Financial Times
Date: 3/20/2020
Yuval Noah Harari: the world after coronavirus
This storm will pass.  But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come

Humankind is now facing a global crisis. Perhaps the biggest crisis of our generation. The decisions people and governments take in the next few weeks will probably shape the world for years to come. They will shape not just our healthcare systems but also our economy, politics and culture. We must act quickly and decisively. We should also take into account the long-term consequences of our actions. When choosing between alternatives, we should ask ourselves not only how to overcome the immediate threat, but also what kind of world we will inhabit once the storm passes. Yes, the storm will pass, humankind will survive, most of us will still be alive — but we will inhabit a different world. 
人類現在正面臨全球危機。也許是我們這一代人最大的危機。各國政府在未來幾周內做出的決定，可能會在未來數年內改變世界。它們不僅將影響我們的醫療保健系統，還將影響我們的經濟、政治和文化。我們必須迅速果斷地採取行動，但還應考慮到這些行動的長期後果。在不同方案之間做選擇時，我們不僅要問自己，如何克服眼前的威脅，而且還要問問自己，風暴過後我們將居住在什麼樣的世界上。是的，風暴將過去，人類將繼續存在，我們大多數人仍將活著，但將生活在另一個世界中。
Many short-term emergency measures will become a fixture of life. That is the nature of emergencies. They fast-forward historical processes. Decisions that in normal times could take years of deliberation are passed in a matter of hours. Immature and even dangerous technologies are pressed into service, because the risks of doing nothing are bigger. Entire countries serve as guinea-pigs in large-scale social experiments. What happens when everybody works from home and communicates only at a distance? What happens when entire schools and universities go online? In normal times, governments, businesses and educational boards would never agree to conduct such experiments. But these aren't normal times. 
許多短期的緊急措施將成為生活的一部分。這就是緊急措施的性質，它們加快了歷史進程。通常情況下，可能需要花費數年時間進行審議的決定，現在幾小時內即可通過。不成熟甚至危險的技術投入使用，因為不採取任何行動的風險更大。整個國家都在大型社會實驗中充當豚鼠。每個人都在家工作，並且僅遠端交流時會發生什麼？整個學校和大學都上網時會發生什麼？通常情況下，政府、企業和學校永遠不會同意進行此類實驗。但現在不是正常時期。
In this time of crisis, we face two particularly important choices. The first is between totalitarian surveillance and citizen empowerment. The second is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity. 
在危機時刻，我們面臨兩個特別重要的選擇。第一個是在極權主義監視與公民賦權之間的選擇。第二個問題是在民族主義孤立與全球團結之間的選擇。
 

Under-the-skin surveillance
In order to stop the epidemic, entire populations need to comply with certain guidelines. There are two main ways of achieving this. One method is for the government to monitor people, and punish those who break the rules. Today, for the first time in human history, technology makes it possible to monitor everyone all the time. Fifty years ago, the KGB couldn’t follow 240m Soviet citizens 24 hours a day, nor could the KGB hope to effectively process all the information gathered. The KGB relied on human agents and analysts, and it just couldn’t place a human agent to follow every citizen. But now governments can rely on ubiquitous sensors and powerful algorithms instead of flesh-and-blood spooks. 
皮下監視
為了遏制這種流行病，所有人都必須遵守某些準則。有兩種主要方法可以實現此目的。一種方法是政府監視人民，並懲罰違反規則的人。如今，人類歷史上首次，技術可以一直監控每個人。五十年前，克格勃無法每天24小時追蹤2.4億蘇聯公民，也不可能有效處理收集到的所有資訊。克格勃依靠人類特工和分析師，不可能跟蹤每個公民。但是現在，政府可以依靠無處不在的感測器和強大的演算法，實現這個目標。
In their battle against the coronavirus epidemic several governments have already deployed the new surveillance tools. By closely monitoring people’s smartphones, making use of hundreds of millions of face-recognising cameras, and obliging people to check and report their body temperature and medical condition. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel recently authorised the Israel Security Agency to deploy surveillance technology normally reserved for battling terrorists to track coronavirus patients. When the relevant parliamentary subcommittee refused to authorise the measure, Netanyahu rammed it through with an “emergency decree”.
在與冠狀病毒的鬥爭中，一些政府已經部署了新的監視工具。通過嚴密監視人們的智慧手機，使用數以百萬計的面部識別攝像頭，並迫使人們檢查並報告其體溫和醫療狀況。以色列總理本傑明·內塔尼亞胡（Benjamin Netanyahu）最近授權以色列安全局，部署監視技術以追蹤冠狀病毒患者，該技術通常用於與恐怖分子作戰。當議會拒絕批准該措施時，內塔尼亞胡提出了一項"緊急命令"。
You might argue that there is nothing new about all this. In recent years both governments and corporations have been using ever more sophisticated technologies to track, monitor and manipulate people. Yet if we are not careful, the epidemic might nevertheless mark an important watershed in the history of surveillance. Not only because it might normalise the deployment of mass surveillance tools in countries that have so far rejected them, but even more so because it signifies a dramatic transition from “over the skin” to “under the skin” surveillance. 
你可能會爭辯說，這些並沒有新意。近年來，政府和公司都在使用越來越先進的技術來跟蹤、監視和操縱人員。但是，如果我們不謹慎的話，現在的這種流行病可能將是人類監控史上一個重要的分水嶺。不僅因為它可以使迄今為止拒絕使用大規模監視工具的國家，出現監控正常化，而且更重要的是，它表明監控從"皮膚上"急劇轉變為"皮膚下"。
Hitherto, when your finger touched the screen of your smartphone and clicked on a link, the government wanted to know what exactly your finger was clicking on. But with coronavirus, the focus of interest shifts. Now the government wants to know the temperature of your finger and the blood-pressure under its skin. 
以前，當你的手指觸摸智慧手機的螢幕並按一下連結時，政府想知道你的手指到底在按一下什麼。但是對於冠狀病毒，政府關注的重點已經轉移，現在政府希望知道你的手指的溫度及其皮膚下的血壓。
 

The emergency pudding 
One of the problems we face in working out where we stand on surveillance is that none of us know exactly how we are being surveilled, and what the coming years might bring. Surveillance technology is developing at breakneck speed, and what seemed science-fiction 10 years ago is today old news. As a thought experiment, consider a hypothetical government that demands that every citizen wears a biometric bracelet that monitors body temperature and heart-rate 24 hours a day. The resulting data is hoarded and analysed by government algorithms. The algorithms will know that you are sick even before you know it, and they will also know where you have been, and who you have met. The chains of infection could be drastically shortened, and even cut altogether. Such a system could arguably stop the epidemic in its tracks within days. Sounds wonderful, right? 
緊急布丁
監控技術正以驚人的速度發展，十年前的科幻小說如今已成為日常新聞。作為一項思想實驗，請考慮一個假設的政府，該政府要求每個公民每天都要佩戴生物特徵識別手環，以監測24小時的體溫和心率。所得資料通過政府演算法進行存儲和分析。這些演算法甚至會在症狀出現之前就知道你生病了，並且他們還將知道你去過哪裡以及遇到了誰。感染鏈可以大大縮短，甚至完全切斷。可以說，這樣的系統可以在幾天之內停止流行病的蔓延。聽起來很棒，對吧？
The downside is, of course, that this would give legitimacy to a terrifying new surveillance system. If you know, for example, that I clicked on a Fox News link rather than a CNN link, that can teach you something about my political views and perhaps even my personality. But if you can monitor what happens to my body temperature, blood pressure and heart-rate as I watch the video clip, you can learn what makes me laugh, what makes me cry, and what makes me really, really angry.  
缺點當然是，這種恐怖的新監視系統一旦具有合法性的後果。例如，如果你知道我按一下的是 Fox News 的連結而不是 CNN 的連結，則可以提示你一些有關我的政治觀點甚至個性的資訊。但是，如果你可以在我觀看視頻時監視我的體溫、血壓和心率變化，則可以瞭解使我發笑、使我哭泣以及使我真正非常生氣的原因。
It is crucial to remember that anger, joy, boredom and love are biological phenomena just like fever and a cough. The same technology that identifies coughs could also identify laughs. If corporations and governments start harvesting our biometric data en masse, they can get to know us far better than we know ourselves, and they can then not just predict our feelings but also manipulate our feelings and sell us anything they want — be it a product or a politician. Biometric monitoring would make Cambridge Analytica’s data hacking tactics look like something from the Stone Age. Imagine North Korea in 2030, when every citizen has to wear a biometric bracelet 24 hours a day. If you listen to a speech by the Great Leader and the bracelet picks up the tell-tale signs of anger, you are done for.
重要的是要記住，憤怒、喜悅、無聊和愛是生物現象，就像發燒和咳嗽一樣。識別咳嗽的相同技術也可以識別發笑。 如果公司和政府開始大量收集我們的生物識別資料，他們將比我們自己更瞭解我們，那麼他們不僅可以預測我們的感受，還可以操縱我們的感受，並向我們出售他們想要的任何東西，從產品到政治觀點。生物識別監控將使Cambridge Analytica 公司的資料駭客策略看起來像石器時代。想像一下2030年的朝鮮，那時每個公民都必須每天24小時佩戴生物識別手環。如果您聽取了偉大領袖的演講，而手環發現你有憤怒的跡象，那麼你就完蛋了。
You could, of course, make the case for biometric surveillance as a temporary measure taken during a state of emergency. It would go away once the emergency is over. But temporary measures have a nasty habit of outlasting emergencies, especially as there is always a new emergency lurking on the horizon. My home country of Israel, for example, declared a state of emergency during its 1948 War of Independence, which justified a range of temporary measures from press censorship and land confiscation to special regulations for making pudding (I kid you not). The War of Independence has long been won, but Israel never declared the emergency over, and has failed to abolish many of the “temporary” measures of 1948 (the emergency pudding decree was mercifully abolished in 2011). 
當然，政府可以將生物特徵識別，作為緊急情況下採取的臨時措施。一旦緊急情況結束，這些措施就會取消。但是，臨時措施有持久保持下去的巨大慣性，尤其考慮到新的緊急狀態可能會再次出現。例如，我的祖國以色列在1948年的獨立戰爭期間宣佈進入緊急狀態，通過了一系列臨時措施，包括從新聞審查、沒收土地到製作布丁的特殊規定（我沒騙你）。獨立戰爭早就贏得了勝利，但以色列從未宣佈過結束緊急狀態，並且也沒有廢除了1948年的許多"臨時"措施（緊急布丁法令倒是於2011年被廢除）。
Even when infections from coronavirus are down to zero, some data-hungry governments could argue they needed to keep the biometric surveillance systems in place because they fear a second wave of coronavirus, or because there is a new Ebola strain evolving in central Africa, or because . . . you get the idea. A big battle has been raging in recent years over our privacy. The coronavirus crisis could be the battle’s tipping point. For when people are given a choice between privacy and health, they will usually choose health.
即使在冠狀病毒的感染者降至零的情況下，一些渴望獲取公民資料的政府也可能會說，由於害怕第二次冠狀病毒流行，或者因為中部非洲正在出現新的埃博拉病毒，他們需要保持生物特徵監測系統繼續運行。因為......你懂的。近年來，在我們的隱私問題上，一場激烈的戰鬥一直在進行。冠狀病毒危機可能是這場戰鬥的轉捩點。因為當人們在隱私和健康之間做出選擇時，他們通常會選擇健康。
 

The soap police 
Asking people to choose between privacy and health is, in fact, the very root of the problem. Because this is a false choice. We can and should enjoy both privacy and health. We can choose to protect our health and stop the coronavirus epidemic not by instituting totalitarian surveillance regimes, but rather by empowering citizens. In recent weeks, some of the most successful efforts to contain the coronavirus epidemic were orchestrated by South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. While these regions have made some use of tracking applications, they have relied far more on extensive testing, on honest reporting, and on the willing co-operation of a well-informed public. 
肥皂員警
實際上，要求人們在隱私和健康之間進行選擇是問題的根本所在。因為這是一個錯誤的選擇。我們可以並且應該同時享受隱私和健康。我們可以選擇保護我們的健康的同時，阻止冠狀病毒流行，而不是通過建立極權主義的監視制度，我們也可以選擇增強公民的權力。最近幾周，亞洲一些地區精心實施了一些最成功的遏制冠狀病毒流行的措施，它們雖然使用了跟蹤應用程式，但更多地依賴於廣泛的測試、誠實的報告以及有見識的公眾的自願合作。
Centralised monitoring and harsh punishments aren’t the only way to make people comply with beneficial guidelines. When people are told the scientific facts, and when people trust public authorities to tell them these facts, citizens can do the right thing even without a Big Brother watching over their shoulders. A self-motivated and well-informed population is usually far more powerful and effective than a policed, ignorant population. 
集中監控和嚴厲懲罰並不是使人們遵守有益規則的唯一方法。當人們被告知科學事實，並且人們信任公共當局告訴他們這些事實時，即使沒有"老大哥"看著他們的肩膀，公民也可以做正確的事情。一個有上進心和知識淵博的人群通常比受過訓練的無知人群要強大得多。
Consider, for example, washing your hands with soap. This has been one of the greatest advances ever in human hygiene. This simple action saves millions of lives every year. While we take it for granted, it was only in the 19th century that scientists discovered the importance of washing hands with soap. Previously, even doctors and nurses proceeded from one surgical operation to the next without washing their hands. Today billions of people daily wash their hands, not because they are afraid of the soap police, but rather because they understand the facts. I wash my hands with soap because I have heard of viruses and bacteria, I understand that these tiny organisms cause diseases, and I know that soap can remove them. 
肥皂洗手就是一個例子，這是人類衛生學上最偉大的進步之一。這個簡單的動作每年可以挽救數百萬的生命。雖然我們認為這是理所當然的，但直到19世紀，科學家才發現用肥皂洗手的重要性。以前，即使是醫生和護士，也無需洗手就從一台外科手術轉到另一台外科手術。今天，數十億人每天洗手，不是因為他們害怕員警正在監控，而是因為他們瞭解事實。我用肥皂洗手是因為我聽說過病毒和細菌，我知道這些微小的生物會引起疾病，並且我知道肥皂可以清除它們。
 
But to achieve such a level of compliance and co-operation, you need trust. People need to trust science, to trust public authorities, and to trust the media. Over the past few years, irresponsible politicians have deliberately undermined trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. Now these same irresponsible politicians might be tempted to take the high road to authoritarianism, arguing that you just cannot trust the public to do the right thing.  
但是要達到這種合規與合作水準，你需要信任。人們需要信任科學、信任公共權威以及信任媒體。在過去的幾年中，不負責任的政治家故意破壞了對科學、公共當局和媒體的信任。現在，這些同樣不負責任的政治家可能會傾向於走專制主義的道路，爭辯說我們不能信任公眾會做正確的事。通常，已經侵蝕了多年的信任不能在一夜之間重建。
Normally, trust that has been eroded for years cannot be rebuilt overnight. But these are not normal times. In a moment of crisis, minds too can change quickly. You can have bitter arguments with your siblings for years, but when some emergency occurs, you suddenly discover a hidden reservoir of trust and amity, and you rush to help one another. Instead of building a surveillance regime, it is not too late to rebuild people’s trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. We should definitely make use of new technologies too, but these technologies should empower citizens. I am all in favour of monitoring my body temperature and blood pressure, but that data should not be used to create an all-powerful government. Rather, that data should enable me to make more informed personal choices, and also to hold government accountable for its decisions. 
但現在不是正常時期，在危機時刻，思想也會迅速變化。多年以來，你的兄弟姐妹之間可能會發生激烈的爭吵，但是當發生緊急情況時，你突然發現了隱藏的信任和友善，並急於互相幫助。要建立人們對科學、公共當局和媒體的信任，而不是建立一個監督制度，現在並不為時已晚。我們當然也應該利用新技術，但是這些技術應該賦予公民權力。 我完全贊成監控自己的體溫和血壓，但不應該使用這些資料來創建一個功能強大的政府。相反，這些資料應該使我能夠做出更明智的個人選擇。
If I could track my own medical condition 24 hours a day, I would learn not only whether I have become a health hazard to other people, but also which habits contribute to my health. And if I could access and analyse reliable statistics on the spread of coronavirus, I would be able to judge whether the government is telling me the truth and whether it is adopting the right policies to combat the epidemic. Whenever people talk about surveillance, remember that the same surveillance technology can usually be used not only by governments to monitor individuals — but also by individuals to monitor governments.  
如果我可以一天24小時追蹤自己的病情，我不僅會瞭解自己是否對他人構成健康危害，而且還會瞭解哪些習慣對我的健康有所幫助。而且，如果我能夠訪問和分析有關冠狀病毒傳播的可靠統計資料，我將能夠判斷政府是否在告訴我真相，以及它是否在採取正確的政策來對抗流行病。每當人們談論監視時，請記住，相同的監視技術通常不僅可以由政府用於監視個人，而且可以由個人用於監視政府。
The coronavirus epidemic is thus a major test of citizenship. In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians. If we fail to make the right choice, we might find ourselves signing away our most precious freedoms, thinking that this is the only way to safeguard our health.
因此，冠狀病毒的流行是對公民身份的主要考驗。在未來的日子裡，我們每個人都應該選擇信任科學資料和醫療保健專家，而不是相信毫無根據的陰謀論和自私自利的政治家。如果我們未能做出正確的選擇，我們可能會發現自己放棄了我們最寶貴的自由，相信只有聽任政府監控才是維護我們健康的唯一途徑。
 

We need a global plan 
The second important choice we confront is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity. Both the epidemic itself and the resulting economic crisis are global problems. They can be solved effectively only by global co-operation.  
我們需要一項全球計畫
我們面臨的第二個重要選擇是在民族主義孤立與全球團結之間做選擇。流行病本身和由此產生的經濟危機都是全球性問題，只有全球合作才能有效解決這些問題。
First and foremost, in order to defeat the virus we need to share information globally. That’s the big advantage of humans over viruses. A coronavirus in China and a coronavirus in the US cannot swap tips about how to infect humans. But China can teach the US many valuable lessons about coronavirus and how to deal with it. What an Italian doctor discovers in Milan in the early morning might well save lives in Tehran by evening. When the UK government hesitates between several policies, it can get advice from the Koreans who have already faced a similar dilemma a month ago. But for this to happen, we need a spirit of global co-operation and trust. 
首先，為了戰勝病毒，我們需要在全球範圍內共用資訊。這是人類相對於病毒的最大優勢。中國可以向美國傳授許多有關冠狀病毒及其應對方法的寶貴經驗，一位義大利醫生清晨在米蘭發現的東西很可能晚上在德黑蘭挽救生命。當英國政府對幾項政策猶豫不決時，它可以從一個月前已經面臨類似困境的韓國人那裡獲得建議。但是，要做到這一點，我們需要一種全球合作與信任的精神。
Countries should be willing to share information openly and humbly seek advice, and should be able to trust the data and the insights they receive. We also need a global effort to produce and distribute medical equipment, most notably testing kits and respiratory machines. Instead of every country trying to do it locally and hoarding whatever equipment it can get, a co-ordinated global effort could greatly accelerate production and make sure life-saving equipment is distributed more fairly. Just as countries nationalise key industries during a war, the human war against coronavirus may require us to “humanise” the crucial production lines. A rich country with few coronavirus cases should be willing to send precious equipment to a poorer country with many cases, trusting that if and when it subsequently needs help, other countries will come to its assistance. 
各國應該願意公開地分享資訊，謙虛地尋求建議，並且應該信任所收到的資料和見解。我們還需要全球範圍內的努力來生產和分銷醫療設備，尤其是測試套件和呼吸機。與其每個國家都嘗試在本地進行生產並囤積任何設備，不如在全球範圍內協調一致地努力，就可以大大加快生產速度，並確保可以更公平地分配救生設備。正如各國在戰爭中將關鍵產業國有化一樣，人類與冠狀病毒的戰爭可能會要求我們將關鍵的生產線"世界化"。較少冠狀病毒病例的富裕國家，應該願意向較多病例的較貧窮國家提供寶貴的設備，並相信如果以後需要幫助，別的國家也會同樣幫助自己。
We might consider a similar global effort to pool medical personnel. Countries currently less affected could send medical staff to the worst-hit regions of the world, both in order to help them in their hour of need, and in order to gain valuable experience. If later on the focus of the epidemic shifts, help could start flowing in the opposite direction. 
我們可能會考慮採取類似的全球努力來召集醫務人員。當前受影響較小的國家可以派遣醫務人員到世界上受災最嚴重的地區，以説明他們，並獲得寶貴的經驗。如果未來流行病的發病重點轉移了，幫助就會開始朝相反的方向流動。
Global co-operation is vitally needed on the economic front too. Given the global nature of the economy and of supply chains, if each government does its own thing in complete disregard of the others, the result will be chaos and a deepening crisis. We need a global plan of action, and we need it fast. 
經濟方面也非常需要全球合作。考慮到經濟和供應鏈的全球性，如果每個政府在完全不顧其他政府的情況下做自己的事情，結果將是混亂和危機加深。我們需要一項全球行動計畫，而且要快速行動。
Another requirement is reaching a global agreement on travel. Suspending all international travel for months will cause tremendous hardships, and hamper the war against coronavirus. Countries need to co-operate in order to allow at least a trickle of essential travellers to continue crossing borders: scientists, doctors, journalists, politicians, businesspeople. This can be done by reaching a global agreement on the pre-screening of travellers by their home country. If you know that only carefully screened travellers were allowed on a plane, you would be more willing to accept them into your country. 
另一個要求是達成全球旅行協定。所有國際旅行暫停數月之久，將造成巨大的困難，並阻礙與冠狀病毒的戰爭。各國需要進行合作，以便至少允許一小撮重要的旅客繼續過境：科學家，醫生，記者，政治人物，商人。這可以通過對旅行者在本國進行的預檢查達成全球協定來實現。如果你知道只有經過嚴格檢查的旅客才可以乘坐飛機，那麼你會更願意接受他們進入你的國家。
Unfortunately, at present countries hardly do any of these things. A collective paralysis has gripped the international community. There seem to be no adults in the room. One would have expected to see already weeks ago an emergency meeting of global leaders to come up with a common plan of action. The G7 leaders managed to organise a videoconference only this week, and it did not result in any such plan. 
不幸的是，目前各國幾乎沒有做任何這些事情。國際社會陷入了集體癱瘓。房間裡似乎沒有大人。人們原本希望在幾周前看到全球領導人緊急會議，以制定一項共同的行動計畫。七國集團領導人僅在本周組織了一次電視會議，但並未制定任何此類計畫。
In previous global crises — such as the 2008 financial crisis and the 2014 Ebola epidemic — the US assumed the role of global leader. But the current US administration has abdicated the job of leader. It has made it very clear that it cares about the greatness of America far more than about the future of humanity. 
在先前的全球危機（例如2008年金融危機和2014年埃博拉疫情）中，美國擔當了全球領導者的角色。 但是現任美國政府已經放棄了領導人的職務。它已經非常清楚地表明，它更關心美國的偉大而不是關心人類的未來。這個政府甚至放棄了它最親密的盟友。
This administration has abandoned even its closest allies. When it banned all travel from the EU, it didn’t bother to give the EU so much as an advance notice — let alone consult with the EU about that drastic measure. It has scandalised Germany by allegedly offering $1bn to a German pharmaceutical company to buy monopoly rights to a new Covid-19 vaccine. Even if the current administration eventually changes tack and comes up with a global plan of action, few would follow a leader who never takes responsibility, who never admits mistakes, and who routinely takes all the credit for himself while leaving all the blame to others. 
當它禁止所有來自歐盟的旅行時，它都沒想到要事先通知歐盟，更不用說與歐盟商討這一嚴厲措施了。據稱，美國曾向一家德國製藥公司出價10億美元，購買了新的 Covid-19 疫苗的壟斷權，這使德國感到震驚。即使美國現任政府最終改變了立場，並提出了一項全球行動計畫，也很少有人會追隨一個從不承擔責任，從不承認錯誤，並將所有責任歸咎於他人，榮譽歸咎于自己的領導人。
If the void left by the US isn’t filled by other countries, not only will it be much harder to stop the current epidemic, but its legacy will continue to poison international relations for years to come. Yet every crisis is also an opportunity. We must hope that the current epidemic will help humankind realise the acute danger posed by global disunity. 
如果美國留下的空白沒有其他國家填補，那麼阻止當前的流行不僅更加困難，而且這種空白將在未來幾年繼續毒害國際關係。然而，每次危機也是一個機會。我們必須希望，當前的流行病將説明人類認識到全球不團結帶來的嚴重危險。
Humanity needs to make a choice. Will we travel down the route of disunity, or will we adopt the path of global solidarity? If we choose disunity, this will not only prolong the crisis, but will probably result in even worse catastrophes in the future. If we choose global solidarity, it will be a victory not only against the coronavirus, but against all future epidemics and crises that might assail humankind in the 21st century. 
人類需要做出選擇。我們是走全球團結的道路，還是繼續各據一方？如果我們選擇不團結，這不僅會延長危機，而且將來可能會導致更嚴重的災難。如果我們選擇全球團結，這將不僅是對抗冠狀病毒的勝利，也是抗擊可能在21世紀襲擊人類的所有未來流行病和危機的勝利。

Source: https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/Axn97GVmBqtMm4nclqaWeQ