How teleological thinking survived the pandemic

This essay starts from the observation that historians have remarkably uncritically followed the biopolitical logic behind the approach to the Covid-19 pandemic. It explores why our knowledge and understanding of the historical background thereof did not prevent most from going along with the idea that there was no alternative to it. I argue that historians too were stuck in a teleological notion of progress in which science and technology inexorably drive us towards an ever healthier life and longevity. That historians moreover often concurred with stigmatising and morally condemning those who did advocate an alternative approach can further be attributed to the dominance of a political-ideological framework in which criticism was automatically seen as contrary to the principles of the welfare state and to a specific interpretation of solidarity. It proves that really questioning the status quo requires a deeper reflection on our own 'situatedness' in (Eurocentric) modernity thinking.