From quarantine breakers to social distancing avoiders, ingenuity is turning out to be the weakest link in our coronavirus defence

Darwin’s theory on natural selection is essentially about adaptation and humans have various forms of adaptability. Words like “ingenuity”, terms like “street smart”, and adages like “desperate times call for desperate measures” and “necessity is the mother of invention” describe this. “If life gives you lemons, make lemonade” is quintessentially an ode to adapting.

The new world the coronavirus has created is bringing to the fore this adaptability. Social media is flooded with clips of quarantined people finding ways to deal with forced isolation. There are also coronavirus songs and humour doing the rounds. Traditional media report these as exemplars of the human spirit prevailing over hardship.

But our ability to change with the times does not always have positive connotations. It can also endanger the individual and community.

There are reports of devious means employed to escape quarantine – tour guides suggesting their clients pop a few paracetamol pills to pass temperature checks at airports, others quietly missing from hospitals or ignoring orders to self-isolate. In India, celebrations of nationalism took precedence over the need for social distancing during Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s janata (people’s) curfew on Sunday.

There is another side to this malleability – the thought processes of those who choose to attend functions after having just been to coronavirus-stricken places, and other people’s reaction to them.

In the latter, politeness and friendship can take precedence over safety. In the former, friendship and the assumption that one is healthy, having taken precautions, gives them the confidence to attend.

Being amenable to the presence of such people could also be a form of apathy – another form of adaptability. An unwillingness to rock the friendship boat extends to choosing not to be swayed by current conditions.

Why some Hongkongers are refusing to wear a mask despite coronavirus outbreak

The desire not to put oneself through any trouble is based on either the assumption that the discomfort would be greater than that caused by the problem or that the problem is not yet big enough to need a response. It could be a way to avoid feeling overwhelmed by the crisis or to suggest it is not worthy of notice.

Others believe they are the arbitrators of the seriousness of the situation and will only act when they deem it necessary.

United States President Donald Trump, who is usually intransigent, made a volte-face on Covid-19. His new-found pliancy could be a defensive mechanism against the threat of the coronavirus disrupting his well-coiffured status quo. He had initially maintained that there was no threat from the coronavirus, calling it a hoax propagated by the Democrats and fake news. When this did not work, and he felt he was losing control of the narrative because of situation, he declared a national emergency.

Even religions which have survived millennia and remain relevant to many because of their rigidity have suddenly become supple.

The Catholic Church asked its congregation to stop shaking hands as a sign of peace during Mass. Bénitiers were emptied of holy water while the wafer was given on the hand rather than on the tongue. Now, the faithful are being exempted from Mass worldwide.

Mecca and Medina are devoid of worshippers. In some places, the Muslim call to prayer has been altered. Instead of inviting people to pray at the mosque, the muezzin tells them to remain at home and pray. In India, political leaders opted out of celebrating Holi this year.

The pandemic has given many, including charlatans, an opportunity to promote themselves and their products. People who usually exploit ignorance as a marketing strategy have changed tack and now use fear.

Circumstances force change, whether for the woke, Trump, religions or snake oil salesmen. Sometimes, such flexibility is selfish, preserving one form of life at the cost of others.

Behaviour from the Trumps of the world is recognisable and predictable. But there are those who are ordinary socially conscious who insist on carrying on, business as usual, despite possibly having been exposed to the virus.

They employ dexterous arguments: they have no symptoms so do not need to test for Covid-19 or self-quarantine; going into a quarantine centre when they are merely suspected of infection may end up with them catching the disease after all; and, finally, that they are certain of the efficacy of the precautions they have taken and confident that they present no risk to the public.

The mental dexterity is in seeing themselves as potential victims and not potential perpetrators. This adaptation is a form of othering and an example of individualism.

It is interesting how self-preservation colours self-isolation and quarantine. Some view it as a way to protect others and survive, as it limits exposure and provides better care for oneself.

Others equate it with an existential threat because of hardships associated with isolation, potentially bad conditions at some quarantine facilities and the threat of being infected from others quarantined there. In such a view, the potential impact on others takes a back seat.

Symbiosis and mutualism are also forms of adaptation. These have enabled humans and society to survive and progress, and are dependent on trust. The belief that one’s conduct, or the conduct of institutions, is for the benefit of all and not for the self is the cornerstone of social living.

The success of self-isolation, lockdowns and self-disclosure about exposure depends on this. This mutualism and symbiosis also make society resilient as individuals find ways to keep up each other’s spirits during lockdowns, as has been seen in China and Italy.

The strength of a chain is only as good as its weakest link. When containing the coronavirus depends on people adapting to recommended measures, the ingenuity of those circumventing them is the weakest link in our defence.

Samir Nazareth has worked in the development sector and writes on sociopolitical and environmental issues. He is the author of the travelogue, 1400 Bananas, 76 Towns & 1 Million People