State-run Media Says You Will Own Nothing In The Future, Personal Choice Does Not Matter
A recent piece in BBC’s “Future World” series on its surface celebrates someone who choose to live an “ultra low carbon lifestyle”.
Throughout the Western world, per capita carbon output ranges from 4.46 (France) to Canada being the highest at 15.43, that does not include any Eastern nations like Russia, India or China.
The article talks about the personal challenges around living an ultra-low carbon lifestyle. According to the piece, 2 tonnes/year is also about half the output of a single gas powered car in the US, so the first step for any Americans (or Canadians) wanting to do this, they would have to start by ditching their vehicles. This of-course is absurd knowing more than half the population in America relies on private transportation to commute to work and to go shopping!
Other behaviours which move the needle would be: eating a plant based diet, buying green energy and forgoing one transatlantic round-trip per year. ''Of-course this could only happen under very hellish totalitarian enforcement, which would also rely on mass surveillance and an end to our traditional civilized courtesy of the right to privacy in your own home.
In terms of what level of personal CO2 emissions gets the job done “for the climate”, estimates vary. While the 2 tonne number was somewhat arbitrary, there are other climate focused think tanks that feel the number has to be 1.4 tonnes of C02 per person by 2040 and 0.7 by 2050.
Going back to Canada’s “excessive” carbon footprint – if we look at a metric that really means anything – total CO2 output – Canada is basically a rounding error to the world’s largest emitter, China.
The State-run media claims the ultra-low carbon lifestyle isn’t just for the eco-minded, it has to be for everybody. Or it isn’t going to work (“work” being defined as controlling the planet’s climate decades out).
Well if the answer is “no” then that means the ultra-low CO2 lifestyle has to be for everybody. Would that not include China, Russia and India too then?
“With the right policies, infrastructure and technology in place to enable changes to our lifestyles and behaviour, we can reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions substantially by 2050… In richer countries, this means moving towards a far lower carbon lifestyle for most people. But the changes to get there aren’t necessarily painful or even negative. For example, research has shown that good public services enable higher well being at lower energy use.”
If you read between the lines of this propaganda we see the implications of this. It basically means that an ultra-low carbon lifestyle has to be brought about through systemic change, government policy and massively expanded public services – or said differently, increasing dependence on The State.
We live in a world where many people believe many different things, but nowhere else do we find the kind of mandatory buy-in required as with the so-called climate crisis. Fortunately we’re hearing from an increasing number of scientists that there is no crisis, and whose voices are getting louder even in the face of corporate media “fact checking” and other headwinds of narrative control.
Climate crisis or not, I personally think decarbonization will happen anyway if for no other reason than that fossil fuel supplies are finite. With rational energy policies, including nuclear, natural gas and hybrid EVs (as opposed to full EV), we could significantly ratchet down CO2 emissions while still providing increased energy inputs to a world hungry for higher living standards.
The reality is there is no viable path forward that makes reduced energy usage and standard of living reductions a requirement, let alone mandatory.
https://bombthrower.com/bbc-climate-change-too-important-to-be-left-to-personal-choice/
