THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO THE MAGA MOVEMENT Day 14
THE BELIEF
"Climate change is a hoax invented by China to cripple American industry. The whole thing is a scam—globalists and elites pushing windmills and solar panels while China laughs all the way to the bank. Even their own scientists don’t believe it."
THE PERFORMANCE
This belief is performed with the cadence of a conspiracy revealed. The origin is precise: a 2012 tweet from Donald Trump—"The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive"—which he later claimed was a joke. But the idea stuck, repeated in rallies, Fox News segments, and viral clips where hosts like Tucker Carlson or podcasters like Joe Rogan treat it as self-evident. The tone is mocking, dismissive of "alarmists," and framed as a David-and-Goliath battle between "real Americans" and a shadowy cabal. The rhetorical trick is to conflate two things: skepticism of policy responses to climate change (carbon taxes, subsidies) with skepticism of climate science itself. The performance hinges on a single, damning detail: "Even Exxon knew it was real in the 1970s and lied." The implication? If the oil companies knew, the whole thing must be a coordinated fraud.
THE DOCUMENTED RECORD
Exxon’s internal documents—unearthed in 2015 by investigative journalists at Inside Climate News and later confirmed in peer-reviewed research (Environmental Research Letters, 2017)—show the opposite of what the belief claims. In 1977, Exxon scientist James Black told the company’s management committee: "There is general scientific agreement that the most likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels." By 1982, Exxon’s own climate models predicted atmospheric CO₂ would double by 2060, leading to a 2–3°C global temperature rise—almost exactly what the IPCC later projected. The company didn’t just know; it funded research to confirm it. From 1978 to 1982, Exxon spent $1 million (equivalent to ~$4 million today) on tankers equipped with CO₂ sensors, ice-core analysis, and supercomputer modeling. Their findings aligned with NASA’s James Hansen, who testified to Congress in 1988 that human-caused warming was already detectable.
China’s role is equally misrepresented. The country is the world’s largest emitter of CO₂, but it’s also the largest investor in renewable energy. In 2023, China installed more solar panels than the U.S. has in its entire history (BloombergNEF, 2024). It dominates global production of solar panels (80% market share), wind turbines (60%), and electric vehicle batteries (70%). The Chinese government’s 2021 white paper, "Responding to Climate Change: China’s Policies and Actions," states: "Climate change is a challenge for all humanity… China will strive to peak carbon dioxide emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality before 2060." This isn’t altruism—it’s economic strategy. China sees green tech as the next industrial revolution, and it’s winning.
The belief’s core claim—that climate science is a "hoax"—collapses under the weight of consensus. A 2021 study in Environmental Research Letters reviewed 88,125 climate-related papers published since 2012. Only 28 (0.03%) rejected human-caused global warming. The U.S. National Climate Assessment (2023), a congressionally mandated report, states: "Human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century." The Pentagon, Exxon, and China’s Communist Party all agree on this. The only "hoax" is the idea that they don’t.
THE AUDIENCE
This belief resonates with people who feel economically abandoned. The decline of American manufacturing—symbolized by shuttered steel mills, hollowed-out towns, and jobs shipped overseas—is a real and painful experience. When politicians and pundits frame climate policy as a choice between "jobs or trees," it feels like a betrayal. The audience isn’t anti-science; they’re anti-elite. They see climate action as a luxury for coastal professionals who’ve never had to choose between heating their home and paying for insulin. The belief taps into a legitimate grievance: Why should we sacrifice when China cheats? The answer—China isn’t cheating, it’s out-investing—is harder to swallow than the simpler story of a hoax.
THE CONTRADICTION
If climate change is a hoax invented by China, why is China spending $546 billion in 2023 alone on renewable energy (IEA, 2024)—more than the U.S. and EU combined? Why did Exxon, a company that profits from fossil fuels, spend decades confirming the science? And if the "hoax" is so obvious, why do 97% of climate scientists, the U.S. military, and even oil executives agree it’s real? The belief requires its believers to accept that the world’s most powerful institutions—governments, corporations, universities—are either too stupid to see the truth or too corrupt to admit it. Yet these same institutions are supposedly capable of orchestrating a decades-long global conspiracy. The contradiction: The hoax is either too incompetent to fool anyone, or too competent to be a hoax.
THE THING THEY GOT RIGHT
The grievance is real: Global climate policy has often been hypocritical. Wealthy nations lecture the developing world about emissions while outsourcing their pollution to China. The U.S. and EU spent centuries burning coal and oil, then demand that India and Africa skip straight to renewables. And yes, China does manipulate its emissions data—its reported coal consumption in 2023 was 1.4 billion tons higher than previously disclosed (New York Times, 2024). The belief’s power comes from this kernel of truth: The system is rigged. The mistake is assuming the rigging is about the science, not the profits.
THE ONE LINE
Exxon’s own scientists proved climate change was real in 1977, and China is now betting its future on the same science it’s accused of inventing.
This newsletter uses direct quotes, public records, court documents, and documented biographical fact. It does not make claims beyond what the record supports. Readers are encouraged to consult primary sources and reach their own conclusions.