Philosophy, Biopolitics, and the Virus: The Elision of an Alternative

Every aspect of the pandemic was said to be ‘total,’ absolute, and undiscriminating. Its very name implied as much. The virus was everywhere, and a threat to us all. Philosophy, Biopolitics, and the Virus: The Elision of an Alternative identifies three moments within the pandemic that were conceived in such a monolithic way: (1) ‘The Science,’ which had to be unanimous if it was to assume a sovereign role, and to have us ‘follow’ it; (2) ‘non-pharmaceutical interventions,’ which were regarded as the only possible response, and without which death and disease would ‘run riot’; and (3) there was to be one sole remedy that could bring about the promised end of the restrictions, to the exclusion of every other conception of medicine, treatment, and care. In each case of seeming universality, dissent immediately identifies you as a friend of the virus. Michael Lewis argues that all of these cases have been revealing their counter-productivity ever since. The elision of an alternative shows itself obliquely in the wounds inflicted upon both society and logos itself.