{"id":14401,"date":"2020-05-18T12:02:00","date_gmt":"2020-05-18T12:02:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/"},"modified":"2020-05-19T13:02:49","modified_gmt":"2020-05-19T13:02:49","slug":"diari-de-les-idees-23","status":"publish","type":"newspaper","link":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/","title":{"rendered":"Diari de les idees 23"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

This new edition of the Diari de Idees<\/em>, published in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, aims to point out not only the aspects most directly related to the health crisis unleashed by the coronavirus, but also to analyse some of the political, social, economic, cultural and technological impacts that are beginning to emerge in the post-coronavirus world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the pandemic has spread fear, disease and death, national leaders around the world have been tested hard to lead the response to the pandemic. Many have demonstrated their inability to anticipate scenarios or to rely on prepared teams to make the right decisions.  Others have showed resolution, courage, empathy, respect for science and ethical and moral decency, and in so doing have managed to minimize the impact of the pandemic on their countries. The New York Times<\/em> <\/a> editorial reflects on the role of leadership in managing the current crisis and tries to define some of the characteristics that define good leadership in times of emergency. Among the outstanding characteristics are rapid reaction, compassion and trust in science, all of which determine the most effective responses to manage the current emergency. In this regard, we refer again to women’s leadership, which we mentioned in previous editions. Simon Tisdall wonders in The Guardian<\/em><\/a> whether leaders with the worst results share dysfunctional characteristics beyond mere masculinity. The fixation on war is one of them. The inability to imagine and think “out of the box” is another. They often resort to worn-out metaphors and clich\u00e9s such as “wartime president,” “Blitzkrieg” and “fighting the invisible enemy. The lack of empathy also seems to be a common denominator, among the self-proclaimed “men of the people” who lead national-populist movements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Populism and its leaders are also the focus of articles by Alexander Cooley and Daniel Nexon in Foreign Policy<\/em> <\/a> and Ruth Ben-Ghiat<\/a> in Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a> that argue that populist rhetoric and policies constitute a rejection of the most important aspects of the post-Cold War liberal order. The ideological view of populists often sees internationalism as a source of threat to the political community and in order to implement their policies, populists have to protect themselves from pressures that urge them, among other things, to respect human rights, maintain the rule of law, fight corruption and respect the pluralism of political life. Consequently, national populist movements agree that a multipolar and unstable international system will best serve their interests.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In its editorial the French daily Le Monde<\/em><\/a> points out that the current health crisis is profoundly changing the relationship between the major powers. The end of the Cold War, the disappearance of the USSR, globalisation and the emergence of China as a global player have shaped a new world order. The bipolar order was replaced by a multipolar disorder led by a central actor, the United States, on which the system gravitated and which intervened according to its national interests. But the pandemic has accelerated a paradigm shift and shakes the balances of power that sustain the current structure. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this context, China’s role is focusing a large part of the analysis and news that mark these weeks of unprecedented crisis. If at first the information about China focused mainly on the spread of the Covid-19 contagion and the measures adopted to deal with it, Giovanni Bernardini<\/a> analyses the change of focus on the health emergency that has given rise to a new narrative that presents Beijing as a privileged interlocutor worldwide, thanks to its strategy of helping other countries based on its own experience, in an unprecedented soft power operation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the world begins to think about how it will cope with the coronavirus and the threat of future outbreaks, it is clear that the current pandemic has the potential to disrupt industrial production, accelerate certain cultural and economic trends, or be used to formulate certain political agendas or by those who yearn for transformational programs. In this context, a Europe disrupted not only by the health crisis, but also by the deep disagreements between its members is the subject of an interesting monographic dossier in which the analysts of the journal Politico<\/em><\/a> explore what the possible impacts of the pandemic will be on daily life, democracy and the EU. The dossier seeks to establish what the future will look like in a number of areas such as on-site work, hotels and restaurants, supply chains, eating habits, online shopping, urban planning, collective transport and aviation, technology big companies, privacy, public health care, the European Union and the euro, as well as the new role of experts in defining public policies. Another foresight exercise is offered by Social Europe<\/em><\/a>, where Philippe Pochet highlights the fact that, in the wake of the crisis caused by Covid-19, the very foundations of European integration are being questioned. He wonders what kind of Europe will take shape after the crisis and points out four possible scenarios for the future, which are very different in terms of their social and ecological consequences. The first is that of a possible return to neoliberal orthodoxy, similar to that of the previous crisis (2008-13), when Europe returned even more radically to neoliberal foundations after a more or less green recovery in 2009. The second is the Chinese path, where we would move towards a more authoritarian state that controls the population of a country through new means based on Artificial Intelligence, with restrictions on fundamental freedoms in exchange for a sense of protection. The third scenario is a return to growth at any price, stimulating recovery consumption without restrictions and without any consideration for the environment. The last scenario involves accelerating the ecological transition and rapidly rethinking our growth model, with a return to public services, common goods and placing solidarity at the centre of the economy and social affairs. Ultimately, these scenarios are not mutually exclusive and can be combined and developed in parallel in different regions of the world, depending on the relevant balance of power. The strategy of the collective actors will therefore play a vital role, with implications for the way in which the architectural pillars of the EU will be transformed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

These pillars may well be shaken by the important ruling of the German Constitutional Court, which, curiously enough, has been given little consideration in most media. Th\u00e9ophile Rospars analyses in Le grand continent<\/em><\/a> the judgement voted by an overwhelming majority of 7 votes to 1 which declares that the policy of quantitative easing carried out by the European Central Bank since the euro crisis constitutes a violation of the fundamental rights of German citizens, which poses a conflict of jurisdiction and affirms the primacy of German constitutional law over European law. Moreover, this ruling comes at a critical time, just when the countries of the South were relying on the flexibility of the German government to make Berlin act, if not as an ally, at least as an even-handed mediator between the parties that would enable Europe to implement an ambitious recovery plan. Finally, a relevant proposal for European reconstruction and the reformulation of EU policies is that presented by the President of the Committee of the Regions of Europe, Apostolos Tzitzikostas<\/a>, who advocates the need for fundamental change because, while it is true that the pandemic is seriously testing the European Union, it has also highlighted the interconnection that exists between all levels of government: the EU, national governments, regional governments, cities and towns. Ultimately, it is necessary to reconsider the current structure of EU governance, as it has been shown that centralised power cannot respond to all the challenges of an emergency such as the one we are experiencing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the economic field, which will focus attention in the coming months, we highlight the  report<\/a> published a few days ago by the European Commission on the economic forecasts for the second half of the year and which points to a deep and widespread recession, with an uneven impact depending on countries and sectors, and uncertain expectations of recovery. The data reveal that, despite all the political responses that have been given, both by the EU and the member states, 2020 will be a year in which the Union’s economy will register a major recession – there is talk of an average fall of 7.5% – followed by a significant upturn but which will be very uneven. The expectations are also that the recovery will not take place until the end of 2021, as investment will be low, the labour market will not have recovered, and unemployment rates will still be very high. As for Spain, the forecasts are even worse with a 9.4% fall in GDP, one of the worst in the Eurozone, along with Italy and France. Finally, the European Commission forecasts an increase in the public deficit and the debt of the member states due to the measures adopted to alleviate the economic losses caused by the pandemic, while stating that without a joint recovery strategy there is a very high risk of major obstacles to the convergence of the Single Market and economic, financial and social divergences between countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus, while solidarity links between EU member states are weakened, an article published in El Peri\u00f3dico<\/a><\/em> reviews the different types of management of the Covid-19 pandemic which, together with the foreseen social and economic crisis, has also altered the power relationship in many European countries. It stresses that, although the closing of ranks and the initial consensus has been broken as the weeks have gone by, in no other country is there such a harsh and rough confrontation as in Spain, while Portugal is at the other extreme, with unprecedented cooperation between the government and the opposition. At a time when the health alarm situation seems to be under control in Spain and some territories are beginning to ease the lockdown, not without controversy, as in the cases of Valencia and the Community of Madrid, the political climate remains tense. This anomalous situation is the subject of a very harsh analysis by the Madrid correspondent of the British newspaper The Guardian<\/em><\/a>. Sam Jones criticizes the situation generated by the coronavirus in Spain and the performance of Spanish politicians, especially the role of the opposition, compared to other European countries. The correspondent’s conclusion is devastating and he accuses the right-wing opposition of using the virus as a cudgel while other countries are seeking consensus. He also warns that this radical right-wing attitude could put a brake on economic and social recovery once the health crisis has been overcome. In El Pa\u00eds<\/em><\/a> Josep Ramoneda hammers the point home and considers that political debate – which is always essential, also and above all in difficult times – does not exist in Spain and has left its place to opportunism, falsehoods and obscene exercises of opportunism, speculating on deaths. Instead, it considers that it is essential to build a de-escalation pact based on the restoration, as soon as possible, of the powers of the autonomous communities, together with complementary measures that guarantee the coordinated management of the pandemic. At the same time, it would be advisable to give a unitary response to the European institutions, particularly with regard to the aid for economic recovery and the very future of the European Union. In short, only by adopting pacts and agreements will it be possible to rebuild the economy, which must include a greater role for the public sector and a strengthening of the State’s capacity to limit certain market excesses and the lack of control in certain economic sectors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The concern generated by the impact of Covid-19 on the democratic structures of our societies has been a constant in recent weeks. For example, Leonardo Marchettoni argues in the journal Il rasoio di Occam<\/em><\/a> that the pandemic marks the end of liberal constitutional democracy and that it will no longer be possible to theoretically justify this model of government. For Marchettoni, new instruments adapted to the complexity of the contemporary world and to new technologies are needed: the system of fundamental rights and the conception of the individual must be restructured, leaving aside the individual approach and taking on a more communitarian perspective. We must also take advantage of the resources provided by the new technologies, without forgetting the risks they entail and without failing to develop a critical theory that is up to the challenges of the society that is coming. The compromised situation of democracy is also revealed in the analysis of the Bertelsmann Foundation which has made public its anual report<\/a> where it warns that inequality and repression undermine democracy and the market economy, and that the destabilisation of established political orders lies in the inability of political actors to solve problems, clientelism and the lack of spiri of compromise. La crisi de la Covid-19, per\u00f2, tamb\u00e9 ha revelat una dada evident: les classes treballadores i mitjanes s\u00f3n indispensables per a la superviv\u00e8ncia f\u00edsica i vital de les nostres societats. The Covid-19 crisis, however, has also revealed an obvious fact: the working and middle classes are indispensable for the physical and vital survival of our societies. Thus, geographer Christophe Guilly<\/a> argues that the pandemic has highlighted the social usefulness of certain professions and that public opinion has understood this, since, all of a sudden, nurses’ aides and nurses, but also delivery boys, cashiers, drivers, newsagents, and garbage collectors, have become heroes and heroines. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this sense, former U.S. Secretary of State and professor of public policy at the University of Berkeley, Robert Reich<\/a> points out that the Covid-19 pandemic is making visible the class division that exists in the United States and warns of the creation of four new classes. First, those who do telework and earn the same as before the crisis. Second, essential services workers who make up 30% of the total number of workers, most of whom have no access to paid leave or health insurance, thus constituting a highly vulnerable group. Third, those groups who have had to stop working because their jobs did not allow them to continue working (25% of the total) and who have already spent their leave money. And finally, the group formed by those people for whom social distancing is impossible because they have been confined in centres with a high population density such as prisons. The fight against inequality is also the focus of the article published by Nobel Prize winners Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee in The Guardian<\/em><\/a> in which they propose what poor countries can do in a pandemic situation that they have to face without being able to take the usual measures in the richest and most developed countries. They advise specific confinement of the most affected areas – and not the general population -, the improvement of health systems and the guarantee of housing as fundamental tools to fight the disease effectively, measures that should be complemented with the implementation of a universal basic income that rich countries could contribute to finance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The health crisis has also exposed existing social and cultural fractures. Although it is difficult to predict what the “world after” will be like, we can say that it will not last if it does not end up integrating and recognizing “ordinary people”. Otherwise, everything suggests that the new world will be no more than a copy of the old one, but in worse conditions. A world that could indeed get worse if, as Masha Green points out from the pages of The New Yorker<\/em><\/a>, the political impact of the loneliness and isolation experienced during the pandemic generates the conditions that, according to Hannah Arendt, define totalitarianism, since they make society disappear and we lose the gaze of the other, which is essential to constitute an enriching experience of ourselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The philosopher and activist Franco Berardi affirms in an interview in the magazine  CTXT<\/em><\/a> that if we continue with the criteria of the capitalist economy and consumerism, if we stop the economy according to the terms of a capitalism that prioritizes obtaining maximum benefit, the effects will be catastrophic in the coming years. Faced with the individual and social changes that the post-Covid period will force us to adopt, it will be necessary to rethink and redefine our needs in terms of what is basic to our survival and well-being: food, health care, communication, affection, … However, when the time comes to change the criteria of what is indispensable, and when the new criteria of life begin to be established, a political problem will arise: what will be the source of legitimacy to make these decisions? Who will make these decisions about what the priorities are? <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Several media pay particular attention to the impact of Covid-19 on climate change and sustainability policies. One of them is The Economist<\/em><\/a> which is initiating a series of articles on this issue. This first paper reviews the policies, almost always problematic, and the efforts employed to limit greenhouse gas emissions. The article stresses that, despite increasingly alarming publications and warnings from scientists, companies interested in maintaining the status quo have always campaigned against the science that credited climate change and the emergence of the Chinese economy as a factor that significantly increased emissions. A cry of alarm shared by the newspaper Le Monde<\/em> <\/a> that in one of its editorials points out another of the great concerns of the progressive return to normality with respect to the environment and warns that the massive mobilization to get out of today’s crisis should not go, as happened after the crisis of 2008, to the detriment of the ecological transition. He warns that the significant fall in oil prices, which collapsed along with global activity during the coronavirus crisis, could make very tempting the idea of a “grey” recovery that would depend largely on the massive use of fossil fuels with a very cheap temporary price. The newspaper warns that it is no longer possible to reproduce the same mistake: in ten years the political and economic situation has changed and the leaders, increasingly under pressure from public opinion, know that they can no longer ignore global warming, which has become one of the main concerns of citizens. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

In this context, and as \u00c9loi Laurent writes in Social Europe<\/em><\/a>, the coronavirus crisis reveals the need to update the European welfare state and make it evolve towards a social-ecological state, capable of sharing the environmental risks of the 21st century. The decade that is now beginning is indeed the decade of the ecological challenge: faced with climate change, the destruction of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystems, human communities have to initiate a profound transformation of attitudes and behaviour in order to prevent the 21st century from being the century of the self-destruction of well-being. Laurent believes that this implies transforming ecological uncertainty into social risk, through public guarantees and insurance, so that the social consequences of the environmental crises of the 21st century are as small as possible. And in the stage of growing uncertainty that we are facing with respect to the environment, a determining factor will be that of cities, which are right now the centre of the Covid-19 pandemic, as they have been during so many plagues throughout history. No wonder, then, that Foreign Policy<\/em><\/a> is devoting a special dossier trying to understand what urban centres will be like after the Covid-19 crisis with the participation of twelve leading world experts in urban planning, politics, history and health who share their predictions. Will restaurants survive? Will people continue to travel on crowded public transportation? Will large office buildings be necessary when we will be all connected to Zoom and other videoconferencing tools? It also remains to be seen whether the fear of future pandemics will become the new norm, turning cities into an antiseptic habitat and perhaps even with a dystopian touch.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, the massive and accelerated use of new technologies since the appearance of the coronavirus in the daily lives of millions of people has become the subject of intense debate about its usefulness, its limits and its dangers. In Open Democracy<\/em><\/a> Petra Molnar warns that technology is not intrinsically democratic and points out that it is particularly important to consider its impact in the field of human rights. Indeed, even before the current pandemic, we have already witnessed how technological tools can become instruments of oppression and surveillance, denying people their dignity, through the use of Big Data to predict and prevent the movements of migrants, AI detectors and facial recognition tools for possible deception at borders, or even the systematic surveillance and repression that the Chinese government exercises on dissidents and minorities through new technologies. In the same vein, Ramon Blecua warns in Le Grand Continent Observator<\/a><\/em>y<\/em><\/a> that the pandemic could accelerate the emergence of a new feudalism in which citizens would be prisoners of the anarchic arbitrariness of the new digital powers, true warlords who thrive on the crisis of states and the multilateral system. It is of particular concern that new technological tools and personal data are increasingly in the hands of powerful private companies. The impact of this phenomenon will undoubtedly have profound consequences, and while its success remains uncertain, the cost of inaction will undoubtedly be much higher.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From a positive perspective, a large group of experts has published an article in Foreign Affairs<\/em><\/a> that claims the decisive role that new technologies could play in the fight against climate change and environmental disasters. Contrary to what climate sceptics argue that the costs of climate action are too high, technological progress can facilitate the removal of barriers by reducing the costs of environmental policies and in the coming decades, innovation could lead to significant reductions in emissions, also known as “deep decarbonisation”, at reasonable costs. This will mean reconfiguring a number of sectors of the global economy, including electricity, transport and parts of agriculture, reinforcing positive change where it is already occurring and strongly reversing the trend where it is not yet. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

This new edition of the Diari de Idees, published in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, aims to point out not only the aspects most directly related to the health crisis unleashed by the coronavirus, but also to analyse some of the political, social, economic, cultural and technological impacts that are beginning to emerge in the post-coronavirus world. As the pandemic has spread fear, disease and death, national leaders around the world have been tested hard to lead the response to the pandemic. Many have demonstrated their inability to anticipate scenarios or to rely on prepared teams to make the right\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":14133,"template":"","category_newspaper":[139],"segment":[],"subject":[],"class_list":["post-14401","newspaper","type-newspaper","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category_newspaper-139"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nDiari de les idees 23 – IDEES<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Diari de les idees 23 – IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"This new edition of the Diari de Idees, published in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, aims to point out not only the aspects most directly related to the health crisis unleashed by the coronavirus, but also to analyse some of the political, social, economic, cultural and technological impacts that are beginning to emerge in the post-coronavirus world. As the pandemic has spread fear, disease and death, national leaders around the world have been tested hard to lead the response to the pandemic. Many have demonstrated their inability to anticipate scenarios or to rely on prepared teams to make the right\u2026\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"IDEES\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2020-05-19T13:02:49+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"889\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"515\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/\",\"name\":\"Diari de les idees 23 – IDEES\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/05\\\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1\",\"datePublished\":\"2020-05-18T12:02:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2020-05-19T13:02:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/05\\\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/i0.wp.com\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2020\\\/05\\\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1\",\"width\":889,\"height\":515},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/diari-de-les-idees-23\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Inici\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Diari de les idees\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/analisis\\\/diari-de-les-idees\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Diari de les idees 23\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/\",\"name\":\"IDEES\",\"description\":\"Contemporary global issues\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/revistaidees.cat\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Diari de les idees 23 – IDEES","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Diari de les idees 23 – IDEES","og_description":"This new edition of the Diari de Idees, published in the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, aims to point out not only the aspects most directly related to the health crisis unleashed by the coronavirus, but also to analyse some of the political, social, economic, cultural and technological impacts that are beginning to emerge in the post-coronavirus world. As the pandemic has spread fear, disease and death, national leaders around the world have been tested hard to lead the response to the pandemic. Many have demonstrated their inability to anticipate scenarios or to rely on prepared teams to make the right\u2026","og_url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/","og_site_name":"IDEES","article_modified_time":"2020-05-19T13:02:49+00:00","og_image":[{"width":889,"height":515,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/","url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/","name":"Diari de les idees 23 – IDEES","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1","datePublished":"2020-05-18T12:02:00+00:00","dateModified":"2020-05-19T13:02:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1","contentUrl":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/revistaidees.cat\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/05\/Malevich2.jpeg?fit=889%2C515&ssl=1","width":889,"height":515},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/diari-de-les-idees-23\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Inici","item":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Diari de les idees","item":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/analisis\/diari-de-les-idees\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Diari de les idees 23"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/#website","url":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/","name":"IDEES","description":"Contemporary global issues","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/14401","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/newspaper"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/14401\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14411,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/newspaper\/14401\/revisions\/14411"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/14133"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14401"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category_newspaper","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/category_newspaper?post=14401"},{"taxonomy":"segment","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/segment?post=14401"},{"taxonomy":"subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistaidees.cat\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/subject?post=14401"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}