Few in the world of food system scholarship saw a pandemic crisis coming. Some did, like economic geographer Rob Wallace (2009), whose work has unraveled the social-ecological origins of novel pathogens in industrial agriculture and capitalist development. Such work has been generally underappreciated in food system scholarship, and even less appreciated in society at large. Only after a crisis appears do analyses like Wallace’s gain credence, and unfortunately, “the pathogen has left the barn”. So here we are: a dysfunctional food system that works for capitalists, takes epidemiological risks, and operates on a baseline perpetuation of mass inequality, resulting in poorly nourished communities of poor people who suffer increased morbidity and mortality from diseases. Though inequality is not new, food studies have increasingly focused on social equity, analyzing food and farming in terms of their effects on the most marginalized (and mostly non-white) sectors in society: food workers, immigrants, low income people, small-scale and tenure-insecure farmers. Coronavirus simply brings existing inequalities into sharp relief. It is inevitable that supply chain disruptions, changes in labor availability, and other coronavirus outcomes will shake up the current food system. Shortages, shifting marketing options for farmers, greater poverty and hunger, and return to home-scale subsistence strategies are likely outcomes. But it is very difficult to predict the details and trajectories of any of these particular developments. Some food system scholars assume that breakdowns in the social order are likely to result in positive change. For instance, people are already repeating historic patterns of responding to crisis by planting home gardens and seeking local food options, in fear of supply breakdowns. Theoretically, this reduces reliance on the industrial model, and opens up spaces for alternatives to thrive. Yet we know from history that capitalist states intervene to preserve economic growth by bailing out highly-capitalized industries, and indeed the federal government has already allocated $23 billion to the agricultural sector. Meanwhile, gardening itself contains no inherent politics, with motivations from panic and patriotism to revolutionary antagonism. Movements must continue to actively shape why people garden, how they access land, and who can take part or benefit, if breakdowns are to result in positive transformation. They must also carefully consider their understanding of and approach to the state. It is important to remember that the virus itself, and the people it moves through, and societal responses, will change and evolve over time. Social isolation is a real and current issue, and a fundamental shaker of established psychological and economic patterns, but it will not last forever. Those who want to prepare to make a better world out of this crisis should think through the next two years and beyond, in terms of various scenarios of isolation, government crackdown and increasing authoritarianism, and grassroots political responses from various sectors of society. Economic ramifications are key, considered as coevolving with shifts in values, politics, legitimacies, and emergent ‘from-below’ social effects. Preparation-focused thinking must consider food and agriculture, but cannot be limited to it, as narrow sectoral thinking and action prove themselves every day more inadequate. For example, recent farmworker and food justice practitioner struggles for housing (rural and urban) indicate how housing access and affordability have always been problematic for working classes under capitalism. With coronavirus’s economic impacts, working people involved in food systems (and not) now face greater housing insecurity, and calls are This article is part of the Topical Collection: Agriculture, Food & Covid-19.

中文翻译：

---

关于冠状病毒危机的起源、现在和未来的思考：边缘化、食物和住房以及基层战略

在食品系统学术领域，很少有人看到大流行危机即将来临。有些人做到了，比如经济地理学家 Rob Wallace (2009)，他的工作揭示了工业化农业和资本主义发展中新型病原体的社会生态起源。此类工作在食品系统学术研究中普遍被低估，在整个社会中更不受欢迎。只有在危机出现之后，像华莱士这样的分析才会获得可信度，不幸的是，“病原体已经离开了谷仓”。所以我们在这里：一个功能失调的食品系统，为资本家服务，承担流行病学风险，并在大规模不平等的基础上运作，导致营养不良的穷人社区因疾病的发病率和死亡率增加。虽然不平等并不新鲜，食品研究越来越关注社会公平，分析食品和农业对社会中最边缘化（且大多是非白人）部门的影响：食品工人、移民、低收入人群、小规模和无保障的农民. 冠状病毒只是使现有的不平等现象急剧缓解。供应链中断、劳动力供应变化和其他冠状病毒结果将不可避免地动摇当前的食品系统。短缺、农民不断变化的营销选择、更大的贫困和饥饿，以及返回家庭规模的生计战略都是可能的结果。但很难预测任何这些特定发展的细节和轨迹。一些食品系统学者认为，社会秩序的崩溃可能会导致积极的变化。例如，由于担心供应中断，人们已经在重复通过种植家庭花园和寻找当地食物选择来应对危机的历史模式。从理论上讲，这减少了对工业模式的依赖，并为替代品蓬勃发展开辟了空间。然而，我们从历史中知道，资本主义国家通过救助资本化程度高的行业来进行干预以保持经济增长，事实上，联邦政府已经为农业部门拨款 230 亿美元。同时，园艺本身不包含内在的政治，其动机从恐慌和爱国主义到革命对抗。如果故障要带来积极的转变，运动必须继续积极地塑造人们为什么种地、他们如何获得土地以及谁可以参与或受益。他们还必须仔细考虑他们对国家的理解和态度。重要的是要记住，病毒本身、病毒传播的人群以及社会反应会随着时间的推移而变化和演变。社会孤立是一个现实和当前的问题，是对既定心理和经济模式的根本动摇，但它不会永远持续下去。那些想要准备好在这场危机中创造一个更美好世界的人应该考虑未来两年及以后的各种情况，包括孤立、政府镇压和日益增加的威权主义，以及社会各界的草根政治反应。经济影响是关键，被认为与价值观、政治、合法性和新兴的“自下而上”社会影响的变化共同发展。以准备为中心的思维必须考虑粮食和农业，但不能仅限于此，因为狭隘的部门思维和行动每天都证明自己更加不足。例如，最近的农场工人和食品正义从业者为住房（农村和城市）而进行的斗争表明，在资本主义制度下，住房获取和负担能力一直是工人阶级的问题。随着冠状病毒的经济影响，参与食品系统（而非）的劳动者现在面临着更大的住房不安全感，并且呼吁本文是专题合集的一部分：农业、食品和 Covid-19。最近的农场工人和食品正义从业者为住房（农村和城市）的斗争表明，在资本主义制度下，住房获取和负担能力一直是工人阶级的问题。随着冠状病毒的经济影响，参与食品系统（而非）的劳动者现在面临着更大的住房不安全感，并且呼吁本文是专题合集的一部分：农业、食品和 Covid-19。最近的农场工人和食品正义从业者为住房（农村和城市）的斗争表明，在资本主义制度下，住房获取和负担能力一直是工人阶级的问题。随着冠状病毒的经济影响，参与食品系统（而非）的劳动者现在面临着更大的住房不安全感，并且呼吁本文是专题合集的一部分：农业、食品和 Covid-19。