Climate Lockdowns May Be Next: Here's What That May Look Like
Set Your Pulse: Take a breath. Turn your attention to your body and release any tension. Breathe slowly into the area of your heart for 60 seconds, focusing on feeling a sense of ease. Stay connected to your body as you read. Click here to learn why we suggest this.
What would a climate lockdown look like? Well, if such an initiative were to take place, governments would limit or ban the consumption of many foods. They would ban or limit private-vehicle use, or limit the distance one can travel in a gas powered car or perhaps even by plane.
Working from home could eventually become the permanent norm if special carbon taxes are put in place. Such taxes could be imposed on companies, limiting driving or air miles, and extend to individual employees. Children could be impacted by climate lockdowns, too. Schools, especially those heavily influenced by teachers’ unions, could impose permanent online-only days.
Delhi, India is already using a version of this concept to crack down on smog pollution.
Implementing significant restrictions like this, slowly but surely in the name of the collective common good, would allow the type of government control that would result in the littlest backlash as possible. This is what a collective alarmist level fear of climate change could lead to, especially given the tremendous growth of government control and power, which is fuelled by a significant amount of support for these types of actions.
Climate lockdowns and other restrictions will be framed as saving the people of the world from themselves. Who would ever disagree with such measures when it is framed under the guise of good will? Like we saw with COVID mandates, if climate mandates ever take place they will be promoted as an extremely noble and necessary action. Those who disagree and present evidence that such actions are not useful or impactful, and instead cause more harm, will most likely be silenced, censored and ridiculed.
Authoritarian systems are often created by people who believe that they have the highest and noblest intentions. Totalitarian countries and theocratic dictatorships are typically founded and promoted by those who are convinced that their actions will benefit humanity.
“The greatest tyrannies are always perpetrated in the name of the noblest causes.”
Thomas Payne
Germany’s new health minister Karl Lauterbach recently proclaimed that addressing climate change would require steps imposing restrictions on personal freedom, similar to those implemented to deal with pandemics. Lauterbach isn’t the only European to call for climate-related restrictions. On September 22, 2020, London, UK-based professor Mariana Mazzucato published an article entitled “Avoiding a Climate Lockdown” in which she says,
“In the near future, the world may need to resort to lockdowns again – this time to tackle a climate emergency.”
In November 2020, the Red Cross stated that climate change is a bigger threat than COVID and should be confronted with “the same urgency.” Bill Gates insisted that dramatic measures are needed to prevent climate change, claiming it will be worse than the pandemic. Despite millions of people supposedly having died from COVID, former governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney last year predicted that climate deaths would exceed those of the pandemic.
Moving towards a completely digital world will make it much easier to enforce climate lockdown measures, like a limit on how often and how far you can travel, for example. Don’t like the restrictions on your gas guzzler? The government could easily track its location and send automatic tickets — or worse.
Perhaps if Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) is ushered in they could shut down your access to funds more easily. Systems are already being developed to measure ones own carbon footprint. Will these systems remain voluntary?
The monitoring of personal behavior by banks will take another step forward, for example, as Canadian credit union Vancity recently launched a new credit card technology to report users’ carbon emissions. On Oct. 19, Vancity announced that it will be “the first financial institution in Canada to offer its individual and business members a way to estimate the CO2 emissions that come from their purchases.” Vancity said its carbon counter, which is attached to Visa credit cards, was developed with ecolytiq, one of Europe’s leading climate engagement technology companies.
Will this one day morph into something that's used to track people’s footprints and put limits and restrictions on what they can and can't do? We saw this, during COVID-19, and still see it in many forms as a result of the pandemic. Just look at what happened with privacy after 9/11 as well.
Political leaders have learned that fear pushes the public to accept a dramatic change when it comes to their freedoms for promises of safety. Early and extremely inaccurate modelling of COVID-19 deaths were used. When it comes to climate change, modelling has painting an alarmist type of picture that many believe signifies the near end of the world. There is no proper discussion of the actual science, just constant alarmism that seems to justify measures put in place to reduce CO2, emissions, when that itself will do very little to better our world and simply put more money, power and control in the hands of the already wealthy elite.
This type of alarmism has been going on for quite some time. For example, in 1989, a senior U.N. environmental official said, “Entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” On June 29, 1989, the Associated Press (AP) ran the story based on an interview with the director of the New York office of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP).
The C02 discussion is an entirely separate one in itself, one for another article. It's not as black and white and as convincing as legacy media and big governments make it seem, and the science is not clear at all.
We've been told for years that there is a consensus when it comes to global warming and doomsday type prophecies. But is this true?
The quote below comes from Roy Spencera meteorologist, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer on NASA's Aqua satellite. He has served as senior scientist for climate studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, and Joseph Bast, a Senior Fellow at The Heartland Institute.
"There is no basis for the claim that 97% of scientists believe that..the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research."
Scientists who disagree do not deny that our climate is changing, they simply don't align with the alarmist perspectives being used in media and by politicians to get the public in line. They do not agree with the proposed "solutions." There are better things we can do, more on that below.
It's unfortunate to think that legacy media and governments have not presented an open, transparent and honest view of the science regarding climate change, COVID-19, and several other political issues that shouldn't be political at all. This has been happening for decades, so it's reasonable to think that things won't change in these areas of society.
So the question then becomes, why do we continue to ask big media and government for change? Why do we rely on them? Why do we give them so much power to dictate so many factors about our lives? Can we expect anything other than constant fear and alarmism in order to usher in new initiatives that benefit the powerful?
Instead, like we saw with COVID-19, and what we've seen with climate change so far, they will use censorship, ridicule and control of opposing narratives.
For example, during a World Economic Forum (WEF) anti-disinformation panel, the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications, Melissa Fleming, announced that they “own the science,” in reference to their climate initiative, as seen in the clip posted below.
She brought up their partnership with big tech companies including TikTok and Google that contribute to controlling the narrative on climate change information.
“We partnered with Google,” Fleming said, adding, “for example, if you Google ‘climate change,’ you will, at the top of your search, you will get all kinds of UN resources.”
“We started this partnership when we were shocked to see that when we Googled ‘climate change,’ we were getting incredibly distorted information right at the top,” she said, before claiming ownership of science.
This is why today, for the most part, children in schools are bombarded with an alarmist view, one that sees no future unless humanity adheres to the climate policies that are being and will be put in place by the worlds elite.
Again the dominating factor seems to be C02 reduction without an actual holistic approach to bettering our environment, like cleaning-up up our oceans, stopping pollution, deforestation, changing the materials we use to manufacture certain products, ground breaking new energy technologies and not treating our planet like a giant garbage bag.
Joe Martino, founder of The Pulse and Collective Evolution made a short documentary called Regenerate. One of the most important messages of Regenerate is that we are looking at our environment from such a limited point of view that we can’t identify the real issues we face, and that our level of thinking, or consciousness, is completely disconnected from the solutions required to truly shift our relationship with earth. Thus, we are creating solutions that don’t truly address making the environment cleaner or better long term.
You can watch the film below.
"One thing I will say is this, many of the current propositions we see from governments, companies and mainstream media are designed to work within our economy. Economy first, environment second. They are also designed not to have humanity question their relationship with things like nature, money, life, who we are and why we are even here. They are designed to maintain the status quo. For that reason, they are often linear, mechanical ideas that disregard the true nature of the earth and the environment.
Those who have really gone deeply into the subject of climate change see this very quickly: you cannot simply solve our climate woes by planting more trees or lowering CO2 emissions, as you are just looking at one TINY aspect to the puzzle, and this direction won’t actually help the planet, it will only make us think we are helping."
Joe Martino. Founder of The Pulse and Collective Evolution