Abstract
This paper argues that lockdown was racist, where “lockdown” refers to a historically situated kind of regulatory response to the Covid-19 pandemic imposing significant restrictions on leaving the home and on activities outside it. We articulate a notion of negligent racism which is objective and does not require intent, and show that lockdown satisfies its definition. The effects of lockdown on Africa significantly disadvantaged its inhabitants relative to the inhabitants of at least some other regions. We show how this suffices to establish the general proposition that lockdown was negligently racist (not merely “sometimes” or “someplace”), given our definitions. We defend our conclusion against two objections: that lockdown was a (moral) necessity (one version of which is the idea that it was a necessary precaution); and that race is explanatorily irrelevant, meaning that to whatever extent our argument is successful, it succeeds merely in showing that lockdown was anti-poor and not that it was racist. Nothing remains to gainsay the conclusion that lockdown was racist.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 20 |
Pages (from-to) | 496-523 |
Number of pages | 28 |
Journal | Ergo |
Volume | 12 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2025 |
Keywords
- Africa
- Covid-19
- lockdown
- negligent racism
- pandemic
- racism
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Was Lockdown Racist?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Press/Media
-
New Philosophy Study Results from Durham University Described (Was Lockdown Racist?)
22/04/25
1 item of Media coverage
Press/Media
-
HMN 2025: How Philosophy ‘negligent racism’ formed world COVID-19 response
16/04/25
1 item of Media coverage
Press/Media