AN article ‘Why Some Scientists Think We Could Soon Have Climate Lockdowns’ published by MSN should set off alarm bells for anyone with half a brain who has an awareness of how the globalist-pushing media works, i.e. drip-feeding future events to the public ahead of intended policy actions. (MSN for those who don’t know is a ‘web portal and related collection of Internet services and apps provided by Microsoft’ which operates in the guise of news service.) But does this really suggest the return of lockdown measures, this time under the umbrella of ‘man-made climate change’?
The original covid lockdowns, which spearheaded the attack on our freedoms back in 2020, were essentially house arrests under the pretext of a public health crisis. To those who were paying attention however, covid-19 itself was simply an additional tool by which elites could build momentum and extend political reach towards their real intentions – the overthrow of free enterprise capitalism and democracy and its replacement by a techno feudalist society characterised by draconian restrictions in behaviour, speech, mobility and freedom. Whilst ecological concerns had long been exploited for further powers by the UN, the lockdowns of 2020 kicked things into a higher gear, enabling the globalist movers and shakers to take another giant step further towards the aim of world governance and the final dissolution of citizen freedom, national sovereignty and domestic policy-making.
Lockdowns delineated a clear step-change in what governments will do to exert greater control over their citizens and, as Marc Morano points out, aggressively pursue ‘the levelling of human freedom under the guise of permanent crises’. Klaus Schwab himself argued in his book The Great Reset (released three months after the announcement of the first lockdowns) that covid-19 provided a ‘window of opportunity’ for a societal, economic and political transition which will save us all.
The lockdown measures, keeping people in their homes, social distancing, staying at home, mask wearing and eventually large-scale vaccination programmes all culminated in the radical transformation in attitudes, behaviours and social norms that the elites had long coveted and had been relatively unsuccessful with, via two decades of cajoling the public on the impending climate crisis. In 2020, however, the scepticism over the immediacy of threat posed by the climate crisis was replaced by the immediate threat of an infectious and unknown disease, and governments around the world were able to leverage an unprecedented level of compliance.
With this success, the agenda setters wasted little time in conjoining and interweaving the two narratives. For example, the International Energy Agencydeclared in 2021 that the global lockdowns since 2020 had seen an unprecedented reduction in carbon emissions as global energy demand had been slashed during this period. The media in the UK highlighted the ‘clear blue skies’ resulting from ten weeks of lockdown, clearly hinting at the implications of such a society becoming the norm. It was even suggested – in the journal Science of the Total Environment for example – that climate change was itself a causal factor in the outbreak of the covid-19 pandemic. The World Health Organization itself made numerous references to the role of the rapidly changing climate as having increased the frequency and location of infectious disease.
Such is their arrogance, the globalist elite often let us catch a glimpse of their real agenda. A tweet released by WEF in February 2021 (and then hastily withdrawn) proposed that ‘lockdowns are quietly improving cities around the world’, suggesting that enforced house arrests may have been a testing ground for more of the same. Indeed, a Guardian article later that year suggested that similar periods of lockdown post 2020/21 would be a necessary condition of the deep cuts in carbon emissions that scientists tell us is imperative if we are to survive. This headline was also withdrawn and revised to propose the equivalent of lockdown periods every two years to reduce the carbon in the atmosphere. What these ‘equivalences’ would consist of was not made clear. Were these merely Freudian slips or were the architects of global change showing us what they have in mind for the near future?
Further lockdowns notwithstanding, recent events in Bristol also provide concerning insights into how policymakers may intend to step up things up in relation to their proposed ‘end game’ – particularly as the UN’s Agenda 2030 deadline draws nearer. In January, constructers moved into Barton Hill, Lawrence Hill, Redfield and St George in the middle of the night to close off side roads, and to create a number of cul-de-sacs and dead ends through which only pedestrians would be allowed. Police were called when protesters appeared at the scenes. Is this the way in which the next stage of our proposed imprisonment will be completed? Under cover of the night and protected by the police? These events provide worrying precedents for what might be to come.
Lockdowns provided a clear line in the sand in relation to the deployment of direct social engineering measures on the public, particularly in the West, and signpost the level and extent of control that the elites wish to pursue. The measures introduced by governments pre-2020 to align with the UN’s sustainability aims never remotely reached the level of control and curtailment of people’s rights and freedoms that they did in 2020. Presumably, the eventual rollout of 15-minute cities will seek to replicate what we experienced in 2020, but at a scale and scope beyond the boundaries of households, ably supported by CBDC and social credit ratings (with carbon credits incorporated into this), and with ‘the internet of things’ coordinated through the mass rollout of 5G towers. This comprehensive digital surveillance infrastructure will mean there will be no need for conventional lockdowns by the time we get to this point.
If recent ‘leaked’ media stories are to be believed, there is always the possibility that we may see a return to lockdowns in the future – maybe as part of the ongoing conditioning into the dystopian world they have planned for us. On the other hand, the lockdowns in 2020 could also be seen as a test of compliance. Would they be willing to risk that the level of compliance reached in 2020? The elites would be aware that announcing further lockdowns under the guise of a climate threat might not get anywhere near the level of public buy-in which occurred in 2020 – both due to a different scenario and the fact that many will simply not be willing to go along with this any more. Large scale non-compliance would surely threaten the order they seek to impose. Perhaps we will see more of the stealthy approach recently seen in Bristol, where it carries less political risk, particularly if the infrastructure to accommodate the level of control which they seek is more firmly in place.
