by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
Remember Greta Thunberg, the Swedish child activist who became a media darling by skipping school to protest climate change? The COVID-19 pandemic has really done a number on her celebrity status. She’s no longer a child, for example, having turned 18 last year. A Democrat was elected president, giving millions of liberals an excuse to stop caring about the things they pretended to care about when Donald Trump was president.
The hierarchy of elite liberal hysteria has shifted. Being up in arms about the “existential threat of climate change” seems so quaint and out of touch compared to the “existential threat of structural racism.” Even the scientists seem to agree. Racism is better for ratings and requires just as little effort to care about symbolically. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer can take a knee wearing Kente cloth, woke corporations can hire a bunch of diversity consultants, and the rest of us can tweet #BlackLivesMatter or post a black square on Instagram.
On a related note, it would be hard to find a more egregious example of “white privilege” than this recently published New York Times article about deranged liberals who aren’t having kids due to their crippling climate anxiety. “I literally can’t go to a dinner party without the collapse of a civilization being at least mentioned, if not being the main topic of conversation,” a rich white woman told the Times. “Arable land is decreasing around the planet. We might not have enough food.”
This raises an interesting question. Who, exactly, is the intended audience for all these Greta Thunberg children’s books? The most recently published one (in the United States), Greta Thunberg and the Climate Crisis, is intended for 7- to 9-year-olds. Children who wouldn’t exist if their parents actually cared about the planet, right? To be fair, they were conceived during the Obama administration when liberals were still riding high after ending racism by voting for the articulate black guy.