COVID: In Praise of Moderation (in English)
Catalina Orlandi
BUENOS AIRES, ARGENTINA—Moderation refers to a way of acting with restraint. It is a principle of life: in ancient Greece, the temple of Apollo at Delphi bore the inscription Meden Again, “Nothing in excess." In politics, moderation is a behavior that tries to be balanced and fair, located in the center, avoiding extremes.
On March 20, President Alberto Fernandez ordered social, preventive, and mandatory lockdown for the entire country, to avert the spread of Covid-19 and prepare the health system for a possible outbreak. Initially, the quarantine would last for fifteen days, but when the established period ended, the lockdown was extended for an additional fifteen days. Similar extensions have been taking place for the past six months. This unique way of administering confinement generated a high level of uncertainty in the population.
Lockdown included closures of classes, both in schools and universities, and the closure of shops, restaurants, cinemas, theaters, and museums, forcing many to work remotely. Recreational outings, such as hiking and sports, were prohibited. To leave the home for any purpose other than buying food or essential items, one had to request a permit online. As months passed, the consequences of all these measures began to be more evident. People started feeling exhausted and angry. They demanded to return to work. Three massive protests were held in the country, which sought, among other things, the relaxation of the quarantine.
Even before the COVID-19 breakout, Argentina’s economic forecast for 2020 was already poor. However, the government's decision to slow down the economy caused significant economic deterioration. Nowadays, Argentina is going through an economic recession worse than that of 2001, which has been historically the most serious. The International Monetary Fund has projected a drop in GDP of 5.7 and unemployment of 10.9. Furthermore, UNICEF estimated that child poverty could reach 62.9% by the end of the year.
However, the economic damage is not the only consequence that isolation has had in the country. The psychological impact of more than six continuous months of confinement has been significant. A large part of society shows symptoms of stress, anxiety, or depression. As a teenager, I witness a great demotivation and exhaustion in friends, acquaintances, and even in myself. However, not only young people suffer isolation and lack of human contact; the elder, and those who are forced to take extreme measures of protection due to higher risk of contagion, are experiencing the very same. Psychological well-being and mental health are aspects just as important as physical health and therefore need to be taken into consideration.
COVID had a sudden impact on the world. There is no doubt that it is an arduous situation, and most countries are battling coronavirus in the best possible way. It would be wrong to underestimate the virus and act as if it did not represent a significant risk to a large sector of the population, but it would also be wrong to sacrifice the economy of an entire country or to wear out society because that implies an equal or higher risk.
How could the situation have been approached more moderately? Firstly, instead of scaring the population by spreading fear, I think it is important to raise awareness and educate about the risk of the virus, appealing to everyone's responsibility. Yes, impose isolation on the population at risk, but allow young people to work, under necessary protocols, to nurture the economy. Nobody disputes the suspension of non-essential activities, such as parties and concerts; still, the benefits of physical exercise are too important to be ban completely. Something similar happens with education. Suspension of school in March was reasonable; six months later, not having a concrete plan for the return to classes, is not.
My opinion might seem utopian. However, I continue to uphold what I learn at home every day: the value of moderation. Even if it is easier to say it than to put it into practice, I believe that is what governance should be about; moderation. In this pandemic, it was not about choosing between economy and health, much less destroying one at the expense of the other. It would have been enough to find a point of balance that could protect both.