2022

Hirvonen, Onni

This contribution focuses on the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic as a phenomenon that discloses problems of freedom within liberal democratic institutions. Many different governmental COVID-19-related restrictions, while useful and helpful, have faced criticism that they unjustifiably restrict freedom. At times this criticism comes from extreme liberal (or libertarian) quarters but there have also been concerns that those from disadvantaged minority groups have been overlooked in the pandemic-related decision-making. It has been argued that having “a voice” is central in the context of liberal democracy. Following Philip Pettit (On the people’s terms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012), it can be said that having an effective voice is necessary for freedom. Further supporting this, according to Axel Honneth (Freedom’s right. Polity Press, Cambridge, 2014) freedom is the key value of modern liberal institutions. According to Pettit, freedom thus requires that parties to democracy be given an equal voice that is unconditioned and efficacious. Thus, the problems with democratic participation are major wrongs precisely because they are explicit transgressions against freedom. But how to reconcile this with the justifiable and legitimate feasibility limits of decision-making during the COVID-19 pandemic? Time-consuming deliberation is not possible in a “state of exception” when decisions must be made quickly. This paper defends the view that feasibility limits are real and it might well be unrealistic to expect all voices to be heard during the decision-making at a time of crisis. Nevertheless, responses to a pandemic ought to be made in a way that does not forget the multiple, varied voices constituting the public sphere. Examining the disproportionate effects of COVID-19 and responses to it helps reveal the injustices that have been entrenched into democratic institutions. It highlights the voices that are not automatically taken into account even without extreme circumstances. Thus, a pandemic functions as a tragic disclosure of the injustices of the institutional order, a disclosure that should be used to argue for institutional renewal and better representation of underrepresented groups.