If the latest global imperialist offensive, that is, the hypothetical “fight against terrorism”, has taught us something, the state of emergency has become a technology to govern normality. Any measure taken in a state of emergency leaves its mark on the norm: the exceptional measures taken by governments in the fight against global terrorism have been left in the “common” laws of the countries. In other words, the exception has become the norm.

At the time when emergency measures are being taken daily in the name of the exception, it is necessary to take into account the above. Until two weeks ago, they are destroying the rights that seemed to us to be untouchable; and not only the rights of working people won collectively through strike or struggle, but also individual (liberal) rights.

Among all these examples, the norm approved a few days ago to legalize the control of people's movements through the geolocation of technological devices should be highlighted. In the case of China, it has become clear that increased sovereignty (and control of movements) is not so much by closing borders – as the first reptile attempts by the EU States were to demonstrate – but by controlling and monitoring people’s movements through data management and digital networks.

This standard has been sold to us as a measure to control contacts between all possible people infected by the virus. In this regard, it is quite curious that this “measure” has been adopted using the same method as the telephone companies used a few months ago for their supposed pilot test. Do you remember the “statistical study” launched between November and December 2019 for six days, the second phase of which was planned for the summer of 2020?

Therefore, one of the two: either by the end of 2019 they already knew that the health emergency was coming, or they are taking advantage of emergency to boost the new government techniques they had been studying long ago, that is, a political use of the emergency and the exception is being made. The state of emergency is never neutral, it is always political.

For all of this we ask ourselves (we are called ill-thought): What will happen after the health emergency? Will it stop using this technology and become a mere commercial research instrument (which is already very regrettable)? Or – on the pretext of “having worked so well against the emergency” – will its use be standardized and it will be extended – legally and in the name of transparency – to control movements and encounters between people?

And – to advance the critic – let us set aside the reductionisms as “they already have all our data”. It is different to collect data (technically) or use them (politically) to govern society. Although these two variants of use are totally negligible, the use of data for market research (i.e. by promoting the consumer society) or, among other things, the registration of the person who has attended a demonstration or its use as evidence in a judicial process (i.e. by multiplying the control and surveillance devices of a society that is already lost) is totally different.

In the same way, we can ask ourselves about the fundamental changes that are taking place both in the field of workers’ rights and in the militarisation of spaces and social life. Once this crisis has passed, will the rule allowing companies to “speed up” ERTE/ERE, or can employers continue to infringe workers’ rights on the pretext of “having to recover from the crisis blow”? Will the army be taken away from the powers of public order (i.e. the authorization of repression) or will any emergency be militarized, using the army as a response to any event that goes from natural disasters to social protests (as is already happening in other European countries)? Will it be possible to re-enjoy public space in a popular and collective way, or will it deepen the trend towards the commodification, privatization and militarization of space and neighbourhoods already begun in recent years?

All these doubts and reflections lead us to ask: What awaits us after the state of emergency? What will be the “normality” of tomorrow? In a world in which the state of emergency and normality are in permanent dialectical relationship, beyond the exception confirming the rule, we can say that it is fertilized and prescribed. In other words, exception never returns to normal, it produces its own normality.

Let us fight against crisis and normalcy: let us not go back to normal, let us not go back to normal tomorrow. Let us break the dialectic of exceptionality to turn the crisis into a revolution.