Tawa town centre in New Zealand during lockdown for the Covid-19 pandemic Photograph: Dave Lintott/REX/Shutterstock

New Zealand has been one of the few western nations to pursue a policy of elimination for Covid-19, drawing global praise and popular support at home for a swift and stringent lockdown that began three weeks ago.

But now as the prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, decides how and when the strictest measures in the countrys national shutdown will ease, New Zealands comparatively low death toll and case rate have generated increasingly fraught and personal disputes between scientists about whether the lockdown has proven too costly.

Ardern announced on 23 March that the government would move swiftly to implement a stringent national shutdown at that point no one had died from the virus and a little more than 200 active cases in the hope of preventing the catastrophic death tolls seen in Italy and elsewhere.

On Monday she is due to signal whether her government believes four weeks of the most restrictive lockdown measures which will expire next Wednesday have been enough to flatten the curve and what the next steps will be.

To date nine people have died of the virus in New Zealand, with more patients having recovered than there are remaining active cases. Modelling used by the government had projected 14,000 deaths if the virus remained unchecked, and Ardern has been lavished with praise by commentators overseas for averting that possibility.

But domestically as always she faces a harder task in convincing the country to stay the course with the elimination strategy, said Jennifer Curtin, a politics professor at the University of Auckland.

There are a lot of people who are experts in this space in a way that we havent really seen in other crises that shes had to deal with, Curtin said. This is a whole of society crisis and a whole range of interest groups are offering their opinion now.

Ardern has suggested that during the next phase of recovery from Covid-19 restrictions will be loosened only slightly. She has also pushed back at academics who are calling for a swift and total lifting of restrictions.

[It is] commentary that reflects our success to date in stamping out the virus as reason enough to take our foot off the pedal, Ardern said. It is not.

Among those calling for an immediate end to the lockdown is a group of scientists who provoked controversy this week by exhorting Ardern to reopen the country. The group of six, calling themselves Plan B, have claimed that a strategy of elimination is bound to fail and would generate worse economic and health outcomes than the virus itself.

They have pointed to Australia, a favourite example of strict lockdown detractors, where a slightly less restrictive shutdown has seemed to result in a similar case rate of Covid-19 to New Zealands though that conclusion has been disputed by a number of other scientists.

Prolonged lockdown is likely to cause greater harm than the virus to the nations long-term health and well-being, social fabric, economy and education, said Simon Thornley, a public health lecturer at the University of Auckland, in a statement on behalf of the group. He added that New Zealands health system had spare capacity to deal with Covid-19, unlike in more populous countries.

Echoing the group, the leader of New Zealands parliamentary opposition, Simon Bridges, wistfully referred this week to the takeaway coffees and haircuts Australians are permitted to access. New Zealanders can only leave their homes to walk, buy groceries or see a doctor.

An editorial published by the group which appeared to have sparked Arderns remarks on Tuesday generated a backlash on social media where users said their proposition would condemn to death the elderly and those in ill health.

Ive never experienced the level of vitriol that occurred over this, Thornley said.

Siouxsie Wiles, an associate professor in microbiology at the University of Auckland who has been a prominent government adviser during the crisis, accused Thornley and his group of cherry-picking and misrepresenting evidence to support their position. An article she wrote rebutting their points also generated a tirade of social media abuse this time against her.

At the heart of Plan B is the belief that those who are more likely to die from Covid-19 should self-isolate so that the rest of us can get back to our normal daily activities, Wiles said. This sounds awfully like the UKs original herd immunity strategy and look how that turned out.

No one would argue that the lockdown was not harmful to the economy but there was evidence from other countries that it was the least worst option, she said.

More than 60 academics from Auckland universitys population health school signed a letter on Thursday saying they backed the governments elimination strategy.

Nick Wilson, a public health professor at the University of Otago, said scientists using their authority to suggest the economy should be reopened immediately were being irresponsible in a time of such crisis.

Normally it wouldnt matter much, duelling academics, he said. But in a national emergency, which is what this is, if people are coming up and saying the governments strategy is wrong, it is irresponsible not to back this with some very thoughtful work.

For his part Thornley is taken aback at the exhortations for him to be quiet. Im getting that sense that Im out of order asking these questions, but to be quite frank these are probably the biggest policy decisions the government will make in my lifetime, he said. I want to be helpful. I could have not said anything and I would have been having an easier time.

Read the original:
Debate over when and how to ease New Zealand's lockdown turns personal - The Guardian

When the reality of COVID-19 began to sink in, it felt like everyone was flooding inboxes with messages of heres our plan or were all in this together. Many organizations were intently focused on getting a reassuring message out. Agency concern for the public and other external stakeholders was the initial priority. Now several weeks in, most federal program managers seem to have established a regular cadence and tone for their updates and guidance.

As you adjust to this new normal, you can now turn your focus to your internal customers. These internal customers are your colleagues from other parts of your organization that depend on your teams work.

Whether internal or external, customer engagement is all about relationships and trust. In the old world of three weeks ago, many of us cultivated these internal connections in-person, during face-to-face meetings, over lunch, or chats in the hallway. Now, as we work from home, its more important than ever to reassure your peers and partners within your own organization that you are open for business and committed to serving their needseven if they cant see you doing it.

Start by reaching out. Tell them in an email or an audio recording what you are doing, as a leader, to keep your employees safe, healthy, and motivated. Share how you and your team are not skipping a beat in delivering the solutions and services they expect regardless of your location. Are there upcoming activities that could be affected, like planned group meetings, technology deployments, deadlines, travel? Be honest; let them know that there may be delays, extensions or even cancellations. Admit that there may be some bumps in the road, but that your devotion to their success is unwavering. Inform of your contingency planseven Plans B and Cshould you need to shift course. And with genuine compassion, make sure they know you care about their health and safety and that of their own teams.

Establish regular touchpoints. While you may not be able to gather in your office or conference room for weekly status meetings, you can leverage approved online meeting options like MS Teams, WebEx, Skype for Business, even FaceTime, to meet by video, share your screen, and do some whiteboarding. Sure, conference calls can be effective, but theres nothing like actually seeing each other, especially in these challenging times, that can bring a feeling of personal connectedness. Kids and pets invited!

Ask what they need. Remember that they are experiencing the same or similar challenges. Are there tips you can give about effectively moving employees to telework? Are there ad-hoc reports they need to make their job easier now? Think about the future; what will they require from you when this crisis is over, and they transition back to the office? Work together to plan for it now.

Report your accomplishments and request feedback. In a virtual world, transparency is key. If they are not already in place, develop dashboards that show the status of your projects, progress against goals, and metrics that matter to your customer. Share these reports regularly with your internal customers and employees. Doing so will instill a level of confidence of that you continue to deliver seamlessly. And ask what you could be doing better, especially now.

Do the same for your team, especially the compassion part. This is a time of tremendous change and uncertainty. While you feel pressure to meet your customers needs, so do they. Connect with them often, celebrate their successes, encourage their well-being, and most of all, be the caring leader they need.

While you navigate this new normal with your colleagues, you can connect with your internal clients and ensure they know they can count your services and support. While there is no playbook for this, the brands [organizations] demonstrating empathy, acknowledging how theyre adapting their business, and transparent about how theyre taking care of their team are the most successful, says Simon Hill, North American president of consultancy FutureBrand.

Lee Frothingham is customer experience consultant and communications strategist with Wheelhouse Group.

Read the rest here:
Ensuring Continuity with Your Internal Customers in a Virtual World - Nextgov

Stepping into a role as a leader whether as a seasoned executive or a neophyte supervisor is both challenging and exciting. How you handle this transition can have a huge impact on your career. You need to hit the ground running not only with your bosses and key stakeholders but also with your direct reports. Research shows that having a 90-day plan with 30-day and 60-day milestones along the way increases your chances of success. But while these plans are great tools, direct reports will evaluate who you are and what you bring to the table long before you hit those milestones. Indeed, theyll make sticky evaluations of you from the very first conversation. Thats why I think you should have a Day 1 plan, or what I like to call a new-leader pitch.

Just as entrepreneurs need people and institutions with money to invest in their start-up ideas, leaders and managers need people with social and human capital to back them. How much support they get directly influences their effectiveness. The good news is, your immediate boss is already invested in you (she knows your background and hired you). But your direct reports havent voluntarily made the same investment at least not yet. And you should never assume that theyll automatically follow your lead just because you have the title of manager, vice president, or even chief fill-in-the-blank (that is, formal power). You must win them over, and you should have a strategy for doing so that you can translate into a cogent set of talking points that guide rather than script all your early conversations with them. If the group you manage is large, these discussions will probably begin with an all-staff meeting at which you introduce yourself, followed by individual meetings with your reports over the next several days.

To answer this question, I asked full-time professionals, via an online survey platform, what they would want to learn from their new leader in their first conversation. In total 278 people responded. Their average age was 36, and the group was approximately half men (53%) and half women (47%), made up mostly of college graduates (77%), and represented a wide range of industries, including telecommunications (14%), government (12%), health care or pharma (11%), education (11%), finance (10%), and manufacturing (10%). I purposely made the context a conversation rather than a presentation to allow respondents to offer what they personally would want to know rather than what they think others or their group might want. In my framework, I also incorporate other research my colleagues and I have conducted over the past decade on work relationships and new employee onboarding.

The respondents in the survey broke down fairly equally into two groups: warriors and worriers. Each group had a distinct set of concerns. Chances are, youll have some of each type among your reports, so youll need to figure out how to address both in your pitch. Lets look at what that entails:

Warriors evaluate your knowledge, competencies, experience (and whether its relevant), and leadership approach to see if they will support you. They want to know if you can handle the job and understand how to help them do theirs better or will just get in their way.

One warrior technical professional for a large high-tech firm, for instance, said that what he wanted to know from a new leader was have they actually done the job, or do they just think they know what the job requires. How willing would they be to get in the trenches and try out our job themselves? Another warrior who was a nurse said her biggest concern was whether the new leader really knows how to do my job. It is offensive to me that people who dont know my job try to make judgments.

Some new leaders might interpret this line of questioning as an attempt to undermine them, and although thats possible, warriors general intent is different. Employees reactions to a new leader usually are based on their experience with the most recent leader. While a warrior direct report might be happy to be rid of a less-than-stellar leader, he or she may still be rightly on edge about whether history may repeat itself with you. Indeed, the nurse went on to explain that all of this is important, because it has been a problem in the past.

Warriors also want to know if you will be an active, hands-on kind of leader. Ultimately, they want you to (as one professional put it) jump in and take responsibility to make sure the team is kept up-to-date, while shielding the staff when there are issues with upper management.

Worriers, in contrast, are more focused on whether youre a safe investment. One sales professional summed it up well when he said he wants a new leader to make us feel secure in our jobs and in the company. How can you set these reports at ease? Many of them ranked clarifying job expectations as the primary task of new leaders. Deep curiosity about the leaders plans for the future and next steps was also common (particularly in turnaround situations). I would like to know if they plan to make any changes, especially what changes would affect me, said one worrier. Last, the worriers also wanted insight into the new bosss leadership approach, but their concerns were slightly different from warriors. They wanted answers to questions like: What is her supervising style? Does she have an open-door policy? How does she want us to approach her with problems?

To address both groups, make sure your pitch provides information on competence and change, experience and expectations, and your overall leadership approach. Jonathan (a pseudonym), a global product development associate at a pharmaceutical company based in the Caribbean, described how a recently hired leader did all this in an initial conversation: The new leader reviewed his past accomplishments in significant detail. It was impressive. He laid out his approach to learning the priorities of the various departments. He also told me that although he would restructure the organization to support the business, jobs and opportunities would expand. No one would be fired, but everyone would need to interview again for positions. That first meeting left quite an impression, and I was excited to see what was to come. Although its true that the prospect of interviewing for positions might have alarmed some worriers, setting clear expectations settled the future for them.

The survey respondents also pointed out ways that new leaders can get off on the wrong foot and what they should be doing instead.

1. Dont overshare, but do relate to reports on a personal level.

Relationships with supervisors can be powerful motivators. Research shows that when a direct report has a strong connection with a leader, the report is more likely to identify with the organization, engage in creative behavior, and help others at work. As one professional said, a good connection with the boss helps with morale and teamwork.

Interestingly, another respondent, an IT consultant, provided nuanced guidance on how to create a productive connection. New leaders, he said, should tell me a small bit about their personal life; nothing too revealing, but enough to make them feel like an actual person. In short, do not get overly personal. Another professional went a bit further: I would like to know them more, not just about where they worked. If they could do anything in life besides what they are doing now, what would that be? Others said that sharing personal details helps a new leader be more relatable and to bond. It also may help lay the groundwork for later presenting your vision for change and continuity. And while it may seem as if relaying that vision right away will help you get your reports excited about you, you may not want to rush in. One professional underlined a preference for the new leader to wait to give the vision for the department once they know us, the staff, better.

2. Dont just share your rsum, but do tell them your story.

While warriors may be examining your experience and worriers may be wondering how it influences your approach to them, both groups want to know about your work history. However, they both want you to stake your claim as the new leader through your career story, or narrative. They want to know, for instance, why this particular job makes sense for you at this time. As one warrior said, I would like to know what led my supervisor to get into a role like this. We help hospices manage their patient care, and our company is only medium-sized and not wealthy. It takes a certain kind of person to give up money and work for a good cause.

Jonathans boss was able to provide a powerful and personalized career narrative. As Jonathan recalled, The new leader expressed his excitement with being here. He took the opportunity to share a bit about himself. He highlighted that his previous college athlete days provided him valuable lessons for his career and his daily drive. He related past successes in a similar role that he thought would translate to our organization.

In your narrative, you can and should project your story into the future. Indeed, several respondents wanted to know about a new leaders goals for the leadership position itself. A health care industry professional commented: I would like to know what their vision for the position entails and how this vision affects me personally. Employees also appreciate it when you explain why your new position is integral to your story and, most important, how your direct reports play a critical role in that story.

After all, everybody likes to be part of a story especially a success story. And if, as a new leader, you put some thought into how to make a good first impression on your reports and win their support, you can help them be part of yours.

See the original post here:
Stepping into a Leadership Role? Be Ready to Tell Your Story. - Harvard Business Review

Jurgen Klopp called him a modern-day great and Brendan Rodgers said he could be as good as Luis Suarez, but the forward is without a club at 30

For a year and a half after joining Liverpool in 2013, Daniel Sturridge looked like the best English striker in the Premier League.

Thirty-five goals between January 2013 and May 2014 told their own story. Sturridge was incisive, clever, technically superb and brimming with confidence.

In the six seasons since, Sturridge has scored just 23 more league goals. He has finished bottom of the Premier League with West Brom, won the Champions League with Liverpool, and been banned from football for betting offences.

Article continues below

He has drifted to the sidelines, on the pitch and in the public consciousness.

At 30, he should be coming towards the end of his peak years, but he was never in the conversation for Englands squad for the postponed Euro 2020 Harry Kane, Marcus Rashford, Raheem Sterling and Jamie Vardy have grown beyond him while youngsters like Tammy Abraham and Dominic Calvert-Lewin have emerged in his wake.

Sturridge is used to being overlooked. As a youngster at Manchester City, he struggled to break into the first-team picture ahead of experienced - if goal-shy - operators like Rolando Bianchi, Darius Vassell and Benjani.

Sold to Chelsea a year after Man City were taken over in 2008, he took time to settle. His first two seasons brought 26 league appearances and just one goal before a productive loan spell at Bolton, but he burst into life under Andre Villas-Boas in 2011-12.

Thirteen goals that year was his best season to date by some distance, but his personal success was tainted. While he shone under Villas-Boas, the Blues struggledand the young Portuguese coach was sacked in early March.

Roberto Di Matteo came in and won Chelsea the Champions League, but Sturridges goals dried up; he scored just two more in the league and didnt feature in Europe beyond the quarter-final first-leg win at Benfica.

Sold midway through the following campaign, Sturridge immediately clicked at Anfield.

There were rumours Brendan Rodgers didnt want him at Liverpool.Regardless,the pair found a good relationship straight away and Sturridge was electric alongside Luis Suarez.

The pairs partnership was among the most potent the Premier League has seen, even if it was short-lived. They spent only one full season together, and almost fired Liverpool to the title in 2013-14. Suarez was the leagues top scorer with 31, Sturridge second with 21, and that wavy-armed celebration was near-ubiquitous.

"Daniel has a wonderful opportunity over the next few years to become world class, Rodgers said midway through that season.

He has every tool and every quality he needs to be as [good] as Luis Suarez. If he stays clear of injury and stays on the field he can achieve that.

Since leaving Liverpool in 2014, Suarez has scored 142 league goals for Barcelona, at one point serving as the tip of perhaps the greatest attacking trident the world has ever seen. In the same time, Sturridge's career has slipped through the cracks.

Hamstring injuries, hip injuries, knee injuries, ankle ligament injuries, calf injuries - his body just couldn't take the strain.

Jurgen Klopp realised quickly enough he couldnt rely on Sturridge to build a team around him. He still scored goals when he played, and he still performed for England his last-minute winner against Wales at Euro 2016 was a career highlight but his playing time dwindled.

The move to West Brom midway through 2017-18 was his last-chance saloon, a nothing-to-lose opportunity to put himself in the shop window.

Six goalless appearances and another two-month injury lay-off left the writing very much on the wall.

He left Liverpool as a free agent at the end of 2018-19 after watching from the bench as Liverpool won the Champions League. His manager had nothing but praise for him.

Daniel has earned the right to be considered a modern-day Liverpool great, I would think, Klopp said.

He came to the club while we were trying to rebuild and re-establish ourselves. Some of the goals he has scored for Liverpool were so, so, so important.

He is one of the best finishers I have ever seen in my life. He scores goals you think could and should not be possible.

Unexpectedly, Sturridge ended up moving abroad. He went to the Turkish Super Lig with Trabzonspor and found his goalscoring touch hadnt left him he rattled in seven goals in his first 16 games.

Then it all fell apart. A year previous, he had been banned from football for six weeks for breaching betting rules after telling his brother to bet on a possible move to Sevilla.

But the FA appealed the decision, and in March 2020, he was banned from football for four months. His contract at Trabzonspor was terminated the same day.

"Devastating for me, I'm absolutely gutted about it. My season's over, Sturridge said.

"I just want to say it's been a very long, drawn out process over the last couple of years, and difficult to concentrate on my football.

In the end, Sturridges ban hasnt been that dramatic, with global football largely suspended anyway. But it is hard to shake the idea it has spelled the end of his career at the top end of the game.

Originally posted here:
What has happened to Daniel Sturridge? Liverpool's 'world-class' striker banned from football and without a club - Goal.com

Working moms already face an enormous amount of pressure to juggle both work and home life. Throw in COVID-19 and the family all together under the same roof 24/7, and you have a recipe for a perfect storm.

In fact, 81 percent of employed moms said their ability to engage effectively at work has been negatively impacted by COVID-19, according to a new study by Bonnier Custom Insights, a division of Working Mother Medias parent company Bonnier Corporation. The survey was taken online by 549 of Working Mother readers from March 27 to April 9.

Over half of the respondents (55 percent) said they have trouble engaging effectively at work because they are experiencing anxiety or stress due to the current uncertainty in their personal life. And a significant portion of working moms, 27 percent, said their emotional state is currently terrible or poor.

They are worried for their children, their households and their careers, said Dr. Laura Sherbin, an economist and managing director of Culture@Work, a division of Working Mother Media.

At the household level, we observe significant challenges beyond just the logistical. Working parents and moms, who are lucky enough to have their job right now are unable to do what they need to do to deliver across multiple demands. Nearly half of working moms are sacrificing rest and sleep and are not experiencing support, she added.

Get the knowyourvalue newsletter.

A similar poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, conducted March 25 to 30 found nearly half of people in the U.S. say the pandemic has affected their mental health, with 19 percent reporting a major impact."

RELATED: 5 ways to curb coronavirus-related stress and anxiety

And the fallout from this stress and anxiety will make a big impact on the economy.

Sherbin estimated that working moms coronavirus-related anxiety will cost the economy a whopping $341 billion. She derived the number based on Gallup, which found that the cost of work disengagement is 34 percent of a persons salary. So, if there are 31 million working moms who make an average of $40,000, that equates to the $341 billion.

So, what can be done to help lower working moms stress and anxiety so they can be as productive as possible?

This is a big time for growth for everyone and the most important takeaway from this time is how we need to evolve and improve our lives, said executive career coach Liz Bentley, who is not affiliated with the study.

RELATED: On air and at home: How NBCU moms are juggling work, family while covering coronavirus

Bentley added, For women, this means it is finally time to divide the parenting and household responsibilities more clearly and with better boundaries. If women are working and also doing most of the caring for the children, they are unfairly sacrificing their careers. Instead, they need to create better boundaries and fight for equality in their relationship so that all of their work and worry is not on them.

Bentley said that working moms in return need to be willing to give up some of the control and allow their spouses to find their own way of doing things.

This will help everyone in the long run and will create a better family dynamic, career success for both parents equally and happier employers," Bentley said. "For so long, we have wanted more women in the boardroom and the C-suite and they cant get their without the support."

Employers can help too. Sherbin stressed management needs to proactively check in with their employees and offer targeted support.

At each team level, there needs to be a resetting of how work gets done with the assumption that this new normal isnt the old normal, just virtual, Sherbin noted. At the company level, offering tools and resources for those with existing and new mental health conditions is paramount to helping employees, and their companies, come out of this crisis.

Visit link:
Working moms are struggling to engage at work and it will cost the economy $341B - NBC News

Germany has overseen the largest-scale coronavirus testing program in Europe, conducting 350,000 tests each week, detecting the virus early enough to isolate and treat patients effectively. In New Zealand, the prime minister took early action to shut down tourism and impose a month-long lockdown on the entire country, limiting coronavirus casualties to just nine deaths.

All three places have received accolades for their impressive handling of the coronavirus pandemic. They are scattered across the globe: one is in the heart of Europe, one is in Asia and the other is in the South Pacific.

But they have one thing in common: they're all led by women.

These countries -- all multi-party democracies with high levels of public trust in their governments -- have contained the pandemic through early, scientific intervention. They have implemented widespread testing, easy access to quality medical treatment, aggressive contact tracing and tough restrictions on social gatherings.

Take Taiwan, a democracy of almost 24 million people -- with roughly the same population as Australia -- off China's east coast. Taiwan is claimed by Beijing as its territory and shunned by the World Health Organization, so it should have been highly vulnerable to an epidemic originating in mainland China.

But when Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen heard about a mysterious new virus infecting the citizens of Wuhan in December last year, she immediately ordered all planes arriving from Wuhan to be inspected.

She then set up an epidemic command center, ramped up production of personal protective equipment such as face masks and restricted all flights from mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau.

Taiwan's early, aggressive intervention measures have limited the outbreak to just 393 confirmed infections and six deaths. The US State Department cites Taiwan's coronavirus success in calling for Taiwan to be given observer status in the WHO's World Health Assembly.

New Zealand is an island country of almost five million, which relies heavily on tourism.

But Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern shut New Zealand's borders to foreign visitors on March 19 and announced a four-week lockdown of the country on March 23, requiring all non-essential workers to stay at home except for grocery shopping or exercising nearby.

Iceland's Prime Minister Katrn Jakobsdttir governs a small, island country of only 360,000 people. But its large-scale, randomized testing of the coronavirus could have broad ramifications for the rest of the world, as it has found that around half of all people who test positive for the virus are asymptomatic. Iceland also intervened early, aggressively contact-tracing and quarantining suspected coronavirus cases.

Contrast these interventionist responses with Sweden -- the only Nordic country not led by a woman -- where Prime Minister Stefan Lfven refused to impose a lockdown and has kept schools and businesses open. There, the death rate has soared far higher than in most other European countries.

Other female heads of state have also made headlines through their tough response to the coronavirus. Prime Minister Silveria Jacobs of Sint Maarten governs a tiny Caribbean island of just 41,000, but her no-nonsense video telling citizens to "simply stop moving" for two weeks has gone viral around the world.

"If you do not have the type of bread you like in your house, eat crackers. If you do not have bread, eat cereal. Eat oats," she says emphatically.

Of course, South Korea's (male) President Moon Jae-in has deservedly received praise for flattening the curve of infections in his country through widespread testing. But many countries led by incompetent, science-denialist men have led to catastrophic coronavirus outbreaks.

That helped bring about the current emergency of over 25,000 coronavirus deaths and a half-million cases, which continue to mount each day.

Similarly, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson dismissed the severity of the public health crisis and refused to introduce restrictions on social gatherings long after other European countries went on lockdown. Before he was hospitalized with Covid-19, he told reporters that the virus would not stop him from shaking hands with hospital patients.

And the coronavirus would not have spread throughout the world as swiftly if Chinese President Xi Jinping had not allowed five million people to leave Wuhan before it went on lockdown.

It's too early to say definitively which leaders will emerge as having taken enough of the right steps to control the spread of coronavirus -- and save lives. But the examples above show that a disproportionately large number of leaders who acted early and decisively were women.

Yet, on January 1, 2020 only 10 of 152 elected heads of state were women, according the Inter-Parliamentary Union and the United Nations -- and men made up 75% of parliamentarians, 73% of managerial decision-makers and 76% of the people in mainstream news media.

It is long past time for us to recognize that the world is in dire need of more women leaders and equal representation of women at all levels of politics.

At the very least, the disproportionate number of women leaders succeeding in controlling this pandemic -- so far -- should show us that gender equality is critical to global public health and international security.

Read the original post:
Women leaders are doing a disproportionately great job at handling the pandemic. So why aren't there more of them? - CNN

April 15, 2020 6 min read

Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Its a troublesome time for everyone in the business world right now, particularly for those of us who own our own businesses. My business, Student Loan Planner, launched in 2016 and grown steadily over the past four years. However, as a CFA and former bond trader, I always knew the day would come when wed need to weather a storm.

Here are sixsmart money moves Im taking for my business right nowthat I suggest you do as well. You want to set your business and employees up for the best possible success as our country navigates this health and financial crisis.

This should be No. 1on your list before doing anything else I mention in this article. Under The Paycheck Protection Program, employers with less than 500 employees can access funding to cover up to eight weeks of payroll and certain other operating expenses. That gives you more cash to motivate and retain your team. Throw your hat into the ring like everyone else. You want this lifeline.

Related:How to Submit Your SBA PPP Loan Application and Calculate the Loan Amount

The U.S. Small Business Administration is providing low-interest working capital loans of up to $2 million. These loans are designed to provide economic support for small businesses that have lost revenue caused by the coronavirus pandemic.

Check out your states programs for businesses. Many states are providing resources and support to small businesses. For example, California and Colorado have work-sharing programs that provide partial unemployment benefits as an alternative to layoffs. Lastly, for local business support, contact your local SBA office or Chamber of Commerce for additional resources specific to your area.

Most people are assuming they will be let go at this point. More than 6.6 million U.S. workers filed new claims for unemployment benefits last week, on top of 3.3 million a week earlier, which means if you can offer anything better than a layoff, your team will greatly appreciate it.

My company is trying toretain as many employees as we possibly can by cutting their hoursbut continuing to pay them something. Doing this means we can conserve cash but try to mitigate the psychological turmoil that comes from being furloughed or laid off completely.

Related:What Leaders Can Learn From Governor Cuomo About How to Communicate During a Crisis

Going this route also encourages employee loyalty your employees will always remember how you acted at this time. If you did everything you could to keep them on payroll during one of the biggest financial crises weve ever seen as a country, they'll support you too.

Your customers and clients are going to remember what you did right now for a very long time. How can you prioritizecustomer service and content at a time when they need it most,even if that means a loss in short-term revenue?

Right now, my company doesn't expect to make much money from the content we're producting in the short term, at least. From showing people how to get their seized tax refunds back if they're in default,to advice on how to cut their monthly payments, to demonstrating how to get loan forgiveness credit instead of refinancing, on which we make a commission.

Customers need guidance right now, and the best brand advertising you can do is to have them remember your company was there for them during this economic crisis.

Many businesses that were already in tenuous positions before the disease started spreading will likely not reopen. If you think about the supply-demand curve you probably learned in your Econ 101course in college, the supply curve probably shifts up and to the left after this because fewers businesses will exist to buy goods.

That means the quantity supplied of goods and services will be lower, and the price you can command will be higher. Meaning, if your company survives, having fewer businesses to compete with will mean higher profits for your company long-term. If your company is in a financial position that gives it a goodchance of surviving this crisis, implement this strategy into your long-term plan.

Related:Entrepreneurs Review the SBA PPP Loan-Application Processes

In addition, businesses have pulled back from paid advertising in a huge way thats a big opportunity if you have cash to burn. For example, say you know each of your email subscribers is worth $5 long-term because you sell a digital product. If the cost of acquiring one of these subscribers on Facebook was $2 but is now $1, you should be excited to spend that money right now. You can acquire these leads for 50 percentoff.

As a business owner particularly one who is trying to protect his or her employees from layoff youre going to take a hit to your personal finances right now. That's where an emergency cash fund comes in.In a recession, even if you have a stable job, you should have cash to cover six months of expenses on hand. If you have an economically sensitive job, it should be one year's worth. You need to include any required loan payments as part of this calculation.

As a business owner, conserving cash is everything right now. If you have to borrow money to get emergency savings, do it. You know how they say on planes that you must put your own oxygen mask on first before helping others around you? The same goes for your personal finances when you own your own business.

This is perhaps the most important tip I can give you right now. Youre not going to make the best financial decisions for your company if you dont take time to blow off steam and relieve anxiety. The worst thing you can do is sit down and stew about your business 24/7. Whether its watching Tiger King or Ozark on Netflix or taking a walk in nature, make sure to clear your head every day for the sake of your business and your own personal well-being.

Related:What the Entrepreneur Staff Is Doing to Stay Sane and Productive While Working From Home

Here is the original post:
6 Smart Money Moves to Make Right Now as a Business Owner - Entrepreneur

Q: Im worried about whats next with this COVID-19 crisis. We dont know when the stock market will recover, when employers will rehire or when the curve will flatten. We dont even know when well be allowed to walk in our parks or spend time with family and friends. Ill have a job to go back to, but I dont know how this will affect my finances longer term. Can you offer some ideas on how to survive this financially?

A: These certainly are interesting times. But dont fight your fears and negative feelings. Instead, accept them because they are bang-on. We simply dont know what will happen, because its actually unknowable at least in the short-term.

But if you believe, like I do, that humankind will conquer the coronavirus, then it can inspire you to hope. And hope can inspire you to action. And with action, you can achieve your goals.

This isolation time has been forced upon us, but you can use it for the better. You can think, plan and act now to improve your financial future.

There are two schools of thought on how to attain financial success: spend less or save more. Its much tougher (and less pleasant) to decrease spending to create wealth. Saving to build wealth is much easier (and more enjoyable) and the easiest way to save more is to earn more and then invest to grow that money.

So, let me ask you, when the COVID-19 pandemic becomes history, what will you have done to set yourself up for financial success? Dont dare let yourself down by permitting this time to pass unproductively.

If you elect to earn (and then save) more money, how will you plan now to make that happen in the future, after the coronavirus crisis is resolved? Will you go back to the same job and the same financial situation? Or might you contemplate a career move or advancement? If so, you could study online for a diploma through Mohawk College. Or simply read a number of ebooks to develop specific skills. You could take some notes from a video course and email them to your employer on how to make his or her business more profitable. Ill promise you theyll be impressed and may even offer you a raise when you are rehired.

Maybe youll investigate additional part-time employment or a side gig to complement your earnings from your job. Or perhaps youll explore becoming self-employed and starting your own business. Regardless of the means, now is the time to learn as much as you possibly can about how to earn more money to enhance your financial future.

This current worldwide situation might feel unsettling. Just the same and in spite of it make this COVID-19 crisis a distinct financial turning point in your life, for the better. I promise you that a time will come when youll look back on this with either a sense of accomplishment ... or a sense of regret. You can choose to take control of your financial success, even during this crazy situation.

I would never have wished this global health calamity upon you, me, or the world, but we have it. We dont know when companies around the globe will recover; but we know that they will. We dont know when jobs will return; but we know that they will. We dont know when the coronavirus curve will flatten; but we know that it will. And we know that well be allowed to walk in our parks and spend time with our family and friends. But I also know that it will be up to you, and how you use your time today, to determine if you will survive or thrive financially.

Never miss the latest news from the Spec. Sign up for our email newsletters to get the day's top stories, your favourite columnists, and much more in your email inbox.

Report an error

Journalistic Standards

About The Spec

Read the original here:
Where will you be, financially, when this crisis ends? - TheSpec.com

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban delivers his annual state of the nation speech in front of Fidesz party members in Budapest, Hungary, on Feb. 16. Attila Kisbenedek/AFP/Getty Images

Lets go back to 1989, said Christopher DeMuth, a former official in the Reagan administration, as he introduced Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, the guest of honor at the National Conservatism conference held in Rome on Feb. 3-4 before the coronavirus ravaged Italy. It was a way to invite Orban to recount his remarkable political career, but it could have been the subtitle of the whole conference, underlining the official title: God, Honor, Country: President Ronald Reagan, Pope John Paul II, and the Freedom of Nations. Never mind that the guest of honor has been rolling back the freedom of Hungarians in recent yearsand since the conference has secured the authority to rule by decree.

The two-day summitwhich gathered some of the most prominent conservative intellectuals and political leaders of the nationalist persuasionwas replete with nostalgia. Heartfelt appeals for the restoration of a supposedly golden age before the end of the Cold War rang out in the baroquely frescoed hotel hall, where speakers alternated on stage to articulate their slightly diverging brands of conservatism.

The era they were evoking predated the most aggressive phase of globalization: George H.W. Bushs new world order, the European Unions Maastricht Treaty, NATOs expansion into Eastern Europe, the introduction of the euro, and other elements of a 30-year process of rapid globalization that the nationalists loathe.

Social conservatives and traditionalists were represented by speakers like Rod Dreher, a writer for the American Conservative, and the Italian historian Roberto de Mattei, a traditionalist Catholic. De Mattei spoke about the dictatorship of relativism, a phrase made famous by Pope Benedict XVI before being elected to the papacy that is described as a system that doesnt recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of ones own ego and desires.

National conservatives gravitate around these types of moral absolutes. Even the French politician Marion Marchal could be included in that loosely defined category. The 30-year-old distanced herself at the conference from her aunt Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far-right party National Rally, striving to represent a smarter, more intellectually inclined branch of conservatism, one that chastises transhumanism while hailing integral ecology as a quintessentially conservative cause. The notion of integral ecology claims that climate change and unfair economic and social practicessocietal problems more often associated with the leftare seen not as distinct problems but as a dimension of a single crisis affecting our age.

DeMuth, the former Reagan speechwriter Clarke Judge, the former U.S. diplomat G. Philip Hughes, and John OSullivan, currently the head of the Danube Institute in Budapesta think tank with ties to Orbans governmentwere the Cold War warriors representing the old Reagan consensus. Leaders of far-right parties from across Europe such as Spains Vox, Alternative for Germany, the Netherlandss Forum for Democracy, Polands Law and Justice, the Sweden Democrats, and Brothers of Italy expressed the European right-wing element.

The presence of younger speakers of the generation, such as Marchal, the Dutch politician Thierry Baudet, and the British author Douglas Murray, could hardly overcome the sense that the leaders convened were mostly envisioning the future by looking in the rearview mirror.

The United Kingdoms formal departure from the European Union in January was widely hailed as the latest step toward the resurrection of a pre-1990s world order organized around the principle of national sovereignty and rooted in the loyalty of local communities. The first step was the election of Donald Trump as U.S. president, and although some of the speakers would be uncomfortable wearing Make America Great Again hats in public, the implicit belief they share is that Trump is the long-awaited dismantler of the liberal internationalist orthodoxy and embodies the resurgence of what they call national conservatism.

The national conservative crowd gathered for the first time in the summer of 2019 in Washington, D.C., in a conference organized by the Israeli philosopher and political theorist Yoram Hazony, whose widely criticized book The Virtue of Nationalism became the manifesto of the national conservative movement. Fox News host Tucker Carlson and then-U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton were among the main speakers at that event.

The Rome conference was the second step in Hazonys effort to mobilize the somewheres against the anywheres, to use the British journalist David Goodharts terminology, referring to the perception that nationalists are rooted in a single homeland (somewhere), whereas the elite are more cosmopolitan with no spatial allegiances (anywhere). This is indicative of the movements wider effort to shift conservatism away from its internationalist tilt and to recentralize the importance of the nation-state.

To accomplish this, the movement aims to redefine an older brand of conservatism that was ostensibly corrupted by the rules-based liberal order in the 1970s and steered away from its original purpose of preserving a traditional version of national sovereignty. That change in direction produced, among other things, a U.S. expansionist foreign policy, increasing reliance on international organizations, cultural homogeneity, misplaced faith in the free market ideology, and an aggressively individualistic outlook captured in Margaret Thatchers famous adage There is no such thing as society. National conservatives, in contrast, want to return to a world order in which nation-states are the primary actors and based on the belief that human beings are mutually dependent on national communities that are ultimately bound by shared values, culture, and history.

But this broad set of objectives makes it difficult to understand why the Rome conference was themed around former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and St. John Paul II, two late Cold War-era leaders who generally articulated the kinds of universalistic, global visions that nationalists wish to break from.

Indeed, Reagan spoke throughout his entire political life of the United States as the shining city upon a hill, a beacon of freedom for all mankind whose values could and should be exported globally. He reinvigorated the tradition of American exceptionalism, described the struggle against the Soviet Union in moralistic terms, praised international institutions like the United Nations as forces for good, and emphasized individualism and free market capitalism. No one doubts that Reagan was a nationalist, but his version of nationalism was colored with a decidedly internationalist outlook.

John Paul is a source of pride in Polish nationalist circles due in part to the close association between Catholicism and Polish national identity but also because of the lead role he played in helping the country regain a more genuine form of independence in the 1980s. But the institution John Paul led was defined by its international scope and universal valuesthe Catholic Churchs institutions disregard national borders, and the values it champions are thought to apply to every community, nation, society, and culture. After all, the kingdom of God has no national borders, and historically the Catholic Church mostly expressed its earthly power politically in the form of empire. The relatively few attempts to marry Catholicism and nationalism often resulted in heresies, violence, or some combination of the two.

The democratic government in Poland that John Pauls activities helped establish spent little time in nationalist isolation at the end of the Cold War, and it moved almost immediately into the U.S.-dominated liberal internationalist order. It began pushing to join the European Union as early as February 1991, and it expressed interest in joining NATO shortly thereafter.

This nostalgic impulse hardly fits in with the nationalist vision, though Hazony tries to justify the behavior of the 1980s generation of nationalists by arguing that their forays into internationalism were always brief and undertaken purely for practical reasons. The only military operation Reagan ordered during his presidency was the invasion of Grenada, which lasted for less than a week, Hazony told Foreign Policy, adding that he considered Reagan the last U.S. president for whom a world organized around nation-states was the default setting. In his view, it was Bushs new world order that changed the game for nationalists.

But Hazony conceded that Reagans vision contained a lot of Aynrandism, a nod to the philosophy of Ayn Rand, who argued that individuals were heroic beings solely preoccupied with their own happiness and with reason as the only absolute. That claim got harsh treatment on a stage filled with critics of free market excesses and neoliberal atomization. On John Paul, Hazony brushed it off, conceding that hes not an expert on popes.

The political alliance that Reagan cobbled together consisted of a fusion of social conservative, traditionalist, and a variety of libertarian inclinations. Of course, Reagan and his generation of nationalists serve only as a base for national conservatives. Hazonys goal is to develop a more modern fusionism that would remove the excesses of purist libertarianism while retaining the elements of the Reagan alliance that promote national sovereignty; at the same time, it would build alliances with populist European forces specialized in lambasting the EU and demonizing immigrants from Muslim-majority countries while standing in stark opposition to political theories grounded in race. Thus, in addition to formulating their political theses around ideas of nationality and values, the national conservatives also include ideas about race, culture, and religion to define their outlooks.

During last years conference in Washington, nods to white supremacism sparked furious reactions. Notably, the University of Pennsylvania law professor Amy Wax said the United States is better off if we are dominated numerically by people from the First World, from the West, than by people who are from less advanced countries. Among Europeans, the connections of at least some of the political partners with the darker chapters of far-right history have generated heavy criticism.

Certainly some of those who were present are from parties which have far-Right pasts and other new parties who may well be a cause for concern in the present, Murray, the British author, wrote after speaking at the most recent conference.

Murray singled out some outright neo-fascist groups like Jobbik in Hungary, Golden Dawn in Greece, and CasaPound in Italy, which are not necessarily part of the national conservatism network but whose presence still poses a larger question: Where is the threshold between acceptable nationalist parties and post-fascist groups?

Brothers of Italy, for instance, is the heir of the post-fascist party Italian Social Movement, which emerged after World War II. Although todays party is the result of several waves of reform and rebrandingand is now a significant challenge to Matteo Salvinis control of the populist voting basesome of its darker features sometimes become public. Last year, the party circulated a poster criticizing George Soros, who made a donation to a liberal, pro-EU party in Italy. It said, Keep the money of the usurers, a reference to an old anti-Semitic trope.

I am very glad this initiative is led by an Orthodox Jew, as I hope this would preserve its focus and keep away the unsavory people who may be attracted to it, one of the speakers at the Rome conference told Foreign Policy, referring to Hazony and asking not to be named to speak freely.

Although national conservatism isnt inherently xenophobic, it offers a useful paradigm for far-right groups who define their conception of the nation-state based on race, religion, and identity. As conservatives begin to reincorporate a strong nationalist element into their own political philosophies, this gives space to far-right groups to project their identitarian tendencies to a broader and more receptive audience. Because those groups tend to be more rigid and uncompromising, an authoritarian tendency seeps into the broader national conservative framework.

Critics, however, see no difference between the far-right and national conservatism, considering the latter to be a thin scholarly veneer of respectability to a fundamentally xenophobic, bigoted, and fascist reactionary movementan intellectual facade that claims Reagan and John Paul but appeals to leaders like Orban and Trump. According to this line of critique, national conservatism is not just disingenuous; its little more than an attempt to connect and organize right-wing populists across the West, similar to what former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon tried to do with his populist group, the Movement, in Europe.

Liberals and nationalists believe they are trapped in mirroring dystopias. For liberals, this new generation of nationalists is working toward a closed, authoritarian society akin to that which exists in George Orwells 1984; nationalists are convinced that liberals have already created Aldous Huxleys Brave New World. But for national conservatives, gaining legitimacy is the next crucial step in their quest to reshape contemporary conservatism.

In theory, national conservatism could offer a framework that appeals to the disparate network of right-wing elements that are disenchanted with the liberal world order that has come into being since the 1960s. As has happened in many parts of the world, the resulting groupings could eventually form well-organized political units that threaten liberal democracy from the inside. But if all this new vision has to offer is what was displayed in Romea vague sense of nostalgia, dubious affiliations, ideological confusion, Corinthian columnsthen its future prospects are poor.

More:
Nationalists Claim They Want to Redefine Conservatism, but They're Not Sure What It Is - Foreign Policy

Author Mark OConnell talks about his uncannily topical new book, Notes from an Apocalypse

The ironies are so uncomfortable we can hardly bear to acknowledge them. Mark OConnell and I meet to talk about his second book, Notes From An Apocalypse: A Personal Journey to the End of the World and Back, the day after the Government has issued a directive to shut down all public gatherings of more than 100 people in order to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

Its mid-March, a Friday the 13th in Dublin city centre, but Grafton Street already looks like a Sunday in 1990.

OConnell is that rare breed of Irish writer, a committed essayist and nonfiction adherent who circumnavigated all domestic routes to make a name for himself as a contributor to the New York Times magazine, The Millions and the Guardian. His preoccupations tend toward classic late Gen X: technology, future shock, pop culture riffs, a quirky sense of the domestic.

Born in Kilkenny and now 41, he is by anybodys barometer something of a local literary star, but youd never know it: many people are shocked to find hes a Dublin resident. OConnells first book, To Be A Machine, a journey into the strange new worlds of AI and transhumanist evangelists, further segregated him from the pack in terms of subject matter and scope. As well as scoring a blurb from Margaret Atwood, it won him the Rooney Prize and the Wellcome Prize and was shortlisted for the Baillie Gifford Prize.

The author has just concluded a meeting with his editor about how to reframe the press angle on the new book. Notes from an Apocalypse is a book about survivalists and end-times obsessives, a global tour of doomsday hotspots and hideouts, from the Black Hills of South Dakota and the pasturelands of New Zealand to the wind-blown desolation of the Scottish Highlands and the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone.

OConnell is, understandably, queasy about making capital out of a scary situation. We live in a time when speculative and dystopian fictions are overtaken by news reports in the lag between draft and publication. Since Brexit and Trump, since Black Mirror and Hypernormalisation, since the inception of non-linear warfare and the corrosion of the notion of objective truth, the future has become not just too dark, but too real to mention. Even as we speak, were still adjusting to the protocol of what will soon be termed social distancing, the eschewing of the handshake for the nod or salute, the polite but measured distance we keep between us as we chat.

But and its a big but despite the new books eschatological obsessions, despite its cast of would-be Martian land-grabbers and bunker monkeys, its a very personal work as well as a very timely one.

I could stand for it to be slightly less topical, to be honest, OConnell admits with a near-grimace. Id take 50 per cent less. Or 100 per cent, actually. Obviously its coming out at an interesting time, but I dont even know that Id want to read a book about apocalyptic anxiety right now. I was talking to my neighbour across the street, cause Id given him a copy of the book, and he was like, I cant read your book, I cant even look at the cover, Ive turned it over on the table. But people are different: some want to read into a situation and some people want to read out of it.

I put it to the author that its actually a book about the anxiety of new fatherhood masquerading as a tract about end-times preppers.

Thats exactly it, he replies. I mean, its not that its masquerading, but the apocalypse cannot be the subject for a book, because its not a thing, its an idea. This book is kind of a way for me to organise my obsessions, a sense of the fragility of everything, and a questioning as to how youre supposed to live with a sense of meaning and purpose at a time when everything seems so uncertain, and the climate that weve brought these children into, were murdering it. Thats a hard thing to face when youve already had kids.

So yeah, I was already thinking about these things, and I wanted to write about these anxieties, but I didnt have an organising principle. Then I started to read about people preparing for the end of the world, preppers and super-rich people buying land in New Zealand. Both my books are about capitalism, and that was a way for me to mediate those themes, through this central idea the Freudian thing of sublimating your terrors or anxieties or desires into a work.

I dont know that I would have gone headlong into it if I wasnt a writer, he continues. My unhealthy obsessions are the same thing as my work. There was a long period, before I knew I was writing a book about this, where I was spending a lot of time watching YouTube videos about preppers, I must have watched Children of Men I dont know how many times, I think it is the most prophetic film, it puts its finger on so many things that were already visible back then, but have become so current.

Not that it was like a therapeutic exercise, just this sense that Im already obsessed with this stuff, and its not healthy, but Im stuck with this particular source of anxiety. People are talking about the apocalypse now a lot, but what does the apocalypse mean? It just means our way of life, in our fairly privileged case, is under threat.

And apokalypsos, translated from the Greek, also means to uncover or reveal. Where theres catastrophic change theres also accelerated growth.

Whats happening at the moment is like a blacklight or something that reveals stuff that is not ordinarily visible, it absolutely shows up the fault lines in our society, but it shows up some of the good things as well. Like, people are talking more, because everyone is going through the same thing. The thing I find really extraordinary about what is happening right now is that everyone in the world is experiencing this thing in different ways, everyones life is falling apart to some greater or lesser degree.

Notes from an Apocalypse is a swift and accessible read, but despite OConnells inherent gift for the comedy of the incongruous, it is often angry. Reading about people such as Peter Thiel or Elon Musk, obscenely rich men sinking bunkers in Auckland, or making plans to colonise Mars, one thinks of privileged slobs who have trashed their own homes and now want to move, leaving the serfs to clean up their mess. The kind of men who would rather face unimaginably hostile alien territory than invest in saving their own polluted planet.

Among other things, Notes From An Apocalypse highlights the infantile aspects of the American frontier mindset, the Last Man survivalist pose. Several times while reading I was reminded of Martin Amiss 1987 essay Thinkability from Einsteins Monsters, the fear he experienced as a new parent in the midst of Cold War nuclear paranoia. Would OConnell characterise the anxiety that fuelled his new book as a sort of male equivalent of post-natal depression?

Hmm. Yes, but I dont know if its explicitly male. One question that is unresolved for me is, how much of this anxiety would I have experienced if I wasnt writing a book about the topic? Theres an emotional trajectory to the book, where at the end theres a sense of, not stoic acceptance, but tentative optimism. And thats true, thats real, I did go through that to some extent.

It was such a hard book to write, and so many of the interludes of, I wont say depression, because its not a clinical thing, but just feeling shit about things that went on for a long time. The writing of it was difficult because the topic was so heavy, but I did come through it, that note of optimism at the end was real, it wasnt something that I had to force.

The key line in the book for me is towards the end: my son is looking at the sunset and he says, Its interesting. Thats the first time I heard him say that. Its not what the book is about, but it is what drove me in a way, because as anxious as I was about the stuff that was happening, its interesting. Its very cold and arguably psychopathic to think in that way, but the fundamental human connection is there. I think if youre a writer you cant stop finding things interesting. The whole psychological dynamic of the book was wanting to be reassured or to have some belief, because when youre parenting really young kids, the big thing is to inculcate the sense in them that the world is beautiful, a good place, and its an interesting place, its not a dark and threatening place. And to hear him say that was really powerful.

As with To Be A Machine, theres a wry humour at the heart of the new book. The tone is somewhere between Louis Theroux or Jon Ronson and Dr Strangelove. This is largely because OConnell is not afraid of looking like an idiot if it means asking the reader-proxy questions.

I dont know how long I spent as a journalist for want of a better term being afraid of coming across as stupid, he says, and I learned eventually that the most valuable thing you can do as a reporter is ask a stupid question. The one thing that youre afraid of asking, because it makes you seem like a f***ing moron, thats the most important question you can ask.

Definitely with To Be A Machine, when I started writing it, I was so fascinated by the topic, I knew I had a good thing, I knew I had this milieu that was fascinating and full of crazy ideas and really eccentric people dealing with things that were of philosophical importance or whatever, but I went through a long period of feeling inadequate to the task, and I did spend time trying to get to grips with the complexity of these ideas, and reading serious books that were in various ways beyond my grasp. And I eventually realised that the stupid ignoramus position not in a comic playing-it-for-laughs way, but a person who knows nothing is actually a better point from which to grasp whats important about a topic, and a better point from which to communicate with people. As a reader I value experts in a broader sense, in the political sense or whatever, but I wouldnt want to read a book about transhumanism by a person who is an expert.

But talking about humour, certainly in my books, I hope theyre funny, but its very unknowable to me what is funny in what I write and what isnt, because for me humour in writing is just like being... accurate. A lot of situations are inherently humorous, so its just about faithfully describing things a lot of the time. I actually think if a writer isnt funny at times, doesnt use humour, or evoke it, I kind of feel like theyre not fully serious. Theres something un-serious about someone whos not funny.

Notes From An Apocalypse is published by Granta

See the article here:
'Everyone in the worlds life is falling apart to some greater or lesser degree' - The Irish Times