Haciendo, planeando, "planhaciendo": una experiencia de pragmatismo municipal en la pandemia del Covid-19 en cooperación con la universidad / Doing, planning, "planning-doing": a case of municipal pragmatism in collaboration with a university during the COVID-19 pandemic

RESUMEN Este artículo problematiza las posibilidades municipales de hacer frente a la pandemia de COVID-19, a partir de la cooperación técnico-científica entre un municipio y una universidad del norte del estado de Rio de Janeiro, a partir de abril de 2020, que involucró la implementación de una sala de situación, procesamiento y análisis de datos para la toma de decisiones y de información para la población, centro de televigilancia, educación permanente con equipos territoriales de atención y estudio epidemiológico de COVID-19 en el municipio, entre otras acciones. En este análisis se utilizó como soporte conceptual una visión micropolítica de los conceptos de experiencia, pragmatismo, trabajo vivo en acto y deseo. La noción de "planhaciendo" se retomó como una planificación inventiva que solo puede ser narrada a posteriori, un acto imperativo, un gobierno vivo en acto que depende de un movimiento anhelante orientado por la vida, y que solo se da en espacios colectivos de prácticas de gestión y de atención a la salud.

ABSTRACT This article critically analyzes local governments' abilities to face the COVID-19 pandemic by examining an instance of technical-scientific cooperation between a municipality and a university located in the northern Rio de Janeiro (state) beginning in April 2020. This collaboration included: the implementation of a situation room, data processing and analysis for decision making and for public communication, a telemonitoring center, ongoing training with territorial healthcare teams, and an epidemiological study of COVID-19 in the municipality, among other actions. We situate our analysis within a conceptual framework that adopts a micropolitical view of concepts such as experience, pragmatism, "live work in action," and desire. The notion of "planning-doing" is deployed as an inventive form of planning that is only narrated a posteriori, as an imperative act, a live government in action that depends on the movement of desire oriented by life, and that only takes place in collective spaces of management practices and health care.

Control Discourses and Power Relations of Yellow Fever: Philadelphia in 1793 / 의사학

1793 Yellow fever in Philadelphia was the most severe epidemics in the late 18th century in the United States. More than 10% of the population in the city died and many people fled to other cities. The cause of yellow fever in the United States had close relationship with slaves and sugar in Philadelphia. Sugarcane plantation had needed many labors to produce sugar and lots of Africans had to move to America as slaves. In this process, Aedes aegypti, the vector of yellow fever had migrated to America and the circumstances of ships or cities provided appropriate conditions for its breeding. In this period, the cause of yellow fever could not be established exactly, so suggestions of doctors became entangled in political and intellectual discourses in American society. There was a critical conflict between Jeffersonian Republicanism and Federalism about the origin and treatment of yellow fever. Benjamin Rush, a Jeffersonian Republican, suggested urban sanitation reform and bloodletting. He believed the infectious disease happened because of unsanitary city condition, so he thought the United States could be a healthy nation by improvement of the public health and sanitation. He would like to cope with national crisis and develop American society on the basis of republicanism. While Rush suggested the improvement of public health and sanitation, the city government of Philadelphia suggested isolation of yellow fever patients and quarantine. City government isolated the patients from healthy people and it reconstructed space of hospital. Also, it built orphanages to take care of children who lost their parents during the epidemic and implemented power to control people put in the state of exception. Of course, city government tried to protect the city and nation by quarantine of every ship to Philadelphia. Control policies of yellow fever in 1793 showed different conflicts and interactions. Through the yellow fever, Jeffersonian Republicanism and Federalism had conflicted in politically, but they had interactions for control of the infectious disease. And with these kinds of infectious diseases policies, we can see interactions in local, national and global level.