Episode3 of the Covid Tracking Project
At the start of the pandemic, a popular narrative emerged portraying COVID-19 as a “great equalizer,” affecting all people regardless of wealth, power, or race. This idea gained traction through celebrities like Madonna and public figures such as Andrew Cuomo, who echoed the sentiment. However, as Ibram X. Kendi highlighted, this perspective ignored systemic inequities, particularly the racial disparities in how COVID-19 impacted communities. Early on, the lack of racial demographic data perpetuated the myth, allowing people to believe that race and racism did not influence the pandemic’s outcomes.
When data finally became available, it revealed stark racial inequalities. Black and Indigenous populations had disproportionately higher mortality rates, while Latinx communities faced higher infection rates. This evidence dismantled the notion of COVID-19 as an equalizer and instead showed that it exacerbated existing societal inequities. Initiatives like the COVID Racial Data Tracker, led by Kendi and supported by the COVID Tracking Project, were instrumental in uncovering these disparities and holding systems accountable.
The narrative of COVID-19 as a “great equalizer” reflects a broader tendency to downplay structural inequalities during crises. While it is comforting to imagine shared vulnerability, ignoring systemic issues undermines efforts to address them. The racial disparities in COVID-19 outcomes underscore the importance of disaggregated data to expose inequities and inform policies. This lesson extends beyond the pandemic: tackling societal challenges requires acknowledging—and addressing—the disproportionate burdens placed on marginalized communities.
I was living in China when the pandemic hit, and I observed firsthand how essential workers, such as delivery drivers, pharmacy clerks, and market vendors, bore the brunt of exposure to the virus. These individuals, often coming from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, could not afford to stay home or work remotely. Their roles required them to be in constant contact with the public, making them far more vulnerable to infection. This reality starkly contrasts the “great equalizer” narrative, as it highlights how the burden of risk was unequally distributed, heavily affecting those with fewer resources and less job flexibility.
While the pandemic was portrayed as a shared experience, in practice, systemic inequalities determined who could afford to stay safe and who had to face heightened risks daily. My experiences reinforced the idea that crises do not erase social hierarchies; instead, they often deepen pre-existing divides. To move beyond the myth of the “great equalizer,” we must address the structural inequities that place marginalized groups at greater risk, both during emergencies and in everyday life.