There’s a quite a lot of heat and noise being generated at the moment about London Mayor Khan’s expanded Ulez (Ultra-Low Emission Zone) which is supposed to start at the beginning of this week. But what few seem to have noticed is that Khan’s Ulez is just a very small part of a much larger programme to control how our rulers believe we should live our lives.
Khan’s Ulez is part of the C40 programme:
C40 is a global network of mayors of the world’s leading cities that are united in action to confront the climate crisis. It was founded in 2005 as C20, and has since expanded to its current network of 96 cities, including London.
Here’s a link to the C40 website, in case you think I’m making this up.
Here’s an overview of what the mayors of the 96 C40 cities are planning for us:
It’s the usual measures to make our lives poorer, more restricted, more miserable and more controlled by our rulers:
- buying fewer clothes each year and making those clothes last longer
- eating less meat and fewer dairy products
- taking fewer flights
- ‘enhancing building utilisation’ which could sound a lot like squeezing ever more people into ever smaller homes
- reduced car ownership and reduced travel by car
- making all our technological devices last longer – does that mean restrictions on how often we can buy new devices as part of our ‘individual carbon budgets’?
And guess who is the C40 Chair?
Yup. it’s our favouritest mayor – Mayor Khan.
Many people have been wondering why Mayor Khan is implementing the Ulez expansion when not only Londoners but also several Labour politicians (including Starmer) seem to be against it, blaming it for Labour’s failure to win the Uxbridge by-election.
Well, hopefully you are now aware that the expanded Ulez is just a tiny part of a much larger globalist agenda which looks suspiciously like a form of climate-catastrophist lockdown for us ‘useless eaters’. So, it should be clear why Mayor Khan is driving this through in spite of the howls of opposition and in spite of the doubts of his own Labour Party.
There’s a lot more I could write about the C40 Cities assault on our lifestyles. But you can go to the C40 website if you’d like more information. However, there’s just one thing I should add – I found it interesting to look at who is actually funding this horror story. Here’s a link to the funders page.
Major funders include eco-organisations such as the Climateworks Foundation, Global Environmental Facility, the Climate Change Collaboration and the European Climate Foundation; Governments such as the U.K. Government, the German Government and the Danish Government and foundations set up by billionaires such as Bloomberg Philanthropies, IKEA, the Hewlett Foundation, Fondation L’Oréal, Google and Novo Nordisk.
Moreover, there is one more major funder which surely deserves a special mention – the Open Society Foundations. The Open Society Foundations website explains “George Soros is the founder of the Open Society Foundations. He has given away more than $32 billion of his personal fortune to fund the Open Society Foundations’ work around the world.”
So who is Mayor Khan really working for when he implements his expanded Ulez as part of his C40 agenda? Londoners? The Labour party? Or the eco-fanatics and the multi-billionaire Davos globalists? I’ll leave you to decide.
David Craig is the author of There is No Climate Crisis, available as an e-book or paperback from Amazon.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I predict your digital footprint will do you much credit, Jack. Keep writing.
Jack, if they’re trying to put you off writing about something then that’s the very thing you should be focusing on. Nothing should be off-limits so go with your gut instinct. Everybody knows by now, it’s the books they want to burn and the people they are keen to censor that you should seek out. That’s where the inconvenient truths live. Success!🙂👍
If good old common sense is ‘far’ right..what is considered just right?
I’m bewildered by ordinary people now…like some of Jack’s teachers..they sound like they’re indoctrinating the kids rather than teaching them…what is wrong with them?
I’m becoming convinced there’s something in the water..(does that make me far-right? LOL)!
Anyhow Jack..keep questioning everything…you give us all hope for the future, I’m sure you are not alone….
No gummy, you’re far out, not far right! 😉 Cripes have you seen this? I wonder when non-Twitter account peeps will get access once more. Pain in the arse as there’s so much worth sharing. Just another day in Europe, Spain this time, with an ”illegal migrant” attacking people with a knife at a kids’ sport event. Shame there’s no deets as yet but I hope no-one was seriously injured.
https://twitter.com/JimFergusonUK/status/1676183907006283776
…horrible…but you know what they’ll say..lessons will be learned
…but they won’t….
If a “far right” exists it is so small I have not seen it.
Presumably the gradings of politrics in the minds of Jack’s teachers runs from Normal, Centre Right, Right Wing and Far Right. I suspect most who post on this and compatible sites view it differently. For us it runs Authoritarian Left, Left Wing, Centre Left, Moderate, Libertarian and [actually there is no one that matters at this end].
It’s a war between people who want to live and let live, to get on with their lives with minimal interference from others, as long as they do not directly harm others, and people who want to stick their nose in your private business, or applaud the state or other parties when they stick their nose in your private business.
Joel Smalley looking at U.S data to see if the death jabs saved any lives. I think we know how this theme goes by now;
”Nevertheless, in the nine months since July 2021, when the “vaccine” is alleged to have been effective, there is exactly the same amount of excess death as there was in the nine months fifty-five weeks before, when there was no “vaccine”.
So, if there is no decrease in excess mortality, it is inconceivable that any lives could have been saved. Unless, of course, there is a legitimate reason why deaths might have otherwise been higher in that period?”
https://metatron.substack.com/p/the-covid-vaccines-saved-millions
Can someone define “far left” and “far right”, because I have no idea of what they actually mean. Except for the hint that “far right” is always something bad, no article ever seems to clarify the terms. And most allegedly “far right” opinions seem more based on facts rather than wishful thinking and spin.
Nice to hear that “conspiracy theories” have hit PSHE lessons; given that most seem to have come true over the last couple of years, it would seem that conspiracy theorists are just better informed than most of the population! Your summary indicates that the lesson being taught is actually “if you question anything you are a far right terrorist”. Eastern Europeans lived with this type of sh!te for nigh on 50 years, it should not be happening in the UK.
I won’t attempt a definition, but the problem with the term “far right” is that it’s historically inaccurate. The National Socialist German Workers’ Party (the Nazi Party) were of course socialists, and their policies were socialist but with strong ethno-nationalist roots – and that’s generally what people mean when they say “far-right”. There was a debate how socialist the Nazis were in the Telegraph a few years back.
If it is so difficult to define, how come the term is bandied about so much? I’m trying to get clarification of the principles of left wing and right wing politicians (if indeed they have any), ie the intentions by which they would govern the country.
Or is the term used simply to denigrate any opinions not in line with the approved narrative, to be bandied about by the useful idiots, with a hint of slippery slope to genocide?
It doesn’t make sense because there isn’t only 1 axis of opinion.
You could extend it to 2: markets or command and social conservatism or social liberalism, but though that does a much better job it’s still simplistic.
I suspect reducing everything to one axis of opinion is, to a large degree, the intention. Doing so suppresses debate far more effectively than simply pushing an accepted narrative, because it creates the illusion of free debate when in fact that debate contained to a small range of allowed views on an artificial one-dimensional spectrum. It also serves to polarise people, into left and right, such that they fight against each other and are easier to control. Communist dictatorships, such as in China and formerly in the Soviet Union, justify themselves in terms of the struggle against Fascism. Fascist dictatorships, such as Nazi Germany, justify themselves in terms of the struggle against Communism. Although both are only-subtly different brands of the same Totalitarian Hell on Earth, they are presented as polar opposites to suppress discussion of other systems of government or the notion that maybe the same interests are controlling both.
Political buzz-words are not intended to have a meaning, but to produce a reflex hatred.
In another, though related, field, consider the word “Fundamentalist.” In origin, it described a particular biblically conservative Christian viewpoint, but it gradually became simply a term of abuse for anyone more religiously “conservative” than the speaker. The philosopher Alvin Plantinga has argued that its actual meaning nowadays is “stupid sumbitch.”
It’s in that general sense it was applied to “Muslim Fundamentalists” who have no similarity whatsoever to supporters of the “new statement of the fundamentals of Christianity” published in the 1910s to combat liberalism, nor even with early Islam. But the label serves the double purpose of using one unnuanced prejudice to create another, and then using the second to brand the original Christian Fundamentalists as equally terroristic – which is seen in US Democrat targeting of Evangelical parents as “domestic terrorists.”
So you won’t get a better working definition of “Far Right” than “stupid sumbitch,” and you may notice that this is also an exact synonym for “racist,” “white supremacist,” “puritan,” “bourgeois” [archaic Marxist usage], “[any]phobe,” and many more terms somehow exempt from the “hate speech” laws (“hate speech” being defined a “anything stupid sumbitches say.”)
All these terms originally have useful individual meanings covering both very good and very bad people, but once converted to buzz-words, it’s safe to say they are describing good people, because using buzz-words is, itself, a sign of moral shortcoming.
I hope that’s an adequate explanation!
Why do we have to have this again? The NSDAP was socialist in the sense of the original socialism, which was about forming societies (that’s where the social came from) for the improvements of the lifes of factory workers. Hitler considered finding answers to the so-called social question (soziale Frage) a core issue in order to reconcile working class people in towns with the German nation state. This is zero relations to the Marxist ideology the German socialists rethorically adopted towards the end of the 19th century and even less to the practial policies they implemented instead as soon as they got the chance to. These were basicially We must rule! and anything else is – at best – secondary to that.
The modern definition of far right is that it’s essentially a meaningless label members of the chattering classes like to stick onto people opposing anything they are proposing. It’s really nothing but a guilty by association smear supposed to delegitimize opposition based on the notion that the porkressive left is always absolutely right on everything and because of this, anybody who doesn’t share any of the at times seriousy extreme (Nut Zero) or seriously silly (the claim that man can becom women and vice versa) opinions is therefore part of the forces of evil and a enemy of all mankind.
My personal political view is that politics is not linear but is circular. At the top is a balanced, reasonable, realistic, people based approach, you can go anti-clockwise down the left hand side or clockwise round the right hand side but either way if you go too far you end at the bottom with tyranny, repression, immiseration of the people and a lack of humanity.
Yes…pretty much what I was asking….It would appear that absolutely anything that goes against the current agenda is far-right….so if you think XX and XY chromosomes define whether you are, physically, a man or a woman, that is a far-right view….
I think we all know now that being neutral or disagreeing with the prevailing agendas, whether that’s on gender, net zero..anything …. is not allowed. You have to agree or you are far right…..
I don’t think any real discussion on politics or any attempt at a definition, historically or otherwise changes the reality of the modern construction and the way it is now used….
The original definition, coming from the revolutionary French national assembly, was that the group seated on the right of it advocated for more conservative policies and specifically, for keeping a constitutionalist monarchy in place. Those sitting on the left favoured a radical transformation of all of society and a democratic republic.
Every day’s a school day! The unknown origin was particularly bugging me, along with the missing definitions, but now I have a framework.
Of course, much like the use of “anti-vaxxer”, nowadays the terms are used in ignorance by those who just want to throw insults rather than recognise and address real issues.
And the word became the thing…..as has been previously discussed, give it a name and it becomes a legitimate “thing”, and you propagandise the name to market whatever it is you want the masses to believe.
Thanks all for your explanations, all this political and philosophical stuff bored me rigid as a student, but am now finding it is essential to understand how the political classes got us into this mess. I can ponder these weighty issues whilst tidying the barn, sharpening the pitchforks etc.
Well this is very interesting and speaks volumes. A fundraiser set up to support the family of the police officer who shot the teenager in France stands at 1.47 million euros vs the fundraiser for the victim’s family which stands at 352,000 euros. That’s quite the contrast.
https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230704-fundraiser-for-officer-who-shot-nahel-outstrips-donations-to-victim-s-family
” However, I received an email responding to an article, in which it was said I should listen to the advice of the careers advisor. ”
You should report both the career advisor and the sender of the email. Teachers should NOT be questioning opinions you hold or trying to suppress those opinions.
Report to whom? Report to a headmaster now and, if only to prevent staff trouble, it’s a suspension.
The only advice I would presume to give this lad would be never, ever, listen to careers advisors. A more clueless, useless set of people it would be difficult to find.
Whenever I’ve taken a wrong path in life and reached a dead-end – both as a youngster and as an adult at a turning point, it has been due to the guidance of a careers advisor.
My children would never discuss politics if they could avoid it in case it emerged I was an activist in UKIP. Much more recently they have told me they do not discuss political questions in the school and Universities where they teach because the preponderance of teachers are vocal about their left wing views.
I have raised gender issues teaching with my local Conservative County Council. County Counc Do ils run schoopls. He gave me some useful in formation but did not engage with the isues and said theyr were down to either the school or the Government.
The control of all tax payer funded institutions and many private businesses and professional institutes has been captured by the left. This has gone on apace in the time since Cameron-Clegg ran the government. Do not expect any correction before the next GE.
Jack, you are a natural untethered thinker. Don’t let anyone try to tie you down. The signs of incoming flak show you’re on the right track. Keep it up.
Well Jack …. now that your Career Teacher and other teachers have “raised their concerns” in this manner, I’m afraid you CAN’T stop writing the opinion pieces you want to write.
If you did that you would be giving into their intimidation tactics and that is precisely what they want to achieve.
So …. I look forward to the next article.
Two things come to mind. Firstly, what does any Career Teacher know about the world of work outside their own, narrow field of experience? Secondly, make sure you don’t use the school’s email account as I’m sure the terms of use will restrict any views they don’t agree with.
Every best wish for your future.
Well done Jack. Keep up the good work. We need more young people like you.
“Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings”!
It is preposterous that schools are setting out to deliberately indoctrinate our children and young people. The way in which they were treated during the pandemic is a very clear indication of the disdain and disinterest of the “powers that be” in the welfare of the younger generation.
Keep up the writing Jack. Hopefully other youngsters will be brave enough to follow your lead.
….you have to wonder what the ‘higher powers’ and their minions expect this to turn out like?
Everything that makes being human wonderful seems to be off the menu now…
I suspect once they get A.I up and running the next ‘enforced doses’ will be fatal to us all…but they will live in a dreadful parody of a world….
Excellent!
Keep making the teachers looking ignorant – and resisting their indoctrination.
Better question: Why are scores of so-called teachers bullying and threatening me because I don’t always agree with the general political opinions the teacher’s union advocates?
And the answer is: They would also prefer to make you wear a so-called face covering for the own, perceived benefit in perpetuity and would love to force you to do a nasal swab twice or thrice per day. These people may sit on teacher positions but they really aren’t. They’re would-be politicians who never managed to break into real politics.
Right wing views are dangerous – dangerous to their activism.
The very quick answer is that Education has been hijacked by the Liberal Progressives who don’t like you having a choice since you might not choose to be one of them.
The quicker answer is that bonkers Leftist views can only succeed if they are unchallenged.
People do challenge it but powerful forces that insist eg that our children should all go to the same toilet can and do shut down debate. GB News, one of the only channels to question leftist ideologies being imposed on us have their advertisers harassed and intimidated for daring to want to advertise on the channel.
Much of the argument for 9/11 being an inside job comes from basic high-school physics rather than politics, ‘right wing’ or otherwise: buildings do not collapse in free-fall unless they are undergoing controlled demolition. As the authorities have been so found of saying the last three years, Follow The Science: https://youtu.be/_nyogTsrsgI, https://youtu.be/6fsvwnRVVyY, https://youtu.be/stOQ5Vl9d0k.