The Guardian view on lockdown and community: beware social segregation
In any national emergency there is a need for solidarity and an instinct for self-preservation. Sometimes the two are aligned. When people obey the rules of lockdown it is because they recognise that public gatherings can transmit coronavirus to others and also because they don’t want to succumb themselves.
But there are also points of tension. The second world war is heavily mythologised as a time of national togetherness, but even then there was opportunism. Petty crime went up during the blackouts; a thriving black market circumvented rationing.
Today, the commonality of the emergency belies different experiences, defined by disparities of wealth and status. We take vital comfort from moments of demonstrable togetherness, such as the ritual of doorstep applause for NHS staff and carers. But it is also important to remember that loneliness and isolation are, by their nature, invisible. Much of the public narrative of quarantine is defined by the experiences of those who are coping well – and have the means to do so. Families
in cramped accommodation with limited internet access will not be uploading fun videos of their pastimes.
Hidden inequalities will eventually be revealed by economic data. Some of the social and cultural problems associated with lockdown will be even harder to identify, and take longer to emerge. While the whole nation has to deal with the pandemic, there could be fragmentation below the surface. Long before quarantine was imposed, people were relying on social media and peer networks for information. Those information flows are conditioned by unconscious biases: we congregate in like-minded digital silos; we surround ourselves with digital filters to avoid the discomfort of contradiction. Such effects will now be amplified.
In the analogue world, workplaces, schools and public spaces bring people from different backgrounds together. Cultural lubricants that help people rub along more easily are now absent. The disappearance of football from a Saturday afternoon removes more than a shared 90 minutes of entertainment. It is a whole sphere of reference that
weaves conversations between people who otherwise have little in common. Without those interactions, we are limited to homogenous cultural and social spheres. As people seek comfort and security in lockdown, there is a risk that society is further atomised by a retreat into demographic and political comfort zones.
None of these hazards are inevitable and all can be mitigated by vigilance – being mindful of those who are absent from our narrowed horizons and our screens; recognising that social distancing has an in-built component of social segregation. And when the conditions of lockdown are eventually lifted, some effort will be required to rebuild connections that will have atrophied from lack of use. This is a truly national crisis, but it will only bring the nation together if we are alert to the hidden forces that can also pull it apart.