There are no closed borders as far as I'm aware. I can jump in my car and drive to France right now. Gas stations are still open as well. It's not smart and air travel is a bitch right now but if you must... possible.

There are no closed borders as far as I'm aware. I can jump in my car and drive to France right now. — Benkei

Coronavirus: Travel restrictions, border shutdowns by country

France
French President Emmanuel Macron announced on March 16 that France's borders would be closed from March 17.

The French leader, however, added that the country's citizens would be allowed to return home.

The EU's external borders were also shut for 30 days from March 17. This does not apply to US citizens departing France to return to the United States.

It's wrong. On the official Dutch website from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

https://www.nederlandwereldwijd.nl/landen/frankrijk/reizen/reisadvies#anker-verkeersveiligheid

The relevant translation:

Coronavirus
Follow the advice of the local government and keep a close eye on (local) news.

Traveling to and through France is only possible with a valid reason. There is limited public transport and air traffic. The external borders of the Schengen area are closed, except for Europeans with a permanent residence in the EU or returning nationals.

Travelers traveling to or through France must fill in (or transfer) the attestation de déplacement dérogatoire (statement of reason for relocation) and state the reason for the trip (tick the 4th box - déplacements pour motif familial impérieux - and add it manually: retour aux Pays-Bas).

Whether you meet the "valid reason" criterium is another matter.

As to this thread. Nothing is going to change except some technocratic tweedling and fiddling to make sure the system continues to work with as little interruption as possible next time. So we'll have more extensive, international cooperation and procedures specifically with respect to the next pandemic.

Also, can I just express my incredulity for the ingenuity of how nature works at times? One person gets infected somewhere in China, probably in November, and within 5 months it cripples economies across the world, kills over 15,000+ people (and counting) and the little fucker is invisible to the eye. This is just as mind-boggling to me as having a hydrogen star implode into a denser star and continuing to implode until it's fusing iron atoms.

I gather that nationals and residents can cross the border, but for example some in Mexico cannot now come to Finland as there aren't any direct flights from there. Reason? Problem coming to France/Germany/Spain etc. and then getting a domestic flight. And oh btw. when they are residents of Finland, the local Embassy isn't so desperate to help them.

As long as capitalism exists, this will never happen.

LOL.

If it's anybody you know, I'd advise them to fly via Schiphol. The Netherlands is still slightly more relaxed than surrounding countries.

As to this thread. Nothing is going to change except some technocratic tweedling and fiddling to make sure the system continues to work with as little interruption as possible next time. — Benkei

I don't think so, especially if you look at this from a different point of view.

I think this will be one of those important collective experiences and a historical event IF there isn't a worse pandemic the next decade. Just as on successful terrorist attack changed things and attitudes, so will this too.

That's the way it goes.

First it was cheap labor, then as the labor gets more expensive, it has to be more productive and the industries change. Then it becomes a service economy. At start the clothing industry was mainly in the First World. Then the clothing industry migrated to Southeast Asia and China. From there it will migrate to Africa, if everything would go as earlier.

Hopefully higher living standards and reduction in poverty will go with it. I suspect that, if cheap labor ever runs out worldwide, it will become less centralized in this or that country.

I might just do that, thanks.

Schiphol has become quite familiar to me as that hub and Paris have been the way my family has gone to Mexico (as my wife is Mexican).

Hopefully higher living standards and reduction in poverty will go with it. I suspect that, if cheap labor ever runs out worldwide, it will become less centralized in this or that country. — NOS4A2

Something being "cheap" is quite relative. What has happened is that absolute povetry has truly been reduced. We in the West just whine about our economic recessions, but that (the reduction of absolute povetry) is the good thing that has happened in the World we usually haven't even noticed.

Just look when countries have had famines. My country had in the middle of 19th Century and with Ireland that's about the last great famine in Europe. Last time there's been famine in Europe is during and after WW2. China had it's last famine in 1959-1961, Bangladesh 1974,

How did terrorism change our lives? I haven't experienced any fundamental changes except air travel became more of a hassle.

How did terrorism change our lives? I haven't experienced any fundamental changes except air travel became more of a hassle. — Benkei

No concrete barriers around Xmas markets to protect from sudden jihad syndrome? No forests of CCTV cameras around Jewish schools? No barricades and entry checks around beer gardens? Maybe you don´t have it in your town, but it is certainly spreading in Europe. I am old enough to remember a time before all that.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7701241/Ring-steel-formed-festive-markets-despite-downgraded-UK-terror-threat-substantial.html

If anything we out to become more science oriented and focused on issues that can be dealt with by science. — Shawn

Science can't tell you whether to deliberately crash your economy in the expectation that not doing so would be even worse. — fishfry

Science can't tell us anything. Scientists can, but we should only listen to what they have to say about their relatively narrow areas of specialization. Economists purport to be (social) scientists, but only by assuming that the independent decisions of billions of individual humans are amenable to analysis in a manner analogous to laws of nature.

That decision can never be the output of any rational process. — fishfry

Exactly. I have been saying for years that science is an especially systematic way of knowing, while engineering is an especially systematic way of willing. There is no one "right" or even "optimized" solution to any given real-world problem, because tradeoffs are unavoidable and require the exercise of practical judgment, not a strict application of technical rationality.

So, life as normal. These are changes in degree, not fundamental. The economic structure in society remains the same, the real politik approach remained the same and our solutions to the same problems remain the same (throw a bucket of cash at it).

How did terrorism change our lives? I haven't experienced any fundamental changes except air travel became more of a hassle. — Benkei

So, life as normal. These are changes in degree, not fundamental. The economic structure in society remains the same, the real politik approach remained the same and our solutions to the same problems remain the same (throw a bucket of cash at it). — Benkei

What then does constitutes a change fundamental change for you? Never is there that kind of fundamental change from one year to another.

I bet the Soviet Union collapsing and Germany unifying actually didn't change your life (if you were born) or the life of your family fundamentally either. But Cold War Europe was a bit different. And so if post 9/11 Europe and the US. Just ask any Muslim if they have noticed a difference in the prevailing attitudes. Perhaps only after some decades you really can have a different World: 1913 and 1946 are quite different, just like 1987 is from now (even if much less has changed from 1987 to today). Perhaps true changes happen only in a Century or two, but if those are fundamental, the those changes in degree are also important too.

Nobeernolife told some of the changes, but how about the train wreck that has happened in the Middle East? Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan do have some effect on what has happened here later. Not just that some of my reservist friends have seen war in Afghanistan, which was quite different from the usual Blue Beret missions.

That decision can never be the output of any rational process.
— fishfry
Exactly. I have been saying for years that science is an especially systematic way of knowing, while engineering is an especially systematic way of willing. There is no one "right" or even "optimized" solution to any given real-world problem, because tradeoffs are unavoidable and require the exercise of practical judgment, not a strict application of technical rationality. — aletheist

Yes. Past rationality, there is only the will of certain individuals. The will to power. One begins to see why postmodernists distrust rationality. Rationality is so often used through history as a weapon of the uppers against the lowers.

We can't logic our way out of the coronavirus crisis. Prevent the spread and crash the economy? Or perhaps crashing the economy is the point, to undermine Trump. After all 80,000 Americans died of flu in 2018, that's the CDC's official number. Most people never even heard about it. No panic, no hysterical media. Or (a theory I favor) everyone in the know understands that the crash of 2008 never ended. We literally papered it over with the ex nihilo creation of trillions of dollars of funny money in the form of quantitative easing. Everyone knew it would blow up at some point. If if blew up of its own fraudulence the people would burn down the banks when they realized the nature of the swindle. So if it's about to blow up anyway, why not blame a virus? And what's the solution? More Fed printing.

But that's just idle speculation. The main point being that rationality can't answer the big questions; and it's more often a tool used by the powerful against the powerless. Contemporary history makes me suddenly see what the postmodernists are about. Rationality's a fraud.

One of the reasons Clinton fought hard to get China to be a part of the WTO was that he wanted them to be more like us, liberalized, on the path to freedom, democracy and human rights. As it turns out, such an arraignment is a two-way street. As statism, the suppression of the internet, and censorship become the norm, the arraignment seems to have also made us more like them.

So I think you're right. This pandemic has made apparent our reliance on Chinese manufacturing, even for the most basic of products, and hopefully altering the supply-chain to a better deal will begin shortly after. — NOS4A2

Yes that was the original idea. Nixon's idea, when he historically opened relations between the US and China. Everyone thought they'd just become another westernized social democracy. Didn't work out quite as planned. Now they have the Uyghur concentration camps and the social credit system and total cybersurveiillance and I for one have some concerns.

People will come to respect the importance of cooperation among sovereign nations. Global cooperation, not globalism. This could become a movement.
— fishfry

A movement for global cooperation you say? Like the UN? Or the Paris accord? Or the ICC? — Echarmion

I'm all for global cooperation. And borders. Good neighbors make good fences, that's one way to look at it. Of course that doesn't mean we can't be against particular international agreements. The UN and the Paris accords are problematic from a certain point of view. The ICC doesn't ring a bell. All I'm saying is that after the pandemic, people will have a new perspective on borders, national sovereignty, and being able to manufacture the stuff we need to survive. It's a boost to the anti-globalization theme sweeping the planet. I'm not advocating for or against by the way, just noting that the postwar order is coming to an end and a new era of nationalism is arising everywhere. Whether that's good or bad I don't know.

What gives you that idea? I can still travel from the Netherlands to other EU countries without problems provided that I meet the requirements of a lock down in any receiving State. — Benkei

I am weak on the details. I read that Germany closed its borders.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51905129

Also I found this:

BREAKING: EU Decides to Close All Schengen Borders For 30 Days.

Have I got this wrong?

I know we have a corona virus thread generally - but in this thread I would like to consider the uncomfortable questions that no one seems to be asking at the moment as we try to, on a global scale, weather the storm. My question is once we get past this pandemic, or some countries have managed to eradicate it anyway, what will the shape of society to come look like? Although I was too young to understand the significance of it, I guess I'm framing it in a way we frame 9/11 now, with some of the most fundamental assumptions in relation to how society should work being absolutely shaken and then replaced, for example, airline security.

....

Would be curious to hear your thoughts. — Dogar

I hope that the spread of corona virus and the existential threat it creates is enough to show nearly everyone in the world the incompetence of our political leaders and impotence of our government in doing that which needs to be done in times of crisis. Constantly putting people in charge who only care about their own stock portfolios and can not act in times of national crisis (when the right actions will cost them money in the short term) is a recipe for our own extinction.

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: 'I'm all in' on risking my health to lift social distancing guidelines for economic boost
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/23/politics/coronavirus-texas-social-distancing-guidelines/index.html

Dollars vs. deaths is the sickening choice created by coronavirus
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/23/politics/what-matters-march-23/index.html

I am pretty pessimistic about it all. The worst possible thing will probably happen: things will go back to being just as they were before, after some time. — StreetlightX

I more or less agree.

The one thing I'm pretty certain of is the worse things get the more likely the cultures and societies around the world will be permanently changed by it, just as the cultures and societies of Europe were changed by the black plague. Something about either seeing your friends and/or family die around you is enough to push certain people with very dogmatic ideals to reconsider their beliefs and/or reevaluate what human life is worth when there isn't as many people around to do work for them or help them out one way or another.

Of course there is also an increased chance for wars and general craziness (such as the formation of cults, toilet paper hoarding,etc.) any time a plague or pandemic happens but often the good social changes outweigh the craziness since the craziness is always happening and the kind where people reevaluate their fundamental beliefs is very rare outside of plagues and similar stuff.

Nobeernolife told some of the changes, but how about the train wreck that has happened in the Middle East? Invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan do have some effect on what has happened here later. Not just that some of my reservist friends have seen war in Afghanistan, which was quite different from the usual Blue Beret missions. — ssu

These are all wars to maintain the status quo. They're meaningful to those receiving the bombs of course but for the West they mean very little. Life goes on. I mean structural changes to society.

The last meaningful change was the labour participation of women, which has caused significant changes to the social structure, changing gender roles and dynamics. The light bulb. Washing machine. Industrial revolution. Moving from feudalism to democracies.

So in that respect the fall of the Berlin Wall was a fundamental change for Eastern Germany but not West Germany. Does that make sense to you? So a change in the social or economic constitution of a country?

The real question is if we make this permanent: If every time there is an outbreak somewhere in the World, are we ready to hit the breaks if it comes to our continent / country? When will there be an all clear sign given? With 9/11 it didn't happen. Even killing Bin Laden wasn't the end. — ssu

There has always been a war on infections, viruses, outbreaks, etc since before any of us were born. The only problem is up until now there has never been anything to really threaten the safety and security of enough people until this outbreak. Lately more money has been put into things like solving erection dysfunction then coming up with the cure for widespread diseases (since it is often a problem that people with the former issue have money but not people with the late issue) but with the corona virus this might change a bit.

The diseases that are out there infecting animals (such as SARS and Ebola) in the wild are always going to be out there and as long as we have wet markets, international travel, people living in close proximity, humans encroaching into natural habitats, etc and few safe guards in place for such behavior there will always be threats for some "super bug" to wreck havoc on us much as the corona virus has...so even if we are able to minimize the risk from the corona virus, there will never be a true "all clear sign" from the treat of some other threat without some miracle medicine coming out in the foreseeable future. And since there is more money to be made treat an ailments then find cures for them...expect the likely hood of more super bugs to mutate from benign viruses and whatnot then for any miracle cure to come out to stop them.

Hopefully, we will get full authoritarian measures to get dumb fucks to stay inside rather than let them run about in public masturbating over their "liberty" and causing irreversible social and economic collapse, not to mention many more dead people. If not, just line the fuckers up against walls and shoot them. If they haven't learned now what's necessary, they never will and are useless to the rest of us. Social Darwinism at its finest. :heart: :kiss: — Baden

Are you talking about liberal hippies in the following articles:

Party Zero: How a Soirée in Connecticut Became a ‘Super Spreader’
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/us/coronavirus-westport-connecticut-party-zero.html

Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick: 'I'm all in' on risking my health to lift social distancing guidelines for economic boost
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/23/politics/coronavirus-texas-social-distancing-guidelines/index.html

..or about non-libertarian type hippies? :D

A lot of poor people are stuck at home with not much to do but be bored, but some wealthier individuals believe this is a good time to go out for social gatherings, vacations, and whatnot instead of being slackers stuck in their house. IMHO the good thing about the corona virus is that it doesn't care whether you or republican, democrat, rich or poor it won't discriminate and will infect anyone that it can and/or those that are stupid enough to allow it.

As long as capitalism exists, this will never happen. It's been a race to the bottom to secure the cheapest labour and manufacturing costs, and the world will continue to rely on China no matter how much anyone pays lip-service to orienting the supply-chain domestically. The one way it could happen of course, is to devastate and immeserate local populations so that others can compete which China at the same level. Which, given what COVID is doing, just might happen. — StreetlightX

I more or less agree. However the corona virus has shown us one thing is security risk that comes with our reliance on China for vital supplies and what can happen if China decides not to export such supplies due to a "China first" mentality (or any other reason) during a global crisis.

Up until now it has only been a "theoretical" argument (although it was all but a given it would happen eventually) but from now on people can point to when parts of China was in lock down and when trying to recover from the virus there was either a all out stop or major slow down or various supplies other countries needed in order to help them fight the virus. Whether this point will make a difference in the future remains to be seen. IMHO globalism only helps a few wealthy individuals and really doesn't do hardly anything for the average plebs out there except make life more difficult.

if China decides not to export such supplies due to a "China first" mentality (or any other reason) during a global crisis. — dclements

This won't happen. Not because China doesn't have 'nationalist' currents, but because putting China first means precisely expanding China's reach overseas, by way, primarily, of trade. Chinese politicians are also not as utterly fucking stupid as American leaders. The Belt and Road Initiative is China's Marshall Plan, and it's not going anywhere anytime soon. Capitalists will be - and have been - all too happy to hitch a ride on the expended circuits of logistics and market expansion that it provides - irrespective of the fact that it comes with the price of ceding of sovereignty and local interests to China, all across Asia and Africa.

It's the borders of the Schengen area which are closed for non-Schengen countries. So existing borders are closed. The border between the Netherlands and Belgium is still open. Between France and Belgium too. You may need a valid reason to travel in those countries though.

So, life as normal. These are changes in degree, not fundamental. — Benkei

Gradual changes eventually lead to fundamental changes. It is the old question of how to boil a frog.

I am weak on the details. I read that Germany closed its borders. — fishfry

It has, Except to illegal migrants who say the magical world asylum. Same as Sweden.
Brilliant, arent they.