Sheridan, the LinkedInenergy philosopher, has authored another worthy post on the subject of whether or not the UK, run amok on so many levels (e.g., free speech, immigration, grooming gangs, climate) under successive uniparty governments, can yet be saved. Here are his thoughts on that:
The Editorial Board of the UK Telegraph writes, after hosting an international climate change summit, a defiant Ed Miliband faced down domestic critics of his net zero policies.
“They will not shut up, I am sure, (but) they need to know this Government is not for bending…this Government is standing firm. If they want to fight about this, bring it on.”
Well, his challenge has been taken up by none other than Sir Tony Blair, the former Labour prime minister, who has called for a radical “reset” of the Government’s green agenda. He said it was wrong that people were “being asked to make financial sacrifices and changes in lifestyle when they know that their impact on global emissions is minimal”.
.
Miliband has shown himself unprepared to countenance any suggestion that his efforts to decarbonise the grid within five years might be reckless. In the aftermath of the blackout in Spain and Portugal, the shift to renewables needs to be approached with far greater caution. Sir Tony said politicians must face the “inconvenient facts” which show that any strategy based on phasing out fossil fuels was “doomed to fail.”
He added, “Present policy solutions are inadequate and, worse, are distorting the debate into a quest for a climate platform that is unrealistic and therefore unworkable.” Agreed. When will the Prime Minister wake up and see the harm this is causing, not least to his own Government?
Our Take 1: Honestly, it boggles the mind how oblivious current British political leaders are to their nation’s worsening plight. Each energy policy decision and adjustment seems as wrongheaded as the last. It’s like watching an endless parade of flightless dodos leap off the cliffs of net-zero, only to perish on the rocks of economic reality below.
Our Take 2: Fingers crossed Blair’s admonishments sink in. The UK is fast running out of time.
Sheridan correctly sums the energy situation, I think, but I’m not so sure our English cousins have not already run out of time unless they get new leadership. The problem is that new elections are still years away and, even then, a Nigel Farage is not going to rock the boat like Trump has. The West is but a shadow of its former self and paralyzed by philosophies that have invaded it from the inside.
A recent post in TCW, a blog published in the UK, addresses the underlying problem, which is that the West has fallen prey to the “sustainability” trap, which, at root, is the false idea that there are too many of us and our elites need to do something about it.
Despite the fact that nearly the entire world is now in the midst of a demographic implosion, the ruling class is still obsessed with overpopulation, a problem that only exists in their own mind. They have also invented theories to back it up, one of them being “The Tragedy of the Commons,” which amounts to the thought of a fellow named Garrett Hardin, A Club of Rome sort of fellow who was seeking a way to justify population control.
Here are a few excerpts from the TCW post:
The Tragedy of the Commons arguably provided not only the framework by which the economic rationale for sustainable development emerged blinking into the policy world, but also as a unique insight into the underlying motivations and hidden moral perspectives behind sustainable development. The concept in simple terms describes a (theoretical) situation where individuals, acting independently and rationally according to their self-interest, deplete a shared resource, even though it is detrimental to everyone involved…
The Tragedy of the Commons was written primarily as a philosophical treatise on what would happen if humans continued to have unrestricted access to ‘the global commons.’ According to Hardin, the global commons constitute the earth’s shared natural resources, the seas and oceans, the atmosphere and, perhaps more hypothetically, Antarctica and outer space…
Elaborating further on the implications of this for ‘stewardship of the planet’, Hardin suggested that it was a folly to trust people to self-regulate consumer habits or their impacts on the planet’s biosphere. Hardin warned that an innate tendency for over-consumption would eventually incur a shared welfare loss and would eventually lead to an ever-spiralling degradation of the global commons – both as public goods and of themselves. Even if some individuals were able to demonstrate restraint, he reasoned, others would simply consume or take more…
For Hardin, population growth was never a passive or neutral process, largely because he understood this as an unmitigated increase in the ‘units of selfishness’ that characterise the human condition…
Distrust of the masses amongst the elite, expressed by Hardin and other prominent figures, has been an open secret through the ages. Thomas Malthus was the first openly to state fears around growing population and diminishing resources. Others, such as H G Wells and George Bernard Shaw, were never shy in offering their opinions on this subject. Boris Johnson followed suit in 2007 with the dramatic statement:
‘Whatever it may now be conventional to say, that single biggest challenge is not global warming. That is a secondary challenge. The primary challenge facing our species is the reproduction of our species itself. Depending on how fast you read, the population of the planet is growing with every word that skitters beneath your eyeball. There are more than 211,000 people being added every day, and a population the size of Germany every year.’
Sustainable development has been sold as a collective environmental ideal for mankind to strive for. Whether it was his intention or not, Hardin flagged up the real motivations of those pushing this now universally embedded agenda: population control. It is the belief that there are too many people on the planet, the majority of whom are selfish, individually motivated, and concerned with satisfying excessive wants and needs that ultimately endanger the planet. The irony of this is that it is the underlying philosophy of sustainable development that, interfering with natural checks and balances, is killing us.
It’s specifically killing the UK, of course, and we see it in what Sheridan points out about the Madman Milliband, who is on a holy secular crusade that makes no sense to anyone but fellow elites.
So, on April 28th, Spain celebrated its historic first day of energy produced entirely by renewable energy via a nationwide outage and blackouts that shut down the internet and transport. Houses, offices, trains, traffic lights and even the Madrid open tennis tournament were without power. MSM tried to blame hackers, with lower seeded tennis players presumably high on list of suspects. The government blamed ‘unexpected atmospheric challenges’, which is political speak for nighttime. This was later corrected to the equally vague ‘induced atmospheric vibration’. Surely a day completely reliant on renewables followed by a national power cut is coincidence? Spain has convened experts, with even King Felipe VI chairing a national security meeting.
.
Meanwhile, the other day Norwegians awoke not to pastries so sticky that it’s hard to know from which direction to eat them, (although I’m sure they know exactly how to approach), but to the discovery that some self-important British MP had announced they live in a petrostate.
A petrostate is a country whose economy is heavily reliant on the extraction and export of oil or natural gas, as though that’s a bad thing. Besides, Norway has a diverse range of industries, including seafood, forestry, and mining.
It might not have sounded so bad had he not also aligned Norway with dictatorships. The last time Norway had flirted with anything approaching a dictatorship was with the Kalmar Union in 1397, which really involved nothing but some civil agreements over salted sardines and a rather lurid flag of red and yellow that even Mauritius might find distasteful. Mind you, the Kalmar Union, which sounds more like more excuse for regular afternoon teas than a functioning empire, probably meets Ed Miliband’s liberal criteria for dictators.
Miliband increasingly makes announcements apparently fuelled by painful indigestion rather than actual facts. He said bills were rising “because we’re so reliant on fossil fuels, in particular gas… and the markets that determine the price of those fossil fuels are controlled by the decisions of petrostates and dictators”. In his favourite gaslighting mode of communication, he misdirects attention away from where the game really lies, which is in his evangelical dogmatic commitment to Net Zero, while the rest of the world he’s modelling it for laughs, and continues to build economies on cheap coal and self sufficiency, rather than emulating his example.
As Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Miliband’s juggling of energy security and climate change is impossible; if he was Defence Secretary he’d be claiming national security while arguing for bang! flags to drop from the muzzles of the guns. Appointing himself as secretary for climate change is like declaring himself secretary for the weather, although more on that shortly. He’s correct about one thing though, the reason we are reliant of fossil fuels is because they are reliable. To his credit he’s also right about increasing UK electricity bills to the highest in the world. And yes, on his watch. According to Ofgem data, electricity bills for an average household in the UK have increased by 35.5%, from £652 in 2021 to £884 in 2024, according to Ofgem data. Watching Labour argue that when they promised to reduce electricity bills by £300 per year they meant at some indeterminate point in the future, rather than at any time which might be useful to businesses and private customers requires admiration for their ability to obfuscate.
The petrostates and dictators that Miliband refers to are the three major sources of natural gas imports into the UK that keep the country running when there’s no wind or sun. 60% of our piped gas comes from Norway, which they drill from the same North Sea that Labour has shut down and refused fresh licences for UK companies. presumably the gas the Norwegians pull out is more Net Zero compliant than ours, even after the cost of exporting it to the UK; this is paying a farmer for potatoes grown on your land for twice the price it might cost to farm yourself. The next two petrostate and dictatorships are the USA (26%) and Qatar (6%). We’re aware that to most lefties the US is now a dictatorship albeit without the banners hanging along boulevards, dissenters arrests and night curfews, even if it remains a democracy, but hearing the buffoonery from Miliband is laughable. Denmark should be pursuing him through the courts for slander, or simply turn off the gas.
These dictatorships in Miliband’s head sound ominous, but at least they’re not dimming the sun. The latest twist in the UK government’s twisted pursuit for UK Net Zero is to block the sun. It sounds like a particularly rambunctious Danger Mouse episode, but UK scientists at ARIA (Advanced Research and Invention Agency) are to launch outdoor geo-engineering experiments as part of a £50m government-funded programme. It confirms what many (the ones mocked as conspiracy theorists) have already been observing for years – the cross-hatching of chemical trails soon followed by a low chemical haze that lingers for days on end. Plenty of US states are already banning the spraying of reflective particles such as bromium, aluminium and strontium into the atmosphere to block sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface.
Apparently ARIA is an agency built to unlock scientific and technological breakthroughs that benefit everyone. Everyone apart from the sane. Because if we’re so worried about the negative impacts of manmade climate change then why are we now investing money in, erm, manmade climate change. Messing with natural phenomena has been historically explored during the first ten minutes of dystopian science fiction movies in which families lie huddled together in basements of tinned food scared witless. And regardless as to your view on Lee Anderson from Reform, seeing Miliband laughing as he refuses to answer his question on the wisdom of blocking out the sun reveals the only dictator we need to fear is Miliband himself.
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply