Much to the disappointment of many idealists and romantics, society shows no sign of change. Nor will it in most cases. No governments will fall, no global trade agreements will be redone, consumerism will not die or people become better human beings. There is no reason to and life will go on as usual although slightly depleted. There is no compulsion to change.

Do cataclysms change history?

The institutions, systems and the structure which in fact are now working to defeat the corona threat will continue in the shape they are. However, their weaknesses have been very exposed so a general consensus for some reform and more efficiency delivery will rise. To what level will depend on varying objective conditions of different countries. Things will improve hopefully but not at a radical level as some expect.

History is a cruel teacher. Going by what we know, the great change maker is not disaster but the livelihood system which is not under any threat. It's just a temporary blip. The compulsion for change rises when old economic systems are threatened by a new. The post subsistence society - moving from settled agriculture and later industrial system based on a marketing economy - remains as usual.

Cataclysms are expected to be change but only when in alignment with all other forces. However, history shows few such instances have occurred particularly in a maturing globalization-based world where access to resources has become international. Just as many of the problems have become globalized too like Corona.

What about WW 1 and 2 or famines of Bengal?

Both WW 1 and 2 had influence on reshaping the world. One gave rise to the birth of Soviet Union and decline of the monarchic models of governance in the West. The next one ended the supremacy of Europe and assured the rise of the US and to a lesser extent USSR and China. However, within fifty years of those dates, both "socialist" countries or ideology based states based on a command economy system had died and market economies remained the only way.

The most radical change in the post WW 2 world is the rise of market economy under the command of a single Communist Party. It was not produced by global cataclysms but internal history of China.

In Bengal, two major disasters are noted. Both are famines that killed more people than any other disasters, before or after. Both were produced by colonialism in 1770 and 1943 and both killed millions but society didn't change dramatically. The establishment of the zamindar system and Bengal Renaissance, the great achievement of colonial collaborationist culture went full steam ahead after millions died. History was produced by later events not disasters.

In 1943-45, the famine had no significant influence and the state making process went on as usual. As expected, various dominant classes were not overthrown. However certain things did change including the social equations which ultimately allowed state making to adjust in 1971.

In post 1971, social relationships didn't significantly change except throwing up a new upper class. However over time, the rural population gained strength through their own efforts in alliance with the middle class has made them much more powerful than ever. It happened without the benefit of a mega disaster.

Social space and changes now?

The big difference is the rise of social work motivated individuals and groups trying to help the affected particularly the poor and the marginalized. These people were always there, interested to play their role but didn't have the space. The corona virus has created that enabling environment, partly because of the significant decline of the political class as a credible social player.

Involvement of local level politicians in relief corruption, low visibility of senior politicians and the much higher dependence on the professional class and amlas has diminished the power of the politicians. Their opportunity to use muscle in this period is also vastly reduced making them less able to exert dominance. Media exposure of theft in such times has contributed much to their decline, though it is probably temporary.

What however is probably not temporary is the rise of the socially conscious activists who are very different from the political activists/supporters who still remain locked in political battles. They are not on the ground and barring the Facebook not visible. This has resulted in a scenario where the new group, collecting and distributing relief using social funding that has created the group termed as "good civilians".

Interestingly, the image of the army has not been negatively affected by the corona response and public belief in it as the most organized and reliable non-civil force remains. Even the police has been seen much more positively than ever making new (sub) groups' emergence possible. Conventional politics is taking a massive hit and informal social sector is growing.

Since the political structure is not organized, the social space will have new players though much depends on how each section plays the game. In a different shape the formal social service sector -NGOs- will be strengthened by possibly the larger informal- charity based community organizations- that grows everyday now. And they may form new alliances beyond the ones today to add to the ruling class.