Part IV of an article series examining themes from the British dystopian series Years and Years that have become pertinent following the Russia-Ukraine War.
Parts I, II, and III of this article series examined the various societal and international themes derived from the prophetic fiction series Years and Years, specifically those that have become ever more pertinent due to the Russia-Ukraine War and its emergent consequences. Respectively, the themes discussed were Refugee & Housing Crises, Nuclear Attack & World War, and Financial & Employment Crises. Furthermore, this particular succession of socio-international themes was shown to comprise a logical chain reaction of crises that can be traced through the series’ narrative, implicitly when not explicitly. Part IV presents the culmination of this chain reaction of developments in what can be thought of as their sociopolitical ‘endgame’ and the ‘comeuppance’ of accumulated follies: neo-fascism*.
*To avoid ambiguity in using this term, the Wikipedia definition will suffice here: “Neo-fascism is a post-World War II ideology that includes significant elements of fascism. Neo-fascism usually includes ultranationalism, racial supremacy, populism, authoritarianism, nativism, xenophobia and anti-immigration sentiment as well as opposition to liberal democracy, parliamentarianism, liberalism, Marxism, capitalism, communism, and socialism.”
A compilation of my notes from the book: Plagues and Peoples, by William H. McNeill (1976); complimented by my summarizing sub-headings.
As quoted by the Lancet behind the front cover of this book,
Professor McNeill is an American historian with a sound grasp of epidemiological principles.
As McNeill points out himself in this book (which can be seen immediately in the notes to follow), historians systematically gloss-over the significance of epidemic disease.
In choosing to read Plagues and Peoples third in my sequence of pandemic-themed books, I identified it as the one most complimentary to Daniel Defoe’s A Journal of the Plague Year: for while the latter is “the prototype of all accounts of great cities in times of epidemic”, the former has to be one of, if not the most substantial attempts at a historicalinterpretation of epidemics (—which is quite distinct from an epidemiological interpretation of history, I would add).