The new identified virus COVID-19 has become one of the most contagious diseases in human history. The ongoing coronavirus has created severe threats to global mental health, which have resulted in crisis management challenges and international concerns related to health issues. As of September 9, 2021, there were over 223.4 million patients with COVID-19, including 4.6 million deaths and over 200 million recovered patients reported worldwide, which has made the COVID-19 outbreak one of the deadliest pandemics in human history. The aggressive public health implementations endorsed various precautionary safety and preventive strategies to suppress and minimize COVID-19 disease transmission. The second, third, and fourth waves of COVID-19 continue to pose global challenges to crisis management, as its evolution and implications are still unfolding. This study posits that examining the strategic ripostes and pandemic experiences sheds light on combatting this global emergency. This study recommends two model strategies that help reduce the adverse effects of the pandemic on the immune systems of the general population. This present paper recommends NPI interventions (non-pharmaceutical intervention) to combine various measures, such as the suppression strategy (lockdown and restrictions) and mitigation model to decrease the burden on health systems. The current COVID-19 health crisis has influenced all vital economic sectors and developed crisis management problems. The global supply of vaccines is still not sufficient to manage this global health emergency. In this crisis, NPIs are helpful to manage the spillover impacts of the pandemic. It articulates the prominence of resilience and economic and strategic agility to resume economic activities and resolve healthcare issues. This study primarily focuses on the role of social media to tackle challenges and crises posed by COVID-19 on economies, business activities, healthcare burdens, and government support for societies to resume businesses, and implications for global economic and healthcare provision disruptions. This study suggests that intervention strategies can control the rapid spread of COVID-19 with hands-on crisis management measures, and the healthcare system will resume normal conditions quickly. Global economies will revitalize scientific contributions and collaborations, including social science and business industries, through government support.

No abstract

No abstract

This paper claims that, since many of the concepts relevant to our analysis of systemic change were coined in and about the core, the potential with which solutions to world-systemic crisis are credited in the long run should be assessed differently depending on the structural location of their origin. In the periphery, such concepts as conservatism, socialism and even liberalism took forms that often retained nothing of the original model but the name, such that strategies of applying them to (semi)peripheral situations ranged from “stretching the ideology” to “discarding the (liberal) myth” altogether. In a first step, “the hypothesis of semiperipheral development” (Chase-Dunn and Hall), according to which the semiperiphery represents the most likely locus of political, economical, and institutional change, is amended to say that, at least for the late modern world-system, the strength of the semiperiphery resides primarily in the cultural and epistemic sphere. In a second step, this contention is illustrated with the help of major challenges that the Eastern European and Latin American (semi)peripheries have posed to the world-system’s political fields and institutional settings both in the past and to date—with different degrees of success corresponding to their respective structural position. In light of these examples, it is argued that a comparative analysis of continuities among political epistemologies developed in the semiperiphery can help us understand the ways in which similar attempts can become antisystemic today.

The article makes a case for Europe as a creolized space, or Europe Otherwise. It argues that, in order to account for both the transregional entanglements and the internal hierarchies that European colonialism and imperialism have produced since at least the sixteenth century, we need to unlearn received notions of Europe as an unmarked category; and that theoretical and empirical lessons from the Caribbean are central to relearning Europe differently. To conceive of Europe as a creolized space thus means to draw attention to the decisive shifts that its colonial possessions operate in both its historical legacies and its present borders when consistently taken into account. Such reconceptualization entails a simultaneous creolization of theory so as to reinscribe into sociological thought the experiences of peoples and regions racialized as non-European, non-Western, and non-White alongside the multiple entanglements between Europe and its colonies. Drawing on Caribbean perspectives on creolization, I first discuss how creolizing Europe contributes to countering the definition power of ahistorical and unmarked categories. Subsequently, I propose to rethink Europe as a political, cultural, economic, and discursive formation from its current colonial borders in South America and the Caribbean Sea. Finally, I argue that focusing on Europe’s colonial possessions in the Caribbean today and their corresponding geographical referent, Caribbean Europe, is one way to effectively creolize established understandings of Europe’s colonial history as a thing of the past, of a white Western European identity as the norm, and of the European Union as confined to continental Europe. Recent crises in the Caribbean – from the 2017 hurricanes to Brexit – are used as a magnifying glass in order to make Europe’s ongoing colonial entanglements theoretically and politically visible.

An entire Occidentalist tradition of citizenship theory viewed citizenship as a modern, progressive institution that helped overcome particularities of unequal social origin. Contrary to the claims of this (mainly male) Western scholarly tradition, the article argues, first, that the institution of citizenship has developed in the West through the legal (and physical) exclusion of non-European, non-White and non-Western populations from civic, political, social and cultural rights; these exclusions, and thus citizenship as such, have historically been (en)gendered. Second, the article maintains that citizenship and gender are the most decisive factors accounting for extreme inequalities between individuals in rich and poor countries in the twenty-first century. Forms of racialization, sexualization and precarization to which the acquisition of citizenship and the corresponding gain in social mobility are linked today are illustrated with examples of practices to subvert citizenship law through marriage or childbirth in countries relying primarily on jus sanguinis and jus soli, respectively.

The contribution in this introduction, and in this monograph issue of Current Sociology itself, is to explain how patterns of inequality associated with global capital have been reconfigured in different contexts and have historically produced varied results. The definition of global inequality used here transcends Euro- and US-centric models of linear development and comparisons of national income and its distribution to explain how complex socioeconomic hierarchies, including – but not limited to – class, reinforce inequalities among social groups around the globe. The editors trace contemporary patterns of inequality back to the history of imperial and colonial power so as to reintroduce into the scholarly dialogue on inequality a broader understanding of ascriptive hierarchies of race, gender, caste, and national citizenship and their relationship to colonial conquest, enslavement, and labor migrations as interrelated contexts of the global production and reproduction of inequality patterns.

No abstract