By undermining cooperative, science- and law-based approaches to managing the most urgent threats to humanity, leaders have helped to create a situation that will, if unaddressed, lead to catastrophe, sooner rather than later." (Photo: Getty Images)
Something Like Coronavirus Is Exactly What the Doomsday Clock Has Been Warning About
While "social isolation" and other tactics being used today to combat the coronavirus pandemic are not those needed to address the dangers posed by nuclear weapons and climate change, the resolve now being exhibited to take major steps to bring about swift change is a model for dealing with these existential threats to the future of human life.
Remember the threats of nuclear war and climate change?
After a few months of life with the coronavirus pandemic, the existential threats to humankind that once dominated so much of our thinking may seem much more removed from today than they are.
In fact, as the person who convened the Jan. 23, 2020 announcement in which the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the hands of its iconic Doomsday Clock twenty seconds closer to midnight, I have been asked more than once, "How did the Doomsday Clock miss the coronavirus?"
The truth is that it didn't.
While concerns about climate change and nuclear war were the major drivers in moving the Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds to midnight, the 2020 statement issued by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists returns over and over again to the same underlying problem: The deliberate erosion by politicians of science and our core institutions.
As the Doomsday Clock Statement notes: "Over the last two years, we have seen influential leaders denigrate and discard the most effective methods for addressing complex threats ... in favor of their own narrow interests and domestic political gain. By undermining cooperative, science- and law-based approaches to managing the most urgent threats to humanity, leaders have helped to create a situation that will, if unaddressed, lead to catastrophe, sooner rather than later."
In recent years, we have seen a growing group of national leaders dismiss information with which they do not agree as fake news and advance their own untruths for domestic political gain. Scientists and experts are being marginalized just as their findings are most needed to navigate increasingly complex and global 21st century challenges.
As we pointed out back then, "In the United States, there is active political antagonism toward science and a growing sense of government-sanctioned disdain for expert opinion, creating fear and doubt regarding well-established science about climate change and other urgent challenges."
Four months later, I read those words and I am chilled by the extent to which they anticipated the early denial in the U.S. of the coronavirus pandemic threat, the downplaying and delaying of needed public health responses, the "China virus" references, the vilifying of prominent scientists, and so forth. It is a disastrous succession of falling dominoes made possible by four years of shredding science, mocking scientists and other experts and catering to conspiracy theories instead of nurturing our previously most trusted institutions.
On the date in January when the Doomsday Clock minute hand moved closer to midnight, reports were emerging from China about the fast-spreading virus that was prompting the government in Beijing to quarantine the entire city of Wuhan. The United States had recognized its first case of coronavirus only one day earlier.
Since then, we have joined many others in asking: Where do we go from here?
Rather than turning inward and undertaking a global blame-game, the challenge before us is how best respond to the current worldwide emergency because we can expect more of them in the years to come.
While "social isolation" and other tactics being used today to combat the coronavirus pandemic are not those needed to address the dangers posed by nuclear weapons and climate change, the resolve now being exhibited to take major steps to bring about swift change is a model for dealing with these existential threats to the future of human life. Wide scale individual action remains essential to demanding that political leaders take action now before it is too late.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
Remember the threats of nuclear war and climate change?
After a few months of life with the coronavirus pandemic, the existential threats to humankind that once dominated so much of our thinking may seem much more removed from today than they are.
In fact, as the person who convened the Jan. 23, 2020 announcement in which the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the hands of its iconic Doomsday Clock twenty seconds closer to midnight, I have been asked more than once, "How did the Doomsday Clock miss the coronavirus?"
The truth is that it didn't.
While concerns about climate change and nuclear war were the major drivers in moving the Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds to midnight, the 2020 statement issued by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists returns over and over again to the same underlying problem: The deliberate erosion by politicians of science and our core institutions.
As the Doomsday Clock Statement notes: "Over the last two years, we have seen influential leaders denigrate and discard the most effective methods for addressing complex threats ... in favor of their own narrow interests and domestic political gain. By undermining cooperative, science- and law-based approaches to managing the most urgent threats to humanity, leaders have helped to create a situation that will, if unaddressed, lead to catastrophe, sooner rather than later."
In recent years, we have seen a growing group of national leaders dismiss information with which they do not agree as fake news and advance their own untruths for domestic political gain. Scientists and experts are being marginalized just as their findings are most needed to navigate increasingly complex and global 21st century challenges.
As we pointed out back then, "In the United States, there is active political antagonism toward science and a growing sense of government-sanctioned disdain for expert opinion, creating fear and doubt regarding well-established science about climate change and other urgent challenges."
Four months later, I read those words and I am chilled by the extent to which they anticipated the early denial in the U.S. of the coronavirus pandemic threat, the downplaying and delaying of needed public health responses, the "China virus" references, the vilifying of prominent scientists, and so forth. It is a disastrous succession of falling dominoes made possible by four years of shredding science, mocking scientists and other experts and catering to conspiracy theories instead of nurturing our previously most trusted institutions.
On the date in January when the Doomsday Clock minute hand moved closer to midnight, reports were emerging from China about the fast-spreading virus that was prompting the government in Beijing to quarantine the entire city of Wuhan. The United States had recognized its first case of coronavirus only one day earlier.
Since then, we have joined many others in asking: Where do we go from here?
Rather than turning inward and undertaking a global blame-game, the challenge before us is how best respond to the current worldwide emergency because we can expect more of them in the years to come.
While "social isolation" and other tactics being used today to combat the coronavirus pandemic are not those needed to address the dangers posed by nuclear weapons and climate change, the resolve now being exhibited to take major steps to bring about swift change is a model for dealing with these existential threats to the future of human life. Wide scale individual action remains essential to demanding that political leaders take action now before it is too late.
Remember the threats of nuclear war and climate change?
After a few months of life with the coronavirus pandemic, the existential threats to humankind that once dominated so much of our thinking may seem much more removed from today than they are.
In fact, as the person who convened the Jan. 23, 2020 announcement in which the Science and Security Board of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists moved the hands of its iconic Doomsday Clock twenty seconds closer to midnight, I have been asked more than once, "How did the Doomsday Clock miss the coronavirus?"
The truth is that it didn't.
While concerns about climate change and nuclear war were the major drivers in moving the Doomsday Clock to 100 seconds to midnight, the 2020 statement issued by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists returns over and over again to the same underlying problem: The deliberate erosion by politicians of science and our core institutions.
As the Doomsday Clock Statement notes: "Over the last two years, we have seen influential leaders denigrate and discard the most effective methods for addressing complex threats ... in favor of their own narrow interests and domestic political gain. By undermining cooperative, science- and law-based approaches to managing the most urgent threats to humanity, leaders have helped to create a situation that will, if unaddressed, lead to catastrophe, sooner rather than later."
In recent years, we have seen a growing group of national leaders dismiss information with which they do not agree as fake news and advance their own untruths for domestic political gain. Scientists and experts are being marginalized just as their findings are most needed to navigate increasingly complex and global 21st century challenges.
As we pointed out back then, "In the United States, there is active political antagonism toward science and a growing sense of government-sanctioned disdain for expert opinion, creating fear and doubt regarding well-established science about climate change and other urgent challenges."
Four months later, I read those words and I am chilled by the extent to which they anticipated the early denial in the U.S. of the coronavirus pandemic threat, the downplaying and delaying of needed public health responses, the "China virus" references, the vilifying of prominent scientists, and so forth. It is a disastrous succession of falling dominoes made possible by four years of shredding science, mocking scientists and other experts and catering to conspiracy theories instead of nurturing our previously most trusted institutions.
On the date in January when the Doomsday Clock minute hand moved closer to midnight, reports were emerging from China about the fast-spreading virus that was prompting the government in Beijing to quarantine the entire city of Wuhan. The United States had recognized its first case of coronavirus only one day earlier.
Since then, we have joined many others in asking: Where do we go from here?
Rather than turning inward and undertaking a global blame-game, the challenge before us is how best respond to the current worldwide emergency because we can expect more of them in the years to come.
While "social isolation" and other tactics being used today to combat the coronavirus pandemic are not those needed to address the dangers posed by nuclear weapons and climate change, the resolve now being exhibited to take major steps to bring about swift change is a model for dealing with these existential threats to the future of human life. Wide scale individual action remains essential to demanding that political leaders take action now before it is too late.