CLIMATE CHANGE: A TOOL FOR SOCIAL CONTROL AND FINANCIAL MANIPULATION FORGING GLOBALISM (Part 1)

This content utilizes analysis and arguments from author Rupert Darwall in the article Climate Change Has Become a Tool of Social Control, published in the Epoch Times. Rupert Darwall is a senior fellow at the Real Clear Foundation and the author of Green Tyranny, exposing the totalitarian roots of the climate industrial complex and the report The Climate Noose, Business Net Zero and the IPCC's Anti-Capitalism. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of NTDVN. Climate change, a tool for social control and financial manipulation, forging globalism. Climate change is increasingly becoming a defining concern of our time, despite remaining a subject of intense debate. Trillions of dollars are poured annually into preventing a future catastrophe. Whether this disaster will truly manifest remains to be seen. However, climate change has already been exploited as a tool for social control, financial manipulation and a pretext for the expansion of globalism. Is climate change becoming a tool for social control? Part 1. Today, climate change alarmism has crystallized into a rigid institution, a finishing blow to already crippled growth and employment after decades of consecutive financial crises and their aftermath. Rarely does an organization, public or private, fail to recite the climate dogma, asserting that it is an existential threat, the President of the United States, the Fed, the IMF, the World Bank and the World Health Organization, Davos, the epicenter of globalism, Wall Street and every corporate CEO seeking to avoid a shareholder revolt. Extreme Panic. Treat the climate crisis like a real crisis, teenage climate activist Greta Thunberg famously urged. Regrettably, the climate change establishment is stripping young people like Greta of life's opportunities. You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes, Thunberg declared at the 2018 UN Climate Change Conference in Katowice. It is not just Thunberg who expresses such acerbic panic. It is not just international organizations and governments that are in lockstep on carbon. Any scientific study with different conclusions or skeptical voices is immediately branded as a crime against humanity. Climate change has effectively been transformed into a religion where no data and no scientists are permitted to harbor doubt. No one is allowed to question it. Those who dare are immediately condemned. Nevertheless, many compelling pieces of evidence and scientific studies continue to courageously swim against the tide, despite the radical support from the media and globalist movements for this agenda. A scientific article titled The Flaws in Climate Models, published on the prestigious Hoover Institution website in 2017, questioned whether carbon is truly the culprit behind global warming. Today's atmosphere is approximately 0.8 degrees Celsius warmer than in 1850. Climate change theory posits that atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have increased by 40 percent since 1750 and that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. From this, it is hypothesized that CO2 is the villain responsible for the 0.8 degrees Celsius warming, based on these two data points. Consequently, CO2 has been institutionalized for eradication across global production activities. However, Hoover Institution researchers argue that modern science is largely incapable of conducting controlled experiments, such as increasing and decreasing atmospheric CO2 levels and measuring the resulting temperature changes. What else can be done? Humans have built complex computer models using physics to calculate how energy flows through the earth, water, and atmosphere. Such models are frequently used today to make catastrophic predictions about earth's fate. According to the Hoover Institution, the problem is that these models have serious limitations that significantly diminish their value in making predictions and directing policy. Specifically, three major issues exist, propagation of error, uncertainty regarding solar energy inputs, and unreliable input hypotheses regarding clouds. Hoover researchers assert that any one of these three issues alone is enough to cast doubt on predictions. Together, they deal a devastating blow to current model forecasts. For example, cloud concentration remains a blind spot for modern science. How cloud layers form, dissipate, and congregate remains outside the bounds of current scientific data and global understanding. In fact, global temperature forecasts from 1998 to 2014 showed that only 2.6% of models predicted a decrease in temperature, while 97.6% predicted warming. Unfortunately, this 97.6% group predicted warming at a rate 2.2 times higher than the actual recorded results. With such discrepancies, the perceived severity is being pushed toward a tragedy far removed from reality. Even setting aside the controversies over climate change and decarbonization measures, the harsh rhetoric of activists suggests that decarbonization must be undertaken by current generations in the hope of tempering global warming for those yet unborn. In other words, climate change theory is exerting maximum pressure on the current workforce, who are expected to sacrifice their life opportunities to provide future generations with a slightly less warm planet, even if the assumption of severe warming is highly questionable. Trading Growth and Jobs for the Manipulation of Youth Producing energy without hydrocarbons is more expensive and resource intensive. It means slower growth, something today's youth have faced since the 2008-2009 financial collapse. Economic growth is the elixir of youth. It means faster income growth, more job opportunities, more travel, more disposable income, and a greater ability to save for freedom and independence. Conversely, it is less critical for the elderly, who can live off pensions and savings or depend on social security funded by the young. But the brutal decarbonization of the climate institution will further shatter the dreams of the youth, adding to the hardships they already endure. Stagnant growth following the dot-com crash 2001, the global financial crisis 2008-2009, and the COVID-19 pandemic. All doors of opportunity seem to be closing, particularly for contemporary youth worldwide. Decarbonization has accelerated the relative decline of the West, making it harder for these economies to recover from crises. Between 2002 and 2014, the West cut its carbon dioxide emissions by 10.2%. The rest of the world, meanwhile, is literally using hydrocarbons to fuel its development. During the same period, their carbon dioxide emissions increased by 76.8%. In fact, the increase in non-Western emissions over those 12 years was significantly larger than the West's total annual emissions, 11.6 gigatons from 2002-2014 compared to the West's 9.5 gigatons in 2014. This is not a race where everyone wins. If things continue this way, the younger generation will live in a world where the West and its values are in decline and perhaps even dissolved. By portraying the youth as innocent victims of future climate change, their elders are robbing them of any justification for a war against a generation that has profoundly disappointed them. The consequence, intentional or not, is the transformation of climate change into a tool for social control. Young people can be manipulated. During the Vietnam War, as student protests swept the Western world, Sweden's social democratic government took a different approach. According to Roland Huntford, author of The New Totalitarians, while Western governments resisted the trend, Sweden's rulers became its allies. They supported the protests. The Swedish prime minister denounced Washington and praised Hanoi. State radio and television provided extensive coverage of every protest and paid homage to Vietnam supporters in Sweden. All of this benefited the government, Huntford wrote. The youth had an outlet for their energy and the social democratic party stood by their side. Teenagers and protesters in their 20s, with long hair, buttons, badges, and hippie attire, became an accepted part of the landscape. In the U.S. in 1967, the first baby boomers shared a summer of love while others were sent to fight in Vietnam. A new feature of the youth then was the sexual liberation movement. Casual sex was considered trendy. Perhaps the proximity of war and real danger created a link between the boomers in the age of Aquarius and the youth rebellion following WWI, which Stefan Zweig described as an era of wild ecstasy, a rebellion purely for the sake of rebelling against everything, an intellectual revolution progressing with supple energy that cleared away the atmosphere of musty tradition. Wild ecstasy, supple energy, purely for fun. Today's young climate warriors face no pressure from war, but because of climate change, they are forced to endure exactly that kind of pressure. For them, fighting climate change is a grim, joyless task. Has anyone seen Ms. Thunberg's smile, let alone laugh? Far from rebelling against authority, today's youth are following a script written by authorities, the wealthy and well-connected individuals in multi-billion dollar organizations and NGOs. For politicians, especially Europeans, saving the planet is a pleasant diversion from the difficult, unpopular task of rejuvenating their sclerotic economies. Today's youth, millennials and Gen Z are willing to follow the climate crisis narrative because it casts them as the aggrieved party and their parents as the guilty ones, who can still absolve themselves of climate guilt by joining climate projects and making a lot of money doing so or merely by subscribing to the climate crisis dogma. The climate change, boogeyman, flawed and ambiguous. Since 1970. In June 1988, NASA climate scientist James Hansen gave a speech that alarmed humanity before Congress. This was followed by UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's unsettling speech on global warming. Later at the Toronto Climate Conference, climate change was swiftly compared to nuclear war. Doomsday predictions have been a staple of the climate crisis from the beginning. Interestingly, we have now had enough time to verify the truth about the boogeyman painted over the past 33 years. A 2021 article by researchers David Rode and Paul Fischbeck of Carnegie Mellon University tracked doomsday prophecies since the first Earth Day in 1970. Throughout half a century of forecasting, the apocalypse has always been the boogeyman scheduled for 20 years in the future. By the end of 2020, 61% of predictions regarding planetary collapse had come and gone, unproven. We know this because we are still here. In most fields, a track record of 100% consecutive failure would elicit a degree of ridicule, if not reasoned skepticism. An April 2021 survey of UK adults conducted on behalf of the London-based Global Warming Policy Foundation revealed a paradox suggesting that fear of climate change among young people might be weaker than standard narratives suggest. When asked how much the average global temperature has risen over the past 150 years, the young respondents revealed the most extreme and ignorant views. 54% of those aged 18-24 and 60% of those aged 25-34 thought the average global temperature had risen by 5 degrees Celsius or more compared to 45% of older adults. However, the same survey showed that the proportion of respondents who were very concerned about climate change was lowest in the high youngest age groups, 26% and 24% respectively. Concern increased with age, peaking at 35% for those over 65. This indicates a clear divergence. The age groups with the most extreme views on past climate change are also the least concerned about it, having the lowest percentage of very concerned respondents. It also shows a disconnect from climate policy. The goal of widely publicized net zero climate policies is to prevent global temperatures from rising by 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. 1 degree of that 1.5 degrees Celsius has already occurred. However, only 18% of 18-24 year olds and 15% of 25-34 year olds correctly identified that the global average temperature has only increased by 1 degree Celsius, while 22% and 20.5% respectively believed that global temperatures had increased by 10 degrees Celsius over the past 150 years. Why worry about a future warming of 0.5 degrees Celsius if the world has already warmed by 5 or 10 degrees Celsius? The detachment from climate policy suggests that expressions of concern about climate change are performative rather than reflective of deeply considered scientific belief. They are designed to signal an adherence to the consensus of what constitutes good taste and a morally correct opinion, to use the words of Elisabeth Noël Neumann in The Spiral of Silence. Noël Neumann, Germany's leading post-war pollster, likened public opinion to a social skin. Individuals fear social isolation. She quoted James Madison, the reason of man like man himself is timid and cautious when left alone and acquires firmness and confidence in proportion to the number with which it is associated. Perspectives surrounding climate change are a powerful social force, indeed the most powerful social force in the West today. It operates independently of the facts and science of climate change. It is nothing short of a catastrophe for Millennials and Gen Z, yet its structure is designed to attract them. It gives them the halo of climate victimhood while concealing the truth that, to enforce the climate institution, they are the ones who lose. They are indeed victims. Their prospects have been ravaged by financial crises and the accumulation of massive public debt, and they are the generation that will bear the primary burden of climate change policies. Decarbonization will suck the oxygen out of already weakened economies. The younger generation and their children will gain nothing from climate policies, on the contrary. The Spiral of Silence, the only serious form of climate denial, prevents young people from perceiving these realities. They have been disarmed in the battle for their own economic interests. Unless they rid themselves of the invisible constraints of their parents' tyranny, they will remain the primary victims of climate change. Beyond social control, climate change has become a sharp tool of globalism, a perfect boogeyman for globalism to thrive under the guise of protecting humanity. Parallel to the globalist agenda, climate change is currently giving rise to green finance, a financial tool purportedly meant to prevent climate change, where globalist-aligned financiers, ostensibly responsible for the Earth's temperature, are striving to speculate and manipulate. A green financial crisis is looming. The younger generation and their children will once again become the greatest victims of this agenda, as they have been, are, and will be forced to shoulder a massive new mountain of debt. Stay tuned for part two, the plan to make trillions through Wall Street's green finance. Costs remains a complex puzzle for medium-term economic growth prospects. You've been watching Unseen Ledger, where we turn data into insight and insight into advantage. Tell us in the comments what stories or topics you'd like us to explore next. Your perspective helps shape our next episode. If today's report gave you a new way of seeing the market, please like, share, and subscribe so you never miss what's hidden behind the numbers. Unseen Ledger, where the numbers speak, we make them confess.