It started with an innocuous tweet. On March 10, 2020, the New York Times columnist Tom Friedman tweeted:
“Bigger threat to world than Covid. Longer to recover too. Tucker Carlson is doing his part to keep America great.”
Carlson replied:
“What is the bigger threat to the world right now? Covid-19 or climate change? How about poverty, war, or food shortage? Which one of those do you think will cause the most damage in the long term? I’d say we’re more likely to solve climate change than we are to vanquish the coronavirus. But to each his or her own.”
Even though the two men were engaging in banter, there was an air of seriousness to their words. Friedman was clearly comparing the pandemic with the perils of global warming. And Tucker Carlson was, in essence, agreeing. But Carlson’s rejoinder was not received well by many Twitter users, given the gravity of the pandemic.
Not Everyone Agrees
The tweet was an attempt at humor, but many saw it as an affront. The right-leaning website Daily Caller was one of the many publications to which Friedman and Carlson have regularly appeared. And many on Twitter felt that the columnist had taken the journalist’s usual flippant attitude and made it even more pronounced. One user replied to Carlson’s tweet:
“You should be ashamed of yourself. You are a complete tool. You are not helping your case. Please stop.”
Another tweeted:
“He’s making a serious point. You should be ashamed. Your ‘argument’ is intellectually dishonest.”
Still another replied:
“He’s joking, right? But still, you’re being completely dishonest. Trying to compare the two is as misleading as comparing the war in Syria to the war in Iraq. One is a direct result of the actions of the other, but they’re not similar. Stop being such a hack.”
A Rising Tide Of Debating, Fewer People On Social Media
These were not the first salvos in what would turn into an all-out war. Before long, the debate had spread to other platforms. And, ultimately, the war would be fought not just on social media, but also in newspapers, magazines, and on TV.
In the weeks that followed, hundreds of Twitter users would weigh in on the debate, sometimes with just a few words, other times with well-thought-out arguments. The conversation inspired the creation of this blog. As social media users debated the relative merits of climate change and the pandemic, the platforms on which they debated grew more crowded.
In the weeks after Friedman and Carlson’s debate, visits to the site spiked by 50%. And while traffic to Twitter in general increased by 20% in the month after the pandemic, traffic to the anti-pandemic hashtag #climatestory increased by 140%.
Biggest Threat
The coronavirus was not going to go away, and for many, the fight still continues. In the weeks and months following the pandemic, there have been protests against stay-at-home orders and growing fears about a second wave of Covid-19. Many people feel that the media has been a part of the problem by downplaying the threat of the pandemic and shifting the blame to Trump and other conservatives for not taking the issue seriously enough. Many still resent the president’s unhelpful comparison of Covid-19 to the flu, arguing that the disease is not something to be trifled with.
The fight against climate change, on the other hand, has largely been defined by well-intentioned but ultimately ineffective public pleas to limit fossil fuel use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Despite all these efforts, the global temperature continued to climb, and as of April 2020, there are signs that the pandemic may have been more effective in slowing climate change than any other factor, perhaps even more effective than the fossil fuel limitations that many had hoped to see.
Is the threat from climate change greater than that from the coronavirus? Many would argue that the fight against climate change is harder because it requires a complete overhaul of our energy system. The fight against the pandemic, in contrast, is more realistic and, perhaps, more achievable. It requires nothing more than good old-fashioned social distancing, which we’ve all been doing for ages. In addition to which, there is a real possibility that we as a society may have been, if not actually capable of, finding a vaccine or medications to combat the deadly pathogen. Or, at the very least, we’ve been able to greatly mitigate its damage.
Two Dangerous Fantasies
One of the ironies of this entire debate is that many of the people who are most worried about the coronavirus are, in fact, the ones who are most worried about climate change. Trump has continued to downplay the role that he feels the climate crisis has played in creating the pandemic. In an interview with The New York Times earlier this month, the president said:
“I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the number one problem in our country is the border and the number two problem is climate change. I’ll tell you what, if we didn’t have climate change, the border wouldn’t be as big of a problem as it is.”
Trump’s view of the links between climate change and the pandemic is, of course, well-considered. There is no question that the two are, in fact, intimately connected. Global warming makes the spread of coronavirus more likely. But it’s also true that the pandemic has made us more receptive to the message of climate change. People are now more aware that climate change is a bigger problem than ever before, and it’s propelled a movement toward more sustainable living. The people most vocal about the climate crisis are, for the most part, also the people who are engaged in the fight against Covid-19.
Another irony is that many of those most worried about climate change are, in fact, often the ones who are most opposed to vaccinations. Despite all the medical experts’ confidence that a vaccine is within our grasp, some health care professionals have, in fact, called for a stop to all vaccinations because of the link between vaccinations and the spread of climate change. These health care professionals often cite the anti-vaccination movement’s focus on linking vaccines to increased autism rates and other chronic illnesses as the reason behind their call for a halt to all vaccinations. Needless to say, this is a fringe group that has not had much influence.
Not All Bad
Ultimately, while the world waits for a vaccine or treatment for the Covid-19 pandemic, we should not lose sight of the positive aspects of this global health emergency. First of all, the disease is treatable and, for some, the mortality rate is comparatively low. In some parts of the world, particularly in the US, the number of people who have actually contracted the disease is low. This is, in large part, thanks to the tireless work of medical professionals who have kept up with the demands of new cases while also trying to treat those who have already contracted the virus. In addition, the world has changed as a result of the pandemic. People are more open to alternative views than they have ever been before. Many are now more engaged with politics than they have ever been before. The spread of the virus has also, perhaps, made many more consider the role that they play in their communities. Now more than ever, social distancing and good hygiene seem to be the keys to preventing the spread of the disease. The role that big business has played in creating an environment that makes the spread of the virus more likely is also being scrutinized, and many large companies have either taken a hit or are in the process of taking one.
While the fight against climate change will continue to be waged, it is also clear that the tide has, at least for now, turned against the coronavirus.
For the sake of our planet and the millions of lives that are at stake, we should hope that this is the beginning of the end of this pandemic. And as the world continues to try and rebuild, we will need to continue to work toward mitigating the damage that the virus has wrought. But for now, the climate crisis is our number one concern.