Recently, I had brought to my attention the websites of two organizations of local governments, both of which are using the excuse of “climate change” in their attempts to destroy the last vestiges of individual freedom that are left in the UK.
Rio and after
I’ve been aware for many years of the agreements made on our behalves by John Major and others at the Rio “Earth Summit” back in 1992. These agreements, as many will know, were, and still are, not at all in the best interests of us human beings. It is as if they placed something called “the environment” up on a pedestal, like a deity they wanted to force us to worship. And they made out that the well-being of this “environment” was more important than the well-being of the human beings they were supposed to be serving. This is in complete contradiction to any idea of democracy, or of government by the people, for the people and with the consent of the people. Indeed, I regard it as anti-human conduct to put the interests of some nebulous “environment” ahead of the interests of human beings. They don’t care about our environment. So why should we care about theirs?
Yet, all the mainstream political parties bought into this madness. With the result that, in 30+ years, we have never been offered any opportunity to get these agreements rescinded, or even any way to challenge them.
One of the documents those that like to think of themselves as our masters signed us up to was “Agenda 21.” Subsequently, this morphed into “Agenda 2030,” then in 2015 into the United Nations’ “Sustainable Development Goals.” Here are the words, which I wrote about it in 2017 after reading the original Agenda 21 for the first time:
“As to Agenda 21, I don’t recommend reading it. It consists of 350 pages of bureaucratese, in which the word ‘women’ occurs more than 250 times. And it takes up where Our Common Future [the 1987 UN report] left off. ‘Significant changes in the consumption patterns of industries, Governments, households and individuals.’ Recycling as a religion. ‘Favouring high-occupancy public transport.’ A ‘culture of safety.’ And much more. But the clever thing about Agenda 21 – another [Maurice] Strong brainwave, I guess – is that it is to be implemented at the local government level. So, because it wasn’t seen as a national political issue, it passed under many people’s radar.”
Back in 1992, Agenda 21 passed under my radar, too. But not now. It, and its successors, are firmly established as weapons of choice for our enemies the political classes in their agenda of destroying Western industrial civilization and human prosperity. And if you think they have been doing bad things to us at the national level – and you’d be right – then you really ought to be thinking more about the bad things they are doing to us at the local level, too. The Oxford “15 minute city” plan is only the thin end of a very large wedge.
To return to the two local government organizations. They are “C40” and “UK 100.” For the most part, I shall let their websites speak for themselves; although I will, of course, interject a few acid remarks, too.
C40 [[i]] describes itself as “A global network of mayors taking urgent action to confront the climate crisis and create a future where everyone can thrive.” Hmmm… not exactly a local government organization, then. How can you possibly vote in any local election, if your “representatives” are going to indulge in this kind of baloney, instead of doing what they ought to be doing, making your local area the best possible place to live? And… what climate crisis? The burden of proving that there is a crisis must always fall on those that are making the claim. And no such proof has ever been forthcoming, nor even any hard evidence.
The About page [[ii]] is headed: “This is the defining decade for humanity.” Actually, I agree with them. This is the decade in which, so I expect, the green juggernaut on which they have been riding roughshod over us for 30 years and more will come to the end of its road. This is the decade, in which the general public will finally wake up to the green lies and scams with which we have been bombarded, and see them for what they are – lies and scams. I expect that before the end of the decade we will be seeing the biggest backlash in the history of the human race. And that the perpetrators of these fraudulent scams will be seen as what they are – traitors to human civilization and to the human species.
They say: “Science tells us that we must cut emissions [I presume they mean carbon dioxide emissions] in half by 2030 if we are to avoid runaway climate change. Nothing short of transformational change on a global scale is needed within the decade, but such a shift has never seemed more possible than it does right now.” I really would like to see their “science,” if it actually exists. I’ve been looking hard for the last 15 years for objective evidence, that proves beyond reasonable doubt that emissions of carbon dioxide from human industrial civilization have caused significant damage to the global climate. And, unless such evidence can be found, there is no reason to suppose that these emissions would cause any significant damage in the future, either.
In all my searching, I have not found any such evidence. All I have found is politically charged rhetoric from the usual suspects, such as green activists, dishonest politicians and the UN. Nor have I found anything to show that, even if there had been any such damage, any amount of reduction in emissions would have any effect at all.
As to “transformational change on a global scale,” once again, I agree with them – but not in a way they will be happy with! What we need is to demolish the failed political system, that enables unscrupulous parasites and ruthless pests to use politics to feed off ordinary people, to make bad laws to hurt those they don’t like, to make wars, and to evade responsibility for the consequences to others of what they do. To replace it by an honest, de-centralized system of governance, which works for us human beings; which delivers peace and justice, upholds human rights, and enables maximum freedom of choice and action for all, consistent with living in a civilized community. And, bit by bit, to extend that system world-wide.
Moreover, by justice, I don’t mean some nonsensical “social justice” or “climate justice,” or even “economic justice” – three buzz-phrases C40 like to use. What I mean is what I call common-sense justice; the condition in which each individual is treated, in the round and as far as practicable, as he or she treats others. Such a conception of justice will send shivers up the spine of anyone that has ever used politics to drain or to hurt innocent people. Those familiar with them may like to recall these words of the prophet Obadiah: “As thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head.”
C40’s mission, so they say, “is to halve the emissions of its member cities within a decade, while improving equity, building resilience, and creating the conditions for everyone, everywhere to thrive.” There’s an obvious problem here. No-one can thrive unless they have freedom; not just economic freedom, but freedom of choice and action in all areas of life. Yet to halve emissions in ten years (even if achievable) would require draconian, top-down interventions by governments to control most, if not all, of the things people do in their everyday lives. The two are fundamentally incompatible.
Moreover: “C40 member cities earn their membership through action. C40’s most distinguishing feature is that it operates on performance-based requirements, not membership fees.” Yeah, right. That’s exactly the way the EU operates; setting “targets” and “limits” to bully national governments into doing what they order, even if those actions go very seriously against the interests of the people those governments are supposed to “represent.” This is the same idea, just at the city level. It is bound, without any doubt, to fail in the end. And messily, too.
They also say: “The change we need can be delivered through our Chair’s vision for a Global Green New Deal, where mayors are working alongside a broad coalition of representatives from labor, business, the youth climate movement and civil society to go further and faster than ever before. The Global Green New Deal is our essential blueprint to delivering climate justice and strong, fairer economies that serve everyone.” Again, shades of the EU’s “green new deal.” If you want to know how that one’s going, ask the Dutch farmers.
C40 has, so its website says, been in existence since 2005. I retched when I found out the name of its founder: “Red Ken” Livingstone, former mayor of London. But in retrospect, I found it hardly surprising; since I already knew the identity of its current chair, a certain Sadiq Khan. Put Boris Johnson in between them, and you have three extremist green stooges in a row as mayors of London.
And every year, they hold a world mayors’ summit, at which they gather and gab about forcing us to reduce our emissions, for example by making us walk or cycle instead of using our cars. But not many of them actually walk or cycle from their homes to and from the mayors’ summit, do they? What a bunch of hypocrites.
On to “UK 100” [[iii]]. Their membership page [[iv]] begins: “As local leaders across the UK, we recognize our responsibility to tackle the climate emergency and take bold action toward Net Zero.” Hmmm… maybe the first thing they should do to “tackle” the non-existent climate emergency is to reduce their own emissions. To zero. Permanently. Problem solved!
The About page says: “UK100 is a network of local leaders who have pledged to lead a rapid transition to Net Zero with Clean Air in their communities ahead of the government’s legal target. UK100’s primary purpose is to support a local-led rapid transition to Net Zero and Clean Air. We do this through collaboration. To accelerate action, we believe in bringing together the most influential leaders across the country to learn together and agree on priorities for legislative and regulatory change while empowering them to engage with national decision-makers. We provide our network with the knowledge, tools and connections to make this happen.”
From the list of members (I counted 108), it seems that this is not an organization of mayors, or of individual politicians, but of councils. It includes councils at both the county and district levels, sometimes overlapping. Many of the expected suspects, that have been taken over by green extremists, are there: Bath and North East Somerset, Birmingham, Brighton, Cambridge (and Cambridgeshire, too), Edinburgh, Exeter, Glasgow, 11 London boroughs plus Westminster, Oxford (and Oxfordshire).
That Oxford and Oxfordshire are both in the list, suggests that UK 100 may well be behind the goings-on over the proposed Oxford “15-minute city,” where residents have been told that the scheme will be going ahead, even though the sham “consultation” on the matter showed that over 90% of the voters were opposed to it. So much for any pretence of “democracy!”
There are 13 county councils in the list, including the county in which I live (Surrey). That there are this many, suggests that the extremists do not intend to stop when they have reduced all the UK’s cities to the status of uninhabitable by human beings. It looks as if they plan to carry on extending their mad, bad schemes to towns, to suburbs, to villages, and eventually out into the countryside. By the end of which, almost everyone will in effect be in a prison, circumscribed by the distance they can easily walk (or, if they are young enough, cycle).
This is not a viable future for our human species. It must be stopped. And those that have taken part in the activities of these extremist organizations must be brought to justice, made to compensate those whose lives they have damaged, and punished as severely as they deserve.
How to fight back?
How to fight back against all this? First, since these bad policies are supported by all the current mainstream political parties, you must resolve never again to vote for any of those mainstream parties. To vote for “the lesser of two evils,” or for the least of three or more, is no longer an option; if, indeed, it ever was. You must never again give any kind of support to those that have been doing, and are doing, these things to you. You must never excuse their conduct, never forgive them, and never forget the infamy of what they have done to you.
There are local elections coming up on May 4th, including a sizeable number of district councils, particularly in England. If you still really do feel you must vote, you might try the Reform UK party, who at least are new and might be a bit better than the slime we suffer under today. I am still a member of Reform UK; but they seem strangely reluctant to grasp the nettle, and to take on the green juggernaut head-on. Certainly, before you vote for any candidate at all, you must make them demonstrate to you that they are utterly opposed to your council taking part in UK 100, or any other green scheme, and will fight against all such schemes with every ounce of will they have.
I am no politician, but I would have thought that to be the only party to oppose the war on our petrol and diesel cars would be an electoral coup. For more than 60% of the electorate are car drivers! As of 2021, only 22% of households did not have access to a car. Moreover, the practicality and the cost-effectiveness over the whole life-cycle of electric cars are extremely dubious. And there is a high level of concern, among many people (including myself), that they will be forced to give up their cars, not through choice, but because they will be unable to afford to run them any more. Yet, the Reform UK party does not seem even to have tried to latch on to this opportunity. When I reviewed their policy document last November, it made no mention of transport policy at all, beyond scrapping HS2.
But personally, I’ve come to the conclusion that voting is a dead end, and even a liability. If you want to pull down a bad system, you need to do it from the outside, not the inside. Otherwise, you will probably end up like the proverbial Samson! That is why, personally, my primary focus is on writing, trying as best I can to change the prevailing currents of thought.
Others may try joining protest organizations, or civil liberties organizations like Together (who, I am pleased to see, are now working with the Association of British Drivers and others against “low traffic neighbourhoods” and the like). Or both, of course. Each of us must find our own particular way, in which we can fight back most effectively against our oppressors; but it does help to have the support of a group, or groups, of friendly people behind you.
I am wondering whether quiet, small scale, peaceful protests outside polling stations at the upcoming local elections might have some value. I am not aware of any specific restrictions on protests outside polling stations; at least, Liberty’s page on Article 11 [[v]] doesn’t mention anything. But at least such a thing might help people, who are not already aware of C40 and UK 100 and what they are doing to us, to wake up, to find out exactly what is going on, and to join the growing opposition to these fraudulent and freedom-destroying schemes.