Top U.S. Scientists Call for Draconian UN Social Engineering

“Substantial numbers of people will have to alter their existing behaviors to address this new class of global environmental problems,” claim the authors, who include Nobel Prize winners and even the infamous but largely discredited biologist and “population bomb” alarmist Paul Ehrlich (shown above). “Alternative approaches are needed when education and persuasion alone are insufficient.”

In simpler terms, the self-styled arbiters of proper environmental stewardship and human values are seeking to use the force of government — without the consent of the governed, if need be — to radically change people’s thoughts and behavior. If taxpayer-funded propaganda and brainwashing fail to convince enough of the public to submit, coercion in the form of new rules, regulations, fines, and other policies will be needed, the authors claim.

“Policy instruments such as penalties, regulations, and incentives may therefore be required to achieve significant behavior modification,” the paper claims matter-of-factly. In a table included within the document, some potential examples of the envisioned “policy instruments” are outlined, starting from taxpayer-funded propaganda — “active norms management: advertising, information, appeals,” as the authors put it — and moving on through taxes, fines, subsidies, and other “financial interventions.”

Finally, at the bottom of the table: laws and regulations demanding obedience at the barrel of a government gun. “Effective policies, then, are ones that induce both short-term changes in behavior and longer-term changes in social norms,” the paper continues, offering some examples of successful and failed efforts to transform human behavior and values using the coercive force of government. “Government is uniquely obligated to locate the common good and formulate its policies accordingly.”

Much of the document is devoted to strategies on changing people’s behavior to suit the pseudo-environmentalist goals of its authors. While it acknowledges that coercion can sometime backfire — noting that forces within the non-coercive sector would also have to participate in the effort if it is to succeed — the brute force of the state is viewed as a key tool in achieving the radical social changes envisioned. …

Are we really at the cusp of a human-caused climate tipping point?  State propaganda about carbon emissions is in sharp contrast to its policies wrt genetic modification, recycling, endless gratuitous wars and other major toxic inputs into the environment.  It’s notable that commodifying carbon emissions would give the financial masters a strategic choke hold on life-sustaining economic activity down to the grassroots level, and its selective enforcement (which is a given) would serve power-center interests to a tee.

Manufacturing an emergency in order to channel social activity in a given direction is SOP for the oligarchs, and their social control and depopulation agenda is well documented.  This is why the “climate emergency” needs to be examined very carefully.   Why have global temperatures leveled out while carbon emissions are spiking?  Is humanity really a plague, or only the privately controlled monetary system which maximizes waste and creates war?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.