Governments should re-introduce rationing schemes on goods such as meat, clothing, and fossil feuls in order to mitigate the supposed dangers of climate change, researchers at a top British univiersity have demanded.
Acadamics at the University of Leeds have called for World War II-style government rationing in order to fight climate change, arguing that green agenda taxes are levied in a “slow and inequitable” manner and therefore the policy of rationing has been wrongly “neglected as a climate change mitigation policy option.”
The study, which appeared in the Ethics, Policy & Environment journal, said: “Rationing is often seen as unattractive, and therefore not a viable option for policy-makers. It is important to highlight the fact that this was not the case for many of those who had experienced rationing. It is important to emphasise the difference between rationing itself and the scarcity that rationing was a response to. Of course, people did welcome the end of rationing, but they were really celebrating the end of scarcity, and celebrating the fact that rationing was no longer necessary.”
The researchers went on to explain that governments could specifically ration “selected goods, such as flights, petrol, household energy, or even meat or clothing” and that limits could be placed on the amount of petrol an individual can use per month and the number of flights per year.
Dr Nathan Wood, the co-lead author of the study, said: “The concept of rationing could help, not only in the mitigation of climate change, but also in reference to a variety of other social and political issues — such as the current energy crisis.”
The energy crisis in Britain, which came to fruition in large part due to the government’s green agenda and failing to develop domestic natural resources such as nuclear power and fracking for natural gas and thereby leaving the country vulnerable to international price shocks cause by the war in Ukraine, has already seen some supermarkets begin rationing fruits and vegetables this week.
Good news, being broke is good for the climate!https://t.co/cGrcMc2TTB
— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) October 28, 2022
The Leeds academics argued that during the Second World War, people did not object to rationing because it was a necessary response to the scarcity of goods and therefore if people were once again convinced that there was a natural scarcity, they might once again accept rationing measures.
The paper suggested that scarcity could be artificially induced by the state through measures such as banning or restricting or banning the import of fossil fuels and therefore the government could claim that rationing was necessary to “manage the scarcity”.
The joint-lead author of the study, Dr Rob Lawlor said: “There is a limit to how much we can emit if we are to reduce the catastrophic impacts of climate change. In this sense, the scarcity is very real.”
Another scheme offered up by the paper was to introduce “carbon cards, like bank cards, to keep track of your carbon allowance rather than ration cards”. Under such a scheme, the trading and selling of carbon allowances should be prohibited, they argued, saying: “It is feasible that allowance-based schemes could exist with non-tradable allowances.”
The “carbon card” scheme is reminiscent of plans announced by Chinese tech giant Alibaba, with president J. Michael Evans telling the World Economic Forum in 2022 that they are seeking to create an “individual carbon footprint tracker” in order to record and track the behaviour of citizens and the alleged impact on the climate.
Great Reset: Siemens Chairman Calls for ‘Billion People to Stop Eating Meat’ at World Economic Forum https://t.co/Uk7tZ22EKu
— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) January 20, 2023
Follow Kurt Zindulka on Twitter here @KurtZindulka
Read the full article here
Discussion about this post