The Eco-Dictatorship Coming Your Way
By Paul Homewood
Toby Young writes:
Izabella Kaminska, formerly the Editor of the FT’s Alphaville and now the Editor of the Blind Spot, has flagged up an alarming passage in a document published in January 2021 by Deutsche Bank Research entitled ‘What we must do to Rebuild’. Eric Heyman has written the section about the tough choices the EU must face it if’s to meet its goal of achieving ‘climate neutrality’ by 2050 – Net Zero, in other words – and says the following:
The impact of the current climate policy on people’s everyday lives is still quite abstract and acceptable for many households. Climate policy comes in the form of higher taxes and fees on energy, which make heating and mobility more expensive. Some countries have set minimum energy efficiency standards for buildings or similar rules in other areas. However, climate policy does not determine our lives. We take key consumption decisions, for example whether we travel at all, how much we travel and which means of transport we use, whether we live in a large house or a small apartment and how we heat our homes, how many electronic devices we have and how intensely we use them or how much meat and exotic fruit we eat. These decisions tend to be made on the basis of our income, not on climate considerations.
If we really want to achieve climate neutrality, we need to change our behaviour in all these areas of life. This is simply because there are
no adequate cost-effective technologies yet to allow us to maintain our living standards in a carbon-neutral way. That means that carbon prices will have to rise considerably in order to nudge people to change their behaviour. Another (or perhaps supplementary) option is to tighten regulatory law considerably. I know that “eco-dictatorship” is a nasty word. But we may have to ask ourselves the question whether and to what extent we may be willing to accept some kind of eco-dictatorship (in the form of regulatory law) in order to move towards climate neutrality.
When he says we have to “ask ourselves… whether and to what extent we may be willing to accept some kind of eco-dictatorship” I don’t think he has a Net Zero referendum in mind. Rather, by ‘ourselves’ he means the EU’s ruling class. It has to ask itself whether it’s willing to pass laws forcing the EU’s population to modify its behaviour to meet the 2050 ‘climate neutrality’ target, regardless of whether it has a democratic mandate to do so or not.
Read the full article here.
We really should not be surprised. We have had many warnings of what is in store for us in recent years.
For instance, just a year ago the German Health Minister told us himself:
”I think we need certain restrictions to contain climate change. That means less travel is part of it as well. I cannot even rule out that during the climate crisis, we could end up in a situation where we would have to prohibit certain things
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
In the light of significant events and the resulting consequences, for example armed conflict in the Middle East or Ukraine, how can anyone dictate climate neutrality by 2050 ?
This is just about control. Sick and twisted desires of the likes of King Charles and his cable. For better or worse we do indeed live in interesting times.
Got it in one, Mr. Dragonfly.
Incidentally, do you actually have one? I’ve got a Mk V.
Hi Catweazle, unfortunately no. I have much admired these great bikes due to their good design and beautiful looks. They were built just up the road so that adds to the appeal.
I only got to own a Norton Commando and a Triumph Bonnie which I must say we’re great fun. Maybe one day I’ll get there. Long live the internal combustion engine !
I’m in favour of this proposal. But only if any of the legislators who voted in favour of it were banned from all future car and plane travel with severe gaol sentences for any infraction of the ban. Fining them would be useless as obviously the Qataris would end up paying.
* cabal
Germans ? Dictatorship ? Who knew ?
Headline from the Braunau am Inn daily newspaper…”Local boy makes good!”
It is not the Germans who are the problem, as Vernon E tried to highlight yesterday. Councils in Canterbury and Oxford are already imposing restrictions on movement (only as a test you understand). They have split their cities into Zones and people (free law abiding people) are being told that they may not drive from one zone to another, they may only leave on fo0t.If people accept this then our politicians will take note and do a lot worse. Drive where you like folks , removing council placed barriers as you go. Stick two fingers up to any fines imposed.
The splendid Rod Liddle wrote about this in the latest Spectator issue.
Dung, I live in Canterbury City Council area (in a rural village) and the Canterbury plan is never going to happen. It is currently only a suggestion as part of its 2045 Local Plan and is dependent on a new ring road being built that is equally pie in the sky.
The Council leader (claims to be a Conservative) is a notorious swivel eyed loon of the highest order and has precisely zero, zilch, nil, nada authority to make these changes.
It does however get him “on the telly” and satisfy his deranged ego. I can’t speak for Oxford residents but down here they would be mass lynchings if this were to be started.
For what it’s worth, Canterbury is rapidly becoming a ghost town and I personally opt to go to Folkestone mostly – a much nicer place.
According to the excellent book ‘ Green Tyranny ‘ by Rupert Darwall , the roots of the green movement lie with 19th century Germanic philosophy , particularly with regard to the relationship between mankind and a revered natural world .
1930s Germany gave enthusiastic support to the dictator Adolf Hitler .
A prominent German politician of the present day evidently thinks using the ‘ D ‘ word is kind of ok really .
The European Union , driving force behind much net zero nonsense and it’s legalistic enforcement is seen as a Franco – German stitch – up .
So perhaps linking the subject of this post to Germany is not entirely unreasonable ??
And when normal ‘democratic’ politics fail, then the people will have no option but to resort to war…
Can there be any doubt that democracy has failed ?
This has all been said by someone claiming intelligence but hasn’t the least clue what the global temperature will be in or around 2100 and yet has the arrogance to dictate to the rest of us.
Who is that in the photo header? Is it Eric Heyman or George Monbiot?
It looks like Monbiot (and I have seen him in the flesh sadly).
It’s the German Health Minister, Karl Lauterbach. Eugyppius’s Substack has him covered!!
Me too, what a plank he was. I’m sure it is him but I can’t see any reference as to why they included him other than he is a suitable figure to hate. Though I doubt he could be an effective dictator on account of he is too thick.
Certainly looks like the Moonbat to me!
Apologies. Wrong pic. Ignore my 1:55 pm post.
I think Lauterbach reminds me of a previous German politician, but he had a small moustache. I wonder if he could be related?
‘A certain degree of eco-dictatorship’
There is only one degree of dictatorship.
‘What we must do to Rebuild’
Hoax. Government crushed the economy in the name of fighting Covid. All that is needed is for government to back off. Not ‘rebuild.’ The idea of “building back” is to create an economy controlled by the government.
“…to what extent we may be willing to accept some kind of eco-dictatorship (in the form of regulatory law) in order to move towards climate neutrality.”
Climate neutrality is another word for Net-zero emissions. Taking out as much CO2 as has been put in. With global emissions being close to five tons for each of the eight billion stakeholders it’s an impossible goal, eco-dictatorships or not.
For anyone who is unaware of the True (Common?) Purpose:
http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-scare-tool-to-destroy-capitalism/
Reblogged this on Climate Collections.
The most worrying aspect of this is the arbitrary nature of the Net Zero target. Because that has been decided upon, everything else follows, however authoritarian.
And what criteria are to be applied to any assessment of the emissions from the process of manufacture, installation, servicing and ultimate disposal.- never mind the fuel to operate? Modern batteries are said to be among the worst.
Klaus Schwab (and his great admirer King Chuck 3) will be rubbing his hands with glee as he reflects on the increasingly tight grip the WEF is having on all aspects of society. Dictators 1, Democracy 0.
Obviously I’m sure we’ll all be treated to a net zero coronation.
Although the b. s. levels will be uncomfortably high from beginning to end.
The Machine Green dystopia promoted as The Fourth Revolution by the likes of George Monbiot is posing as a genuine threat to our way of life. It will be imposed on people without discussion or consent.
‘the Covid pandemic was used as a trial run for precisely the kind of technologies — smartphone-enabled passports, digital population tracking, media-driven narrative control — which are now increasingly sold to us as a means of “saving the planet”. It is no coincidence that some of the loudest proponents of Machine Environmentalism were also fanatical supporters of the Covid biosecurity state. We are being trained to like what is coming — or at least to shrug our shoulders and accept its inevitability.’
“The truth about eco-fascism – UnHerd” https://unherd.com/2022/11/the-truth-about-eco-fascism/
Someone some loose screwball wanted Obama to suspend the U.S. Constitution and do what ever it takes to persecute those whom they claim are Climate Criminal’s
Reblogged this on Calculus of Decay .