By Paul Glumaz
The climate emergency experts populating the governments of Washington,
Oregon, and British Columbia are having their 6th Cascadia Innovation Corridor
Conference near Blaine, WA September 12-13. Along with them will be much of the
private sector “green” industries, experts, consultants, otherwise known as the
climate industrial complex. The biggest conference sponsor is Microsoft, and Bill
Gates will give a fireside keynote chat. Then later the governors of California,
Oregon, Washington, and the Premier of British Columbia will give short virtual
keynotes. The conference agenda is “Cascadia 2050 Vision, Moving to Climate
Action.”
The Cascadia Innovation Corridor begins in September 2016 at a conference in
Vancouver, BC to help create, in their own words, the “world’s most sustainable
mega region.” It is important to note that this direction towards “sustainable mega
regions” has been growing ever since the early 1990’s coming out of the 1992 UN
Rio Conference on Environment and Development from which came “Agenda 21.”
In past Cascadia conferences, some of the themes have been “meeting the net
zero de-carbonization challenge;” “modern eco-cities in the Cascadia innovation
corridor.” In this conference, the titles of the announced panels are almost entirely on climate action with five panels devoted to it. Climate action means de-carbonization. However, de-carbonization is not the objective. The objective is to use de-carbonization to assist in radically changing the very nature of human
society, and human existence. In this, the Cascadia mega region is to be the model
for the rest of the world for how elite urban areas, economically based on IT
information processing, and the financialization of everything, can dominate the
surrounding areas, and assist in promoting the de-carbonization global
depopulation agenda.
Let’s start with unpacking the meaning of four of the terms used in the lexicon of
the conference announcement, and their consequences when applied.
I- Terms and their meanings:
1- Mega region: First, the mega region “Cascadia” is not the U.S. It is an
amalgam of part of the U.S. and Canada. Thus, it is transnational. In this manner the region of “Cascadia” is designed to weaken the national territorial
integrity and sovereignty of both Canada and the U.S. Second, “Cascadia” is
an unelected, unconstitutional public-private partnership becoming the
overlord over what should be sovereign regional governments.
2- Sustainability: This word means sustaining a balance with nature. This
means no substantive economic development is possible. This is because
fundamental increases in economic infrastructure require the alteration of
nature or breaking that balance. It also means one can’t develop anything
without the approval of those environmental experts, and administrators
who determine whether what is being done interferes with that balance.
Whatever authority defines what is “sustainable” is what controls actual
economic activity, including the use of private and public property by
individuals and community. Though the potential for graft has never been
greater in determining who gets approved on any activity, under the
definitions of “sustainability,” the governing principle of the “promotion of
the general welfare for ourselves and our posterity,” as outlined in the
Preamble of the U.S. Constitution, is replaced by the interpretation of
“sustainability” by a corrupt anti-growth depopulation-promoting elite.
3- Climate Change: Without the threat of some dire emergency, It is not
possible to justify the fundamental changes to society being intended by an
elite which rejects the desire of we the people for a better future of increased
living standards and economic development. Climate change is that threat.
Without imposing a cult-like belief system saying that the by-product of the
most essential sources of energy for industrial society is the greatest threat to
nature, there would no way to justify such fundamental changes. Climate
change, along with sustainability, are also the twin pretexts being used to
eliminate our freedoms and effectively placing us under a climate
dictatorship.
4- Eco-sustainable cities: These are the future cities where affordable carbon-
based fueled modes of automobile transport for most of the population will be replaced by bicycles and public transport, with an upper wealth caste
having the affordable luxury of electric vehicles. Banning gas fueled cars based on reducing the carbon footprint is an essential part of creating eco-
sustainable cities. Without affordable automobiles, individuals will not have a sense of territorial freedoms, and will be much more at the mercy of public
transport. Another aspect of eco- sustainable cities is the defunding of law
enforcement and the rise of homeless and crime required to drive out
traditional homeowners, to make way for the apartments and condos required for the vast increase of IT workers needed to man and produce the
information control-based systems governing our lives, including the
financial system, the media, the surveillance state, and the distribution of
products. For those who are not suited for jobs in the eco-sustainable city,
i.e., the “useless eaters,” increased mortality through legalized, or
decriminalized narcotics, like Fentanyl, can help weed out those not fit for
this change.
II- Consequences:
1- Environmental Consequences: Contrary to any concern about “the
environment,” the effects of the policies of climate action for the Cascadia
mega-region are catastrophic for human habitation. Flood control has been
abandoned throughout the region and replaced with “letting the rivers run
free,” which along with wetland expropriations to sequester CO2 and protect
“habitat,” is making destructive flooding throughout the region a yearly
occurrence. The lack of traditional forestry methods of clearing brush has
also led to increasing forest fires. Both are blamed on “climate change.” The
same situation exists for coastal and lake front areas which are not being
maintained for similar reasons. The intention is to “return” these areas “back
to nature” and to decrease settlement and population in non-urban areas.
Taking down hydroelectric dams based on saving the salmon, when river
dredging that would help prevent floods would serve better for that, is
another economic and environmental catastrophe for humans.
2- Manufacturing and Working-Class Consequences: In an increasing de-
carbonized world, it is falsely believed that there will be less dependence on manufacturing and more dependence on systems of control and the technical
services required for that control. What manufacturing would exist, it is
believed, could be done by an underclass, most likely outside of the Cascadia
mega-region. Unlike the productive middle class, the more tenuously
employed non-manufacturing workforce composed of service and IT
workers, are far more vulnerable, dependent, and subject to greater
pressures to conform in both behavior and thought. A productive middle
class that thinks for itself will not be allowed in the mega region.
3- Urban Demographic Consequences: The traditional patterns of home
ownership in the U.S. will be shifted to renting largely by increasing housing
shortages and using environmental restrictions for preventing new housing starts. Moving people out of cars into public transit is part of that. Conditions
for raising families will worsen as most the of the income people will make
will have to go to paying rent for tiny apartments in high rise complexes.
III- Some of the Fatal Flaws in the Elite’s Eco-topian Vision:
This vision of the elites, which some have called “neo-Malthusian,” is the greatest
threat to humanity. If the effort to implement their flawed vision is not stopped,
most of humanity will perish.
1- Computers and Humans: No computer will ever be able to replace human
creativity. The elites behind implementing the climate dictatorship are
obsessed with the belief that humans are essentially more complex
computers. This is a fatal flaw. Since under the climate change dictatorship,
economic development is not desired, just increased control, human
creativity necessary for economic development is also not desired and will
only get in the way of a completely programmed society. However, society
over time can only exist if there is enough creativity to sustain an increase in
population requiring the human mastery of nature. The discovery of how to
make fire is just an early example of that. A society that suppresses human
creativity as the essence of maintaining a policy of control over its population,
is doomed for lack of the freedoms of thought and beliefs that are necessary
for fostering creativity.
2- Physical Economics: The elites behind imposing a climate dictatorship, do
not understand the physical economics behind even creating and maintaining
their eco-topia. Their goal of a massive decrease in population will
economically boomerang against their capacity for control. That is because to
produce the level of manufacturing to provide the computers, the chips, and
all the hardware and technical support, as well as the infrastructure, skilled
workforce, and manufacturing, requires an increase in the division of labor,
which means more population. From the mere standpoint of physical
economics, the whole pursuit of “sustainable mega regions” is unsustainable.
3- The inability to impose the ecotopian vision on the rest of the world.
The inability to impose this ecotopian vision in Russia, China, probably India, and other nations is another major flaw. Despite having signed the Paris
Climate Accords, and having a social credit-controlled society, China will not
de-carbonize their economy. Russian too will have none of it. This means that
those nations that do not de-carbonize will continue to develop, while those
nations that are de-carbonizing like the U.S., and the nations of Europe, will
continue disintegrating. Those third world nations that were de-carbonizing
like Sri Lanka and Ghana are now experiencing famines. Those third world
nations that move towards the block of nations that aren’t de-carbonizing,
will tend to further isolate the de-carbonization block. This is now occurring.
A disintegrating globalist empire with nuclear weapons intent on pursuing a
suicidal flawed ecotopian vision is a very dangerous thing.
IV- Some Approaches to Combat the Climate Dictators:
1- Most of the population must quickly come to recognize the dire threat t
their existence of the emerging climate dictatorship. This is how it must be
presented to everyone, including members of the climate change cult.
2- Do not debate the climate cult members. They must be frontally
confronted on the fact that they are destroying humanity and that they are
promoting genocide. Shift the label from “climate change” to “climate
dictatorship” in every conversation because that is what it really is.
3- A positive conception of humanity and society must be promoted as an
alternative to the anti-human views of the climate change cult. This positive
conception must be the identity of those combating the climate dictatorship.
It should emphasize that profound distinction between humans and animals
and humans and computers. That every human has that sacred potential to
create the discoveries that can improve our society and future generations.
4- This battle must be public and must influence the outcome of the next
election by targeting all the candidates that are promoting the climate
dictatorship. Many political consultants say, “polls show that only 4% of the
U.S. electorate make climate change their top issue.” Polling is not the issue.
The climate dictatorship is being imposed from the top. Wake up! Genocide is
on its way big time if the ecotopians are not stopped.
5- Since the international bankers that control the central banking
systems, like the Fed, are currently assisting implementing the climate
dictatorship by cutting off lending to carbon-based fuel producers and users,
there is no way to save the nation from genocide but to collapse “their”
banking system, which is already bankrupt, and replace it with one that will
fund our long delayed economic development.
6- Preparations must be made by County, State and Federal government, at
the point of new officeholders, to change the interpretation of the role of
government, from ‘sustainability” to the “general welfare.” In that context,
three decades of red tape and laws that block our ability
Editor’s Note – We Are Not Supporting Protests at This Time!
