As the world witnessed with the covid pandemic, global institutions working with governments and corporations are happy to hype up false threats and inspire public hysteria if they think they can use that rising fear to whittle away our individual rights. The hype over "greenhouse emissions" is no exception.
The vast majority of climate and carbon policies appear to be aimed at the west, and this is one of the reasons why we know the claims behind them are fake. China alone accounts for around 32% of all global carbon emissions, with the US accounting for only 14% and the EU accounting for around 8%. Yet, think-tanks like the World Economic Forum and globalist havens like the UN are hyperfocused on the US and Europe while China does as it pleases.
Why? Perhaps because the Chinese population is already well under control and there is no need to use climate fear as a weapon to subdue them? In any case, the greenhouse gas issue is superfluous because there is zero evidence of a causation relationship between carbon emissions and global warming. Even the evidence of correlation is highly suspect. And, if you ask any climate alarmist where there is proof of the "climate crisis" they always rant about, they will predictably point to normal weather events (or wildfires) which have been common since human records started.
We have been hearing a lot lately about efforts to diminish or ban natural gas stoves in the US, to throttle agricultural production in Europe and to restrict meat in the public diet, but the most pervasive carbon restrictions are planned for cars and private transportation. The WEF has recently published a blueprint for reducing individual car ownership by 75% by the year 2050.
The white paper, titled 'Benchmarking the Transition to Sustainable Urban Mobility' establishes various guidelines for shifting the majority of the human population over to mass transportation within compact "smart cities." The WEF also suggests that over 70% of all people will have to live in these smart cities by 2050 - Currently, 45% of the world lives in rural areas, requiring another 15% of the population to be forced into cities in the next couple decades. Not only that, but 2nd and 3rd tier cities would have to be combined into single homogenized networks. In other words, megacities.
The WEF transportation agenda demands that out of over 2 billion car owners, 1.5 billion people will lose the option of personal transportation. That would leave only 500 million people in the world with the "privilege" of owning a vehicle.
Also keep in mind that the UN also wants net zero carbon emissions by 2050, which means no more gas powered vehicles in the next 25 years.
The WEF paper is awash in meaningless buzzwords covering "equity and inclusion" rhetoric as well as "sustainable development goals" and "stakeholder capitalism" terminology. Reading between the lines is necessary to understand the implications.
To summarize, transportation reduction is an extension of something called Shared, Electric and Automated Mobility (SEAM) Governance Framework, as well as net zero urban planning initiatives. By taking away people's cars, this forces the populace into smaller and smaller areas where mass transportation is available. These extremely concentrated population regions will be digitally connected and monitored by AI, with unprecedented surveillance measures and the government ability to centralize and dictate public movements, public power usage, public access to food and even public behavior.
All of this is sold as a trade off for Utopian convenience and security, when in reality it means the end of freedom as we know it. China has been acting as a beta test country for these measures, with the some of the largest smart city designs and surveillance grids in the world.
Comment: Setting aside Zero Hedge's rather hyperbolic comments on China, there is a real threat of having our freedoms taken away by global elites via the WEF.
We know that the goal of deconstructing private transport is to herd people into increasingly more compact and oppressive cities, but how would a reduction of car ownership of this scale be accomplished?
Through a series of carbon regulations and inflation in prices. Carbon taxes will be used to make purchasing and maintaining a gas vehicle untenable, and inflation in prices of electric vehicles will mean only the wealthy class will be able to buy them. In this way, the establishment can argue that they "never banned cars," they just created the economic conditions that forced most of the population to abandon personal ownership.
Once we examine net zero projects as a whole entity instead of just the pieces and parts, it becomes clear that these plans have nothing to do with saving the environment and the planet and everything to do with centralization of power.
Reader Comments
In fact, the process has already started. Remember the disgrace the last Davos meeting was ? Half of the invitees didn't turn up in the first place, and powerful figures like Jamie Dimon only came to tell them to f*ck themselves.
So if the US would take Amtrak private again while investing in rail as public infrastructure, you would see massive uptake in rail travel. Likewise, if my city would turn the city bus service into a county transit authority, ridership would increase, lowering traffic density during rush hours and ultimately lowering the cost to the county and cities to maintain roads, while also reducing the need for policing of traffic.
13 years ago the feds offered our state $700mn to invest in high speed rail. Our short-sighted governor flatly rejected it saying "we'll have to pick up the cost of maintenance after that" completely ignoring how much we spend on road repairs each year because of our regional climate. There could have been high-speed rail connecting Minneapolis, Green Bay, Madison, Milwaukee and Chicago, which would massively reduce traffic accidents during football season (because of the traffic to Green Bay, Minneapolis, and Chicago during football season). Then maybe we could reinvest some of that money in our park systems that the same governor also took away "because parks are not profitable."
People who use machines for a living still need vehicles though. I'm not going to tow a boat or trailer with a 4 cylinder engine and CVT transmission... Reduce the need for cars and people will use them less. If you dictate it, it will cause a revolt. Because this method of reaching their goal fences people in, it cages them, and no one likes a cage.
@Artex:
What is 'natural' and 'comfortable' for most people now was both unnatural and uncomfortable at one time.
But they got used to it.
Which made it natural and comfortable.
I see you are making progress.
Just don't go in reverse. STAY IN CONTROL.
Or you lose your comforts.
And there is a planet to save.
The stakes are high.
So very very very high.
signed,
Governor Sally, Dick, and Jane
(sarcasm)
Without the corrupt political leaders under the sway of the WEF/World Bank/United Nations, society might stand a chance. I believe then that our first line of defence is to remove those corrupt leaders and lawmakers, either by votes or recall. I don't wish to speculate on what an escalation from those tactics would look like.
There was a mock (or was it) illuminati video a few years back that spoke of this population-control-grid, and how it was going to be utilized by the globalists to "protect them from us, and them from themselves": [Link]
We are there now. You may think the above crazy, it isn't. It is very real. There is devastation all around us that can be activated at the flip of a switch. This warfare can target a single individual or an entire town.
How do you fight back against that?
You may think THAT is crazy but I have the links and history to support my theory that such electronics are already in the bodies of those who have accepted the 'mRNA' injections. Bioelectronics that are triggered by external electromagnetic stimulus.
My take on it, should you be interested: [Link]
.
Reading through your history and research in the link you provided is fascinating, you clearly have a deep understanding of these technologies, where they came from, and why.
. .
This falls right in line with Microsoft's arrogant admission that DNA is highly programmable: [Link]
.
And of course, Moderna, as mentioned in your article calls their vaccine the "software of life": [Link]
Playing God didn't work out so well for these haughty asshats the last time they tried it. It is doubtful this time will be any different.
Holy crap there is an endless parade of dysfunctional 'science' on going for decades now. Good job in collecting those DARPA centered stories. All of them published in 'mainstream' science literature which are guilty of promoting today's mRNA vaxx.
Of interest is the article stating that the U.S. military will be more robotic than human by 2025 - two years away. I suppose this explains why the U.S. military has sunk to enlisting gays, trans and the obese; effective humans are no longer required.
Thanks for the links!