The COVID-19 pandemic was a moment of stark contradictions. Shelter-in-place guidelines, social distancing practices and national lockdowns isolated individuals, disrupting social and communal life. The pandemic was a time of isolation and missed opportunities: students who never went to prom, job opportunities lost to COVID-19 shutdowns, loved ones unable to attend family get-togethers and even funerals. Yet, as Mike Healy notes, during the pandemic, ‘we also witnessed a starburst of creative energies as people sought to overcome the myriad of problems associated with the pandemic lockdowns’ (2). From the empty paper plates protests in the UK, to labor organizing efforts in Bangladesh, to the development of mutual aid groups in Brazil, to the Black Lives Matter protests in the US and eventually the world over, the COVID-19 pandemic was a time of direct-action and solidarity. For as much as the pandemic drew us apart, it also brought people together.
Central to these efforts were digital technologies such as Zoom, WhatsApp, Jitsi, e-mail, social media networks, Google services, among many others. Here too, Healy draws attention to the tension – namely, that the very technologies that, prior to the pandemic, were central to undermining employment possibilities and working conditions, violating personal privacy, mass data collection and increased surveillance efforts, had now become the means by which the problems posed by COVID-19 would be addressed. To examine the contradictory relationship between our response to COVID-19 and digital technologies, Healy conducted a series of international qualitative in-depth interviews during the pandemic, making ample use of digital technologies, including Zoom and an AI transcription service called Otter.ai. One of the strengths of the book, then, is that it provides a repository of first-hand accounts of how people organized and fostered community during this time of crisis. It stands as a lasting time capsule of the lived experience of political and social organizers, and as such constitutes a valuable resource for scholars continuing to wrestle with the social, political and economic dynamics of COVID-19.
To further his analysis, Healy draws upon Karl Marx’s theory of alienation and Antonio Gramsci’s philosophy of praxis, especially his account of hegemony, common sense and good sense. For Marx, within a capitalist system, workers lose control over what is produced and how. Fellow workers become competitors, as opposed to allies and collaborators, in a zero-sum labor market of winners and losers. Instead of life affirming, our labor is exploited and becomes exhausting. We become alienated from ourselves, our co-workers, the means of production and the products of our labor. Yet, this alienation is ultimately dependent upon our cooperation. As Healy writes, ‘[w]e forge our own shackles. This is a weakness and a strength since while it is debilitating, it identifies the solution to alienation. If we are the creators of our alienation, then we are also the vehicle for its demise’ (14). For Gramsci, hegemony refers to an ongoing process of achieving and maintaining consent by a social class through moral and political leadership. This allows for the development of a ‘common-sense’, or an ideological framework that functions as the sets of beliefs and opinions uncritically accepted as normal, popular and widespread. Yet this ‘common-sense’ is not only ripe with contradictions, but because its function is to serve the interest of a social class, it is ultimately unable to address any problems they cause. Resisting the status quo leads to a continual re-assessment of so-called ‘common-sense’ ideas. This critical assessment leads to the development of an alternative explanatory framework, or ‘good sense’, which is not a total rejection of ‘common-sense’, but rather a renovation. As Healy explains, ‘while common-sense and good sense are different, they are interdependent. Their relation is determined and manifested by specific contexts and from the confused chaotic strands that characterise common-sense, there [sic] can eventually emerge as a single set of concepts bringing clarity to our material reality. […] In effect, good sense is the critical analysis of common-sense and one which increasingly draws upon the existing critical concepts’ (19). Healy’s choice of conceptual tools is motivated by a desire to highlight the tensions and contradictions in our use of digital technologies. A central theme of the book is that these sites of tension contain both the possibility of progress and stagnation, of revolution and domination. This book is ultimately dedicated to examining and giving voice to these contradictions.
After introducing the core concepts and methodological framework in chapter one, ‘COVID-19, Digital Technologies – A Challenging Time’, chapters two-six focus on the use of digital technologies in fostering resistance to specific problems. In general, each of these chapters follows a similar format. Each begins by providing an overview of the situation and problems that COVID-19 created, followed by a discussion of case studies and interviews that highlight how those challenges were meant, the role of digital technologies in doing so, as well as the problems that digital technologies created. Afterwards, Healy draws upon his Marxist and Gramscian toolkit to examine those experiences. chapter two, ‘COVID-19, Digital Technologies, and Labour Organisation’, focuses on unionization efforts and labor struggles in Australia, the UK, Bangladesh and the US. In each of these cases, Healy shows how workers organized to combat the prominent ‘common sense’ narratives that prioritized economic health over worker safety. While digital technologies were key to their efforts, as Healy notes, ‘[t]he experiences of the union activists also shows that while DTs can be valuable tools, they cannot compensate for the lack [of] physical offline communications’ (74).
Chapter three, ‘COVID-19, Digital Technologies, and Mutual Aid’, focuses on non-profit mutual aid groups in the US and UK created in response to the pandemic. The focus here is on how the pandemic created ‘the need and space for people to respond to the societal problems initially ignored by more conventional safety nets’ (108). For Healy, these groups were able to gather millions of people to support their efforts by cultivating a good sense prioritizing cooperation and community rather than competition. At the same time, while helpful, the use of digital technologies ultimately necessitated the involvement of far more people, as well as raising problems of confidentiality and security with which organizers had to contend.
Chapter four, ‘COVID-19, Digital Technologies, and Coping with Mental Health’, focuses on mental health support groups, organizing psychotherapist training and advocacy groups aimed at combating mental health discrimination. The testimonials provided by organizers highlight the capacity of digital technologies to facilitate intimate experiences, build trust and ultimately expand the number of people who these services can reach. To achieve this end, health care facilitators had to adopt new roles (e.g. teaching people how to navigate these technologies) as well as learn how to secure new lines of funding needed to maintain access to digital conferencing services. The reliance of digital technologies to access mental health services also meant that some, especially the poor, were left with little to no options. For Healy, the stories of these grassroots mental health activists are in stark contrast with the lack of care demonstrated by corporations and governments. It demonstrates the ability of people, even during times of crisis, to subvert the current hegemony and foster solidarity.
Chapter five, ‘COVID-19, Digital Technologies, and the Creative Arts’, focuses on the experiences of grassroots artists in the US, UK and Brazil to continue their creative endeavors during the pandemic. Across the world, shutdowns resulted in the closure of artistic venues, thereby jeopardizing the livelihoods of artists. In this context, digital technologies became a way to not only circumvent lockdowns, but to radically reshape the artistic landscape. As Healy writes, ‘[a] reworking of time and space created the potential for artists from different geographical, cultural and disciplines to work together in a way not previously considered viable. It can appear that DTs subvert divisions within the arts. The poem becomes a video, which is woven with others to form part of a wider social story. A video on dreams and place incorporates the partnership of musicians and the participation of viewers in its creation’ (174). That said, collaboration may not always be beneficial in the arts. The process of making a video requires a division of labor that may inevitably transform the artistic process into something akin to manufacturing. Posting videos on YouTube may widen its reach, but it also contributes to the commodification of the arts while providing more material for generative A.I. algorithms. The common-sense notion that digital technologies will make art more accessible needs to be countered by a good sense ‘that sees [digital technologies] as a threat to the CCIs [creative and cultural industries] both in form and content’ (175).
Chapter six, ‘COVID-19, Digital Technologies, and Protest Movements’, focuses on political opposition and mobilizing resistance. Here Healy focuses on the Black Lives Matter Movement, the Indian Farmers’ Protest, civil protests over violence against women following the death of Sarah Everard in the UK, and informal worker protests in Nigeria. For Healy, ‘[t]here is an implicit theme within each story, that of mobilizing from below, of building upon a tradition of grassroot action to expand and build networks of protest. While official common-sense policies called for restricting social contact during the pandemic, in several instances, the lockdowns’ provided the time and space for mass presence on the streets’ (212). Digital technologies helped attract greater audience participation, as well as facilitating smaller group discussions. They enabled activists to spread their message and report on news stories being ignored by the mainstream press. Yet these same technologies made possible both official censorship, as well as the spread of fake news and misinformation.
The concluding chapter seven offers a reflection on the common struggles and issues discussed in the prior chapters, emphasizing the tensions and contradictions in the relationship between activism and digital technologies. Such technologies are the byproduct of multimillion-dollar corporations seeking to generate profits. As such, these technologies, whether as commodities or used to perform labor, contribute to the problems of alienation that Marx discusses. Using these technologies meant having to contend and overcome these alienating aspects. To this end, activists had to equally contend with the common-sense notions about digital technologies, especially regarding their perceived efficiency and usefulness. Developing good-sense approaches to these technologies helped address some of these problems. However, more work will ultimately be needed to build both physical and digital bridges between people. While these technologies may be useful, the stories found in this book consistently point to the need for real-world engagement and solidarity.
While it is certainly the case that Organising During the Coronavirus Crisis is not exhaustive, it does cover a wide range of cases from multiple countries including the US, the UK, Nigeria, Brazil, India and Bangladesh. Not only does the book deal with social movements, but labor organizations, mutual aid groups, mental health advocacy groups, community art groups, among others. The first-hand accounts of organizing and activism during the COVID-19 pandemic offer an important reference for learning how to respond to future crises. The work Healy has done to collect such a varied collection of interviews and stories is praiseworthy. The downside of this, however, is that recounting so many stories leaves the book little room to do more robust conceptual work. The notions of alienation, hegemony and common-sense are only sparsely appealed to, and in most instances, their usage is somewhat surface level.
For instance, at several points, Healy discusses the alienating effect of digital technologies, but never makes clear whether this is a feature inherent of these technologies or a byproduct of them being produced by profit-seeking corporations. Would digital technologies created by workers be alienating? Likewise, while the book purports to focus on the ‘contradictions of our digital lives’, it is never made clear why exactly these sites of tensions constitute contradictions. The notion of dialectical contradictions is mentioned early on in the book, but never explored in any depth. To be clear, the book deserves merit for giving voice to a diverse set of organizers and activists; however, those looking for a more robust engagement with Marx and Gramsci may be disappointed by what’s here.
At its core, Organising During the Coronavirus Crisis is about solidarity in the midst of crisis. While Healy notes the unique contexts and challenges that people face across the world, he also exposes just how similar many of these struggles are at their core. As he writes in this closing paragraph: ‘This book argues that our individual experiences during the pandemic can be generalized thus revealing the systemic problems inherent in existing social, economic, and political structures and identifying those responsible for failing to adequately deal with a crisis of international proportions. The pandemic has also enabled us to see who our allies will be in a precarious future as we attempt to assert our long-term needs over short-term policies designed to buttress profits. If future crises will not be of our making, the stories in this book show that collectively we can begin to create the solutions’ (227).
Reviewed by Jordan Liz