Eco-dictatorship: how the EU is turning into a dystopia
The goal of the EU’s project to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is not at all to protect the climate for future generations. The game is about reducing man, reducing him to the position of a pest parasitizing the environment
dr Michał Sopiński
The political and legal systems in their contemporary form are becoming the subject of criticism as being too anthropocentric – putting humans at the center of reality – and overly focused on socio-economic development, without taking sufficient account of the need to protect the environment. Instead, there is increasing talk of “rights of nature,” if only in the context of the sustainable development agenda. In turn, the changes pushed in the European forum by left-wing utopians – following the lobby of the big financiers from the World Economic Forum in Davos and their emissaries in the form of Klaus Schwab, George Soros, or the Bilderberg group – are supposed to lead us there.
This is because the dominant ideology of globalism in the EU today, and especially the environmentalism associated with it, assumes that the greatest threat to the planet and its entire ecosystem is man. However, the goal of the EU’s project to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is not at all to protect the climate for future generations. The game is about reducing man, reducing him to the position of a pest parasitizing the environment, while increasing Orwellian methods and tools of citizen control. Thus, the idea is to impoverish man, both in the material dimension, by making him not own property, by reducing his food intake, but also to reduce him in the anthropological, psychological, and cultural dimensions.
It all comes down to anthropology – a change in thinking about man as such. For at present a false, in fact ideological, thesis of equality between humans and animals in the subject of their rights is being very strongly promoted, and so-called animal rights are being increasingly promoted in the development of a certain faction of gender studies in the form of animal studies, i.e. the study of the status and relationship of animals to humans. Such thinking, however, represents the mistake of attributing human characteristics and qualities to animals. For St. Thomas Aquinas, it is obvious that man, understood as a person, is a more intense entity than any animal; he is an inseparable entity due to the unity of form (i.e., soul) and matter within the biological dimension of life.
The project for the reduction of man – reminiscent in its darkness of the biblical apocalypse of St. John – is laid out very precisely. For years, months and days. All the roles are already cast, and the ordinary Smith is supposed to be like a spectator in a theater, admiring and watching as the destruction of everything that constituted the scion of human civilization is carried out. The curtain has already risen, the masks have fallen, we know what is at stake today, and we also know who is behind it all. The question is: what do we do about it?
Ready for a revolution?
In recent years, a set of unrealistic visions of the future could be heard from the mouths of EU politicians. They are supposedly dictated by the desire to save the planet from human self-destruction. The EU proposals are revolutionary, not to say experimental, not yet tested anywhere in practice.
One such dystopian vision is to raise carbon emission reduction targets. The European Council’s approval of the strategy in December 2020 gave impetus to the creation of new repressive mechanisms and regulations. Previously, the reduction target by 2030 was 40% from 1990 levels, but member states agreed to reductions of as much as 55%, whence the name of the “Fit for 55” reform package presented by the European Commission in July 2021.
The biggest controversy is the extension of the ETS to transport and buildings, a border carbon tax and a ban on the registration of combustion cars from 2035. The EU ETS, introduced in 2005, is now in its fourth phase and mainly covers entities in the energy and industrial sectors, covering approx. 40% of the European Union’s overall emissions. Under Fit for 55, the emissions trading system is to be extended to transport and construction. This will mean a revolution.
According to a study by the Polish Economic Institute, ERCST and Cambridge Econometrics, the increase in costs associated with transportation for this group will be 44%, and with buildings as much as 50%. And this is only the EU average. For a Polish family in the 20% group earning the least, building-related fees will rise by as much as 108%. Transportation is slightly better – the report says a 50% increase for Polish car users, but these are still gigantic increases. The authors also valued the total cost of building and transportation emission allowances for all European Union countries for the years 2025-40. They put the figure at an astronomical 1,112 billion euros.
The Great Reset
Plans to “remodel” the world according to Klaus Schwab, creator of the Great Reset theory, are expected to happen soon, according to the slogan: “You will own nothing and be happy.” Currently, there is discussion of limiting access to basic goods, such as meat, dairy products and basic clothing. However, the question arises about the quality of such a life? It is also worth recalling that the virtual world plays an important role in the theory of the Great Reset – less and less of the real world, more and more of the digital illusion.
The announcement of the end of the age of internal combustion engines after 2035 in the EU has particularly stirred up public opinion. These are changes consulted with large corporations, which are already slowly switching to the production of electric cars. One can see this as a huge threat to potential buyers, since electric cars are much more expensive, their lifespan is shorter, batteries wear out faster and the cost of replacing them is severe. Besides, there is the problem of disposal and storage of electric cars and batteries, which are a greater threat to the environment than the CO2 emitted by combustion cars.
An avalanche of comments and polemics has also been triggered recently by the information that Warsaw is a member of the C40 initiative – an agenda bringing together the world’s largest cities to jointly fulfill a utopian vision of environmentalism by imposing restrictions on their own residents In addition, C40’s intentions are not just recommendations. Until now, giving up eating meat or traveling by car were considered individual fulfilments of a chosen way of life within the framework of the right to freedom, and a lifestyle based on individual consumption, freedom of travel was considered the ideal of the modern bourgeoisie, which we, as Poland, wanted to aspire to after 1989 and which prompted us to join the EU. Meanwhile, today we are told that this world has come to an end, that we are now facing restrictions and…. meat rations. Is this why we came out of communism which crushed our spirits for 45 years, so that after 30 years of freedom, we could enter a new yoke of murderousness anew?
It is obvious that most people will not voluntarily give up meat, dairy products, cars. Therefore, in order to limit consumption, certain fiscal barriers are created. If something is too expensive, you stop using it. Note the galloping prices of meat and dairy products, which are a consequence of rising production costs, but also of the restrictions and requirements placed on farmers. The same applies to internal combustion cars. According to the plans being implemented, the easiest way to force people to change their lifestyles is to make it difficult or restrict access to goods and self-determination.
Of course, this rationing of goods and services, will not equally affect everyone. It is worth noting the provision in the EU’s proposal for a ban on the production and sale of internal combustion cars after 2035, that cars from luxury brands available to the world’s wealthiest citizens will not be subject to the ban. Leftist EU decision-makers, even short distances are covered by airplanes. In contrast, one trip every two years is provided for the average Joe. There is a huge injustice and huge layers of hypocrisy in this. After all, hardly anyone believes that if a Pole gives up his chop, he will save the world from a climate catastrophe. Hence it’s really about a new way of making money by selling digital services, subscriptions, selling less for more. Will it make a difference in saving the planet? Certainly not.
The end of cash
Cash is the last bastion of human freedom in the face of almost unlimited individual control in the modern world. That’s why the main initiators of cashless trading are banks and lobbyists representing the financial sector who influence state governments. This is the first group. The second is the states themselves – autocratic, but also democratic.
Proponents of cashless settlements argue that settlements in the traditional form are expensive. Former Polish Finance Minister Tadeusz Koscinski calculated that cash circulation costs us about 1% of GDP. In contrast, cashless turnover in this narrative is all about the benefits – the ability to make payments online, by phone, card, etc. During the pandemic period, the issue of germs carried by banknotes was also raised. In other words – ease, convenience, and security. Yes, it is worth considering whether it is worth abandoning the use of pennies due to inflation. In this case, the cost of handling relative to the benefits may indeed be high. But only in this case. Besides, the risks associated with abandoning cash are enormous.
Trends toward eliminating cash are evident around the world. Of the EU member states, Sweden or the Netherlands are very advanced in this process, while at the gray end is the EU’s largest economy, Germany, where as much as 63% of payments are still made in the traditional form. On the opposite side of the spectrum is China, which has already announced the introduction of e-Yuan in 2021. And this is already a solution straight out of Orwell. Such an account can be blocked at any time, and digital money can have a limited payment term. This is a huge interference of the state in civil liberties, hence the concerns raised, by constitutionalists and human rights specialists, whether the introduction of digital payments does not mean a violation of fundamental rights, due to the enormity of the interference in our sphere of privacy and intimacy. It is worth noting that the promotion of e-currencies is aimed at bringing about the complete disappearance of national currencies, because since we will only have to deal with e-transactions, why do we need state currencies, since we won’t have our own currencies in our wallets anyway.
Very importantly, digital payments are hugely risky due to hacking operations. It’s not that this is a safer trade than cash. On the contrary, this money can easily be intercepted by international hacking groups or foreign-inspired spy groups. The number of hacking attacks carried out by Russia against the Baltic countries as part of its hybrid war shows that e-currencies are also a target.
It is useful to know what entities are promoting cashless trading. For example, the Davos Economic Forum, or funds that trade in billions of dollars, very often with no actual cover. An example of how much such “financial constructs” are worth is the recent events surrounding the collapse of FTX, a cryptocurrency exchange, which went down like a house of cards and investors were left with nothing, a similarly spectacular collapse was recorded by Sillicon Valley Bank leaving hundreds of start-ups in the lurch. This shows that the abandonment of cash payments may lead to a situation where such financial scams will increase.
In view of this, the advantages of cashless transactions should not obscure their disadvantages. As the 2020 figures show, half of Poles pay in cash and the other half electronically. But the vast majority of Poles, about 80%, favor freedom of choice, that is, keeping cash in circulation. In contrast, a dozen percent do not have bank accounts at all. This applies mainly to the elderly, but at this point it is worth adding that there is also a growing number of those who consciously opt out of electronic payments, not accepting that their consumer habits should be controlled by anyone.
A dystopian world
The European Union is currently engulfed, or rather, saturated and possessed, by leftist influences who are busily pushing their own visions of what a dystopian world should look like, with complete disregard for either the civilizational achievements of the law or the achievements of science, which together define reality and who we Europeans really are.
In this new, unreal Union, countries like Poland would not be an equal partner for Germany, France, the Netherlands or Belgium, but a periphery of the Community – a supplier of services, raw materials or labor, as well as a receptive market. This is nothing more than a policy of neo-colonialism involving the seizure of more spheres, authority belonging to member states, in order to gradually intensify economic dependence, which will eventually turn into economic occupation. This is a carbon copy of the Mitteleuropa project of 1915. Similar goals and methods to subjugate Central and Eastern European countries to Germany. The modern European Union aspires to be an empire. As is well known, empires have centers and peripheries. In the case of the European Union, the center is Berlin, Paris, Brussels, and Amsterdam, while Warsaw, Athens or Budapest are assigned the role of periphery.
An example of this kind of thinking can be seen in the announcement that the Treaties will be changed and that Brussels bureaucrats will take control of the forests, energy, education, or health care of EU member states. Forests, for example, occupy one-third of all Poland and provide about half a million jobs. 3% of GDP is linked to forests directly and 8% of GDP indirectly.
Brussels’ incursions thus encompass fundamental spheres of a sovereign state’s existence, although the smug vision of the EU’s future is only an illusory vision of well-being, and actually foretells the bitter gray reality of an enslaved society deprived of the remnants of humanity. After all, every communist system leads to totalitarianism, the essence of which is depriving man of his identity, freedom and rationality. The changes being prepared are creating a caricature of the world as we know it, and are an affront to humanity and its dignity, all the more so because it has brought this fate upon itself. European law must be “limited” by rational thinking, not by fantasy.
The elites of the world are striving to program a new model of life, as they once did, for example, in Soviet Russia. The new regulations evidently show that history likes to repeat itself. The Eurocrats are trying to design not only people, but are creating a kind of dictation of nature itself, telling nature how it should look – even against its inherent shape. The demands do not take into account its specifics due to latitude. They also look in vain for distinctions due to the life patterns of different nations, climatic conditions, or natural processes in the animal kingdom. This causes the vision to crumble at its very foundation. The eco-dictatorship is not only full of contradictions, but leads us into the very center of a political dystopia.
