A new study conducted by the research firm Consumer Science and Analytics Institute found that 41 percent of French citizens support banning people from flying more than four times in their lifetimes due to “climate change.” An even more disturbing 59 percent of 18-24-year-olds in France support the radical limit on air travel.
To those who are shocked by the number of French residents content with radical limitations on air travel, don’t be. The numbers are a reflection of a growing worldwide push to demonize and restrict freedom of movement. France has already outlawed domestic flights less than two and a half hours long. Meanwhile, the entire European Union is considering adopting France’s short-haul air travel ban.
The C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group, a globalist climate organization made up of nearly one hundred cities across the world (including 14 American cities), has a 2030 “target” of limiting air travel to “1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person.”
If C40 Cities gets its way, however, people won’t even be able to take their “1 short-haul flight every 3 years.” Since C40 cities make up about one 12th of the global population, “One flight per person every three years would cut the air industry’s emissions by way more than 43%,” reported Telegraph’s Travel Correspondent Chris Leadbeater. The move would effectively annihilate the air industry, which barely survived the Covid lockdowns.
The United Nations (UN) has an even more ambitious goal. By the year 2050, the UN wants to ban all flights that do not use sustainable aviation fuels. But even Bloomberg admits that sustainable aviation fuels are not scalable and are wildly expensive. Like C40 Cities’ aim to radically restrict air travel, the UN’s unrealistic net-zero goal for aviation will cause many airlines to close. It also makes the flights that are available only affordable to the extremely wealthy.
Skyrocketing the cost of air travel is not an unfortunate consequence of “necessary” climate policies; it’s a strategy. “They want cheap, convenient airfare as a thing of the past,” Marc Morano, founder of ClimateDepot.com and author of “The Green Fraud” and “The Great Reset: Global Elites in the Permanent Lockdown,” told The Federalist. Morano highlighted how influential American climate activist Eric Holthaus has stated, “We can’t continue to treat cheap air travel as something compatible with a habitable planet.”
It’s not hard to understand why climate activists like Holthaus feel this way. The majority (albeit a slim majority) of French citizens surveyed by the Consumer Science and Analytics Institute said that they did not support the radical limit on air travel. Pricing regular people out of plane tickets means the government doesn’t have to pass unpopular travel bans. If plane tickets are unaffordable, there doesn’t need to be any authoritarian edicts or consequential societal push-back.
Personal vehicles are also under attack. Attention is largely centered around gas-powered vehicles since countries like the U.K. are banning the sale of new gas-powered vehicles after 2030, and places like California require that by 2035, all new vehicles in the state run on electricity.
Electric vehicles (EVs) are expensive and rely on batteries that require human rights-violating and environment-harming lithium and cobalt mining. The price of EVs, coupled with carbon taxes and other policies, such as outlawing new gas stations, will make owning a vehicle unattainable for many — just like flying.
Morano told The Federalist that climate fanatics aren’t actually after gas-powered vehicles —they’re after all privately owned vehicles. Indeed, C40 Cities has a goal of eliminating privately owned vehicles by 2030. Trudy Harrison, the UK’s former minister of state for transport, said that owning a car is outdated “20th-century thinking,” and the UK should move to “shared mobility” to cut carbon emissions.
Likewise, former Democrat presidential candidate Andrew Yang said that climate change may require eliminating car ownership and suggested that people instead rely on a “constant roving fleet of electric cars.” The goal is, as Business Insider Magazine admitted, “to get rid of cars completely.”
Private vehicles and commercial airlines mean autonomy. It means anyone can jump in a car or hop on a plane and leave. With no planes or private vehicles, people become immobile.
Enter “convenient” 15-minute smart cities, which is an urban planning concept featuring high-tech communities that require no driving because everything you need is within a 15-minute walk. Leaders across the world, including the United States, have plans to implement 15-minute communities. Proponents of the 15-minute urban “utopias” claim they will help the environment because humans will have no need to travel and, therefore, no need to pollute.
These 15-minute smart cities will maintain watch and control over the populace’s movement via sophisticated surveillance technology that is already being installed across the world and promoted in the West by intelligence groups like the CIA, FBI, and Mossad.
“The idea is that the government is going to be monitoring you, keeping you within your 15-minute city,” said Morano. “Ultimately,” he added, “it’s going to end up being like East Germany, where you’re not allowed to leave, and they build a wall to keep the people in.”
None of this has to do with the environment. “If you actually look at climate change,” stated Morano, “we’re in the 10 percent coldest period of Earth geologically speaking. In other words, 90 percent of Earth’s history was too warm to have ice at both poles, and 90 percent of Earth’s history had higher CO2 levels and higher temperatures than today.” As Princeton physicist Dr. Will Happer said, we’re “in a CO2 famine.”
Morano likened despotic climate policies, like eliminating gas stoves, banning meat, controlling thermostats, and only allowing people to obtain three items of clothing per year, to “medieval witchcraft.” He explained that these measures “will have no impact on global CO2 emissions.” For instance, France’s ban on short-haul flights will have close to no impact on France’s greenhouse gas emissions. John Kerry even admitted that if the United States reduced its carbon emissions to zero, there would be no impact on climate change.
Beyond the data, consider how the climate activists that head C40 Cities, the United Nations, and the World Economic Forum (WEF) continue to galavant across the globe on private jets amid this supposed “climate crisis.” They don’t want to give up air travel and SUVs — they just want to price out regular people from driving cars and flying commercially.
Climate policies are not about the climate — they are about power. “You can go back through history and see how times of crisis or perceived crises are used to consolidate power,” said Morano. Morano explained how moments in human history, like Rome’s descent from a republic to an empire, Hitler’s takeover of Germany, the post-9/11 surveillance apparatus, and the violation of civil liberties during Covid, were the result of fear in the wake of crises.
According to Morano, the ruling class — “the best educated, the government bureaucrats, the billionaires, the heads of corporations, and even royal families” — use emergencies to assert their power over the populace. “It’s an impulse that’s as old as our humanity,” he said. “It’s the urge to rule over other people. It’s the idea that they know better. It’s arrogance.”
The ruling class elites posing as environmentalists have a big problem: their doomsday predictions and Orwellian policy prescriptions are grounded in egotism, not data. Therefore, the only way for them to maintain climate “crisis” fear and the facade of scientific “consensus” is through censorship.
“They give this illusion of climate consensus, the same way they give the illusion of consensus during Covid,” explained Morano. “If you deplatform, cancel, and censor the scientists who disagree, suddenly the only ones you hear are all in agreement.”
Just this July, Nobel Prize-winning Physicist Dr. John Clauser was disinvited from speaking at the United Nations’ International Monetary Fund after he criticized the climate change movement’s misuse of data and said, “I don’t believe there is a climate crisis.”
The UN’s censorship goes further than silencing award-winning physicists. The United Nations openly admits to partnering with Big Tech companies like TikTok and Google to manipulate search results and censor or promote content related to “climate information.” The UN’s Under-Secretary-General for Global Communications Melissa Fleming stated plainly during a World Economic Forum conference, “We own the science, and we think that the world should know it.”
I personally have been affected by the climate mafia’s speech policing. A video I posted on Instagram, which detailed the aims of the C40 Climate Leadership Group, was slapped with a “false” label and a Politifact “fact-check.” The fact-check, however, addressed a completely separate Instagram user and media site to purposely and deceptively discredit my factual reporting. I responded by fact-checking the fact-checkers.
Fact-checking the lies is the best line of defense against these wealthy jet-setters and their fear-mongering. The ability to move freely is essential for any liberal society. If we do not wish to be confined in surveillance prisons, we must spread the truth. Only the truth can free us from tyrants who wish to scare us into total despotism.