The globalists’ agenda is to destroy the world in order to then rule over it; and “global warming” hoax, and “climate change” scare tactics is their chief strategy for accomplishing it. They know that they can’t achieve their aims when everything is running smoothly, and everyone is happy; so they want to create an artificial global food and fuel shortage crisis to achieve their aim. When the world runs out of food and fuel, and everyone becomes cold, hungry, jobless, homeless, miserable and unhappy, they think they will better be able to accomplish their designs.
Encouraging mass migration of non-ethnic and non-indigenous populations around the world is another one of their tactics. The main obstacle to achieving their aims is the national independence and identity of various individual nations—with their ethnic and cultural identity and diversity; and historic, cultural, and literary heritages, backgrounds, and governments—which make them nationally and culturally unique and independent. If they can destroy the national identities of these nations by mass migration of non-ethnic and non-indigenous populations, they think they will better be able to achieve their aims. Encouraging “fake news” from the mainstream media is still another one of their tactics.
The main obstacle to achieving their objectives globally, however, is that there are powerful nations (with large populations) like Russia, China, and India who have seen through it, and are not going along with it—and they can’t force them to. They are having their success mainly in Europe, Australia, and North America. Other nations for the most part are not buying into it. They may be able to achieve their aims in Europe, Australia, and North America (and destroy those nations in the process); but they won’t be able to accomplish it globally. The Dutch globalists can starve their own populations to death (if the Dutch people are stupid enough to let them); but it will have no effect on Russia, China, or India (and many other nations) who are self-sufficient in food production, and will not go along with it. Here is the transcript:
Sky News: “Now moving on, in October farmers in the Netherlands took a stand against the government’s green crackdown on the agricultural industry, by gridlocking motorways—you will remember, with thousands of tractors in peak hour traffic. The Dutch government, however, has not listened to the farmers; and is now about to shut down—wait for this, 3,000 farms they are going to close down. This is World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab stuff on steroids. Three thousand farms are going to be shut down, in a bid to comply with EU emission standards—ooh methane, ooh nitrogen in the soil, ooh Chris Bowen. The effects of this scheme are going to be devastating for farmers; but it looks to be only the first step in what the EU are planning. Ralph Schoellhammer is an assistant professor in economics and political science at Webster University, and he joins us now. Ralph, great to see you again; this is getting out of hand, the WAF crowd, your prime minister over there, shutting down 3,000 farms; and we also learned that in Germany, they are talking of the stopping German farmers fertilizing their farms. I mean, this is insanity, isn’t it Ralph?”
Ralph: “I know, it is; and I think what we see is, the Dutch are doing to the agricultural sector what the Germans did to the energy sector; and we know also the consequences there. So we get the promises that, oh, this is not going to be a problem; we have got to move to alternative modes of production—be it energy or agriculture. And in the end, they never work. I mean, you just mentioned the Germans; I mean, there is even more insanity. They want to become 30% of their agriculture to go organic, which means they would turn from a net exporter of agriculture, to a net importer of agriculture—which is in times of global insecurity. I mean, we saw this with Russian gas; it is complete insanity. And of course, the Dutch are doing the same, because these 3,000 farms is only the beginning; and the Dutch government is saying this, they said, Oh, we are going to have to do much more in this respect. And it has to be stressed also for your viewers, nitrogen is an absolutely crucial ingredient for synthetic fertilizer; and without synthetic fertilizer, we could not feed the world. If we would not have it, about 4 billion people simply would have no access to food. So this is a war, in many ways I would argue, against humanism, it is a war against humanity—and most of it is by ideological goals, because I looked at the science, it is not clear that nitrogen really has the effect that the Dutch government claims; and even more importantly, the Dutch farmers are reducing the nitrogen use. So this is not that they are oblivious to these problems, but now they are pushed to it really faster and faster, because of the dominant ideology—or I am tempted to call it, the cultish ideology—that tells us, If you don’t change now, the world is going to end in 10 years—which of course it is not.”
Sky: “And they have learned nothing obviously from what we saw in Sri Lanka, when they went organic, and people started not having enough food to eat.”
Ralph: “Yes, exactly. I mean, this is part of a larger story. I mean, remember Sri Lanka: if you go back two years, everybody was cheering them on, because they show the way forward: ‘Sri Lanka knows how to do this, they prove to the world that in fact you don’t need fertilizer, you don’t need any kind of synthetic materials to feed your population.’ And then it all broke down in a very, very short order, because you cannot feed your people—modern agriculture is an absolute necessity, given the population numbers we have. And I think this is overall a larger part of a kind of autoimmune disease, the West is affected by it, where we turn against everything that made our civilization powerful: It is energy. And, ‘You can’t do nuclear, you can’t do nuclear,’ which probably was the greatest scientific breakthrough in the 20th century. ‘You can’t do modern agriculture’. And it goes further than this. We see this guy a couple of days ago: the EU is threatening Elon Musk to ban Twitter. They have nothing to say about Tick Tock, which is basically a Chinese data mining operation; but they say, Oh, we are going to ban Twitter, so you guys don’t do censorship. So everything that kind of made the West the West, we are currently at war against. And just to add on to this, this is part of the program: because I just want to remind everyone, when Greta Thunberg kind of had her big book party of her new book, she openly said so: ‘For me, it is no longer just about a climate, just about the environment; now it is about changing the system, the Western capitalist system has to go’. And this is the actual agenda.”
Sky: “And I mean, and Ralph, that is sort of my next question here: You know you said that the ideological goals are sort of about climate, and they say, Saving the planet. But how much of that is really just a cover for what is essentially I think a Marxist ideology; but also one that looks at a first world of Europe, and Australia, and America that is prosperous, and has a prosperous middle class, and says, That is a problem, we actually want people to be dependent on the state, on the government, because they have too much, because right now all of this prosperity creates independence, and too much free thought, and a lot of other things?”
Ralph: “Oh yes, that is absolutely true. I mean, I would add to this, when we say so, why can we say that it is ideological? Let me give you one quick example: The European Union is now planning to fine the French 500 million Euros because they didn’t build enough renewables. However, the French emissions in electricity production are the lowest, among the lowest in the world, because they had so much nuclear. So they achieved the low emissions goal, but didn’t build enough portable tank and solar, so they get punished; which shows you that this is more about, you know, the altar of solar and wind at which they worship, than it is about actually reducing emissions. The other point about the Marxism: I am not so sure; I mean, for me it is less Marxism, than it is a kind of secular coming of a new form of Reformation. If you listen to how they talk, it is about, you know, society needs to be cleansed; because, you know, we need to change our ways of life. This sounds more like the Puritans, I would argue, than the Marxists. It is about, We need to eat less meat; and yeah, take fewer showers; and so it is all about, society needs to look at a baptism of fire, to cleanse ourselves from the sins of the past—it is a quasi-religious movement.”
Sky: “But Ralph, it is also fascism, if you ask me. I mean, fascism is the marriage of authoritarian governments and big business, big corporations, and we are seeing that. One of the bizarre anomalies here, which just does not make any sense: Food prices are up by about 20% in Europe. So you are seeing food prices going up; but the EU is trying to reduce the amount of food being produced. Now you don’t have to be an economic genius to figure out that that is going to push food prices up even further. So this is a suicide note, what they are embarking on. Who is behind this; and more importantly, who is resisting this?”
Ralph: “Well, I think the problem is, it is pressure from two sides, I think, because you mentioned Fascism. But the thing about Fascism is, Fascism came in uniforms and Jackboots. This was really a kind of top-down, you know forcefully pushed down upon people. This is more insidious because—you see this is also in the United States a little bit—and now you have all these subsidies; so you subsidize the green economy; you subsidize all these things. So you pour money into a kind of macroeconomic Ponzi scheme. And this will go on for a while, because of course, many people say, Well, if they who seem to know better, or claim to know better, are making sure that we still get more money, people are less, let’s say inclined to resist. I mean this is all going to blow up at some point; and you mentioned it correctly, this is what we see currently in Europe. But there is, every month we hear, This is going to be peak inflation; and the next month is, Oh no, this is going to be peak inflation. And then we reach a point where we say, Oh 8% inflation, what a great success. I mean no, that is not a great success. Sure, it is not 15%; but it is still bad. So I think that the resistance is still not where it is supposed to be, because the problem is that everybody who is behind this, or supports this, of course is at the levels of power at the universities, in the media, in culture; I mean it is very difficult to raise your voice against this. I work at a university; I have to tread carefully here. I am very lucky that my University allows me to do this; but this is really, even it is Puritanic, ideological content. You really run the risk of being burned at the metaphorical stake, if you try to resist these programs.”
Sky: “Absolutely, Ralph Schoellhammer. Well, we will speak to you again soon. And we don’t want to see you or us on that stake; but we will all be there together, mate.”
No comments:
Post a Comment