had reservations about massive repatriation initially. For the management of this crisis, it had planned a two-step plan: firstly closing the land, air and sea borders to passengers for two weeks to put an end to the contamination from a ‘foreign source.’ And secondly, the two-week extension of general mobilization and that of strict containment measures to make it possible to limit the spread of the virus and to flatten the curve of the number of people affected by it. Although the plan initially seemed rigid, Lebanon’s Prime Minister has had to step back from his initial stance to prevent repatriation until April 12th due to political pressures – once more proving that Lebanon is not geared by a state, but rather geared by fragmentation of political will. At this point, as it has been proven time and time again, we can only hope the Lebanese returnees will care enough about those who never left to take on the necessary precautions and be honest. As the state believes it can unrealistically ‘contain’ the massive influx of people returning to their homes to be on lockdown with the rest of us all we have once more, is each other watching each other’s’ backs, and washing each other’s’ hands.. Jasmin Lilian Diab MENA Regional Focal Point on Migration, United Nations Major Group for Children and Youth

Another way of looking at the bright side of the corona pandemic is to enact new laws to enforce corporate social responsibility (CSR) to contribute with their fair share in the fight against the coronavirus. This in turn, could help reduce the pandemic culture of inequality which has gripped the world in the past three decades. Enforcing corporate contribution and curbing the greed induced inequality could generate sufficient resources and at the same time inspire renewed culture of compassion, equality and solidarity in society.   The problem   According to Oxfam report of 2019, “three African billionaires today have more wealth than the poorest 50%- or 650 million people across the continent”. Titled “A Tale of Two Continents”, the report was released in the eve of the World Economic Forum Africa Meeting in Cape Town in September last year. Therefore, the report reveals that the chorus of Africa Rising has an ugly back side, which is the rapid rising of inequality across the continent, in spite of the rising GDP.     The same goes for the US where the gap between the top super richest and poorest bottom in the USA has grown from 6 times in the 1970s to currently 60 times. According to the economist Jeffey Sachs, “The richest 10 percent of Americans in 2018 represented 70 percent of all wealth in the nation”  Even in the traditionally equal welfare Nordic countries inequality has exploded exponentially in recent years. We have more billionaires today and many poorer citizens than 30 years ago, when most people found themselves in the middle of the economic ladder. This what the Danish philosopher, poet and father of the popular education Grundtvig meant in the 19th century when he stated that “Society would be good when we have few rich people and even fewer poor ones”   The combination of these pro-business policies in favour of the rich have their roots in the Reagan-Teacher era of the 1980s. Ever since, politicians of nearly all colours have relentlessly and aggressively introduced tax-cuts for the rich, deregulations (laissez-fair) and public subsidies for the giant corporations. The result is what is rightly called corporate welfare at the expense of public welfare. Hence, nearly in every country, social services, education, health and public safety have been gradually starved of resources. Perhaps, this is why even the supposedly advanced countries of the West and the US are badly prepared for the Coronavirus. Instead, most countries have been foolishly investing in useless weapons of mass destruction while neglecting putting their hands where their mouths are. Ignorance and arrogance seem to prevent the Western countries from learning from countries like Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea and China which have responded much more effectively in limiting the impact of the coronavirus. A former Norwegian development minister Erik Solheim lamented over the weekend, that the Western countries are not prepared to test citizens in spite of the fact that the pandemic occurred in China already more than three months ago 🙂  Armed with a huge arsenal of funds, the businessmen (the merchant has defeated the prince) have captured pillars of power from the judiciary to the executive as exemplified by Trump and other populist leaders, including clowns around the world. Super modern telecommunications and transportation systems have not only enabled the super-rich to take over political and economic aspects of life and push for financial globalisation while building barriers between people. It has also given them the tools to create and control the society of consumers we have today. This state of affairs has furthermore made it possible for the corporations to turn the world into an open duty-free like market for members of the consumer society to shop 24/7 around the year. This shopping rites are being done in near total disregard of the well-being of the planet’s ecosystems. The fact that in the final analysis, everything is connected and mutually interdependent was ignored in the pursuit of building and sustaining a pyramid-based society, in which few people have too much and many have too little.   The consequences  The inevitably consequences of this economic house of cards is the recurrent offshoots and financial collapse almost every decade. The founding fathers of the current world disorder seem to have forgotten that in a limited planet with limited resources, there must be a limit to growth. The malaise of this unsustainable politico-economic system has been documented many times over both by experience and experts and caused huge amount of suffering and destructions including two world wars. Please, see a video by journalist and climate campaigner Naomi Klein on link 1 below.  How not to repeat history again  Our authorities must learn from history in order to avoid repeating the same fatal mistakes as in the past. Instead of enabling the giant corporations again to cash from the COVID-19 tragedy and get away with it, the public authorities must be vigilant and act differently this time.   Let’s take the chance the coronavirus had offered  The coronavirus quarantine has given us back the time and space we lost in pursuit of materials goods and “bads”. Before the coronavirus took away the freedoms, we took for granted like hugging, handshaking, visiting each other, walking close to one another, going to work, gather together, to shop in shopping malls, party in bars, pubs, night clubs, cafés, restaurants, cultural events, the mantra in everyone’s lips was: I don’t time. Now we have plenty of time to think and learn to hopefully understand ourselves and life around us better to act for common goods.  This applies to individuals, public, private and civil society sectors.  So, let’s seize the chance the corona offered.  A new social contract for public good   To effectively confront and hopefully tackle the extra ordinary situation the COVID-19 has caused, we need a creative and far sighted vision of a new society in which there is a legal limit in the gap between the super-rich and super poor. Such a social contract will also require the private sector to contribute with a fair % of the wealth they generate from the society and the planet. Towards this new social contract, I propose the seven points below:  As a first step, other countries should consider replicating the measures the Danish government has introduced to deal with the crisis. Thus, the Danish government has offered to pay 75% salaries of all public and private employees for the next three months. It has also introduced various measures aimed at helping public and private enterprises cope with the crises. To fund these measures, the government is borrowing a lot of money on behalf of the public in order to keep society functioning under these special circumstances. In the short term, these

“We are all in this together” a quote by Lily Tomlin which is often repeated on the internet in regards to Coronavirus these days. A number of inspiring articles on how should we turn this unfortunate situation and lockdown into something meaningful are published every day. I got so much inspired about an opportunity of using these slow and long days for things and activities I did not find time for in the past months or even years. This is all so amazing, how people can uplift and support each other by seeing something little positive in the world´s tragedy. I am not an expert on Coronavirus but I try to keep myself updated and sufficiently educated about this issue on the level of an average person. However, I want to share my personal feeling about the current situation from the perspective- not factual, inspirational nor educational, but human. It is very simple. I feel disappointed. Why so negative? Let me explain. Firstly, as a family member, colleague, girlfriend, and friend I do feel a lot of support, love and caring from all the members of my close circle and I do my best to give my love and support to them too. During the recent days, we all are checking on our beloved ones and people we care about a little bit more carefully and more often than usual, naturally, due to the seriousness of the situation. But it seems to me, it ends there. When no string and connection is attached to a person, we simply consider that person a “stranger”, a “competition” someone we have no reason to care about. Today, we are witnessing how people fight over toilet paper, or just buying an unnecessary number of items. Pharmacies in some countries are being sold out on paracetamol, vitamins, and medicine, which won´t treat COVID-19 anyway. People in pharmacies buying medicine, which won´t save them from Coronavirus, but they are forgetting, that there are still people, who are getting sick from regular illnesses and are in need of basic medicine? Instead, these people selfishly putting their own needs ahead of the needs of people “outside of their circle”, “strangers”, who are all a part of the community. Secondly, condemnation and judgment of other people´s actions. Either you are labeled as hysterical by staying locked in the home and behave in accordance with all government´s official restrictions or recommendations while wearing a face mask, or you are a selfish person who put others in danger because you take a walk in the park during a sunny day. We judge, based on our own approach to the situation and own believes. I am not talking about what is responsible to do and what’s not, I am talking about hatred which we spread amongst each other, rather than try to understand the reason behind their behavior. Are people missing knowledge about the seriousness of the situation, or they are just ignorant or irresponsible by putting themselves and others into risk? This is another topic to assess, I am not aiming for this. What I try to express, is how we behave towards these strangers. As I see it, outside of our close circle, we are not humans, we do not act as “we are all in this together” community. If we do not start spreading care and love towards “strangers” instead of judgment and hate, if we do not stop making our own exception for going to a café or outside, while our local situation is dangerous, we are not all in this together, we are in this on our own. What the world needs today, is that all of us sit down and think about what does it mean to be part of the local, regional and world community and understand, that another “stranger´s” problem is also my problem. Let´s use this situation not just for decluttering our messy apartments, catching up on unfinished books but also let´s rethink what being part of the community really means and feels. Then we will not just BE all in this together, we will FEEL that we are in this together from every corner, supermarket and pharmacy we take a step in.  Author: Martina Popaďáková