A New Relationship with Nature”: Unpacking the Euphemism for Climatological Warfare

Let’s analyse “deep transformation that Scwab mentioned in his introductory remarks. He says that there is a need to move into a green world that’s not just about climate change, but about a “new relationship with nature — preserving our oceans, preserving our soil, preserving our forests”. Again, on the surface, this sounds like your standard boilerplate climate change proponent talk. However, when we consider this with recent context and the irony that this Annual Meeting of the Global Future Councils is taking place in Dubai; I would like to highlight critical issues.
First, the WEF’s modus operandi includes defining a problem that nations and private cooperation must formulate policies and innovations to address. For instance, early this year when misinformation was outlined as the biggest threat – even surpassing climate change, we saw escalations in the war on free speech: from laws aimed at criminalising or banning X, to extreme censorship in the UK, Pavel Durov’s arrest, to the Murthy v Missouri case in the US where the SCOTUS failed to support a preliminary injunction to cease the censorship efforts of the Biden-Harris administration, and more.
And so, when Shwab once again defines climate change as a critical issue, there is already a plan to accelerate efforts at weaponising laws and innovations in favour of this agenda, even at the expense of civilisation. And this is where climatological warfare comes in. For some context: people like Scwab care about control – this is why he sees sovereignty and multipolarity as “unstable”. When the COVID plandemic was exposed for being a hoax, and thus failed as an avenue for control, the next plan was climate change. There were a number of actors co-opted in this plan, among them being the media. We know all of this, because one of them was caught on tape discussing this.
But, since climate change is a hoax, and there, therefore, cannot be conclusive evidence of their alarmist claims, those looking to use it as an avenue for control are not only manufacturing evidence for their claims, but they are also engaged in climatological warfare – although certainly not for the first time. This is primarily being done through the use of climate engineering, which at inception was born out of a desire to manipulate weather as a weapon in world war 2.
Whistleblowers and former participants have come out to discuss this information, some of it is public knowledge because it was too big to hide, like the ‘Operation Popeye’ in Brazil. But, the reason that climate engineering amounts to climatological warfare is because climate engineering is the principal man-made cause of devastating weather events.
However, it is once again ironic that this sentiment was shared in Dubai. The United Arab Emirates was one of the first countries in the Persian Gulf region to use cloud seeding technology, which is a form of climate engineering. UAE scientists were said to use cloud seeding technology to supplement the country’s water insecurity, which stems from the extremely hot climate; and the cloud-seeding program was initiated in the late 1990s. However, the floods in Dubai in April this year, were on the most significant warnings of cloud seeding – despite the fact that people tried to dismiss the use of cloud seeding in Dubai as a conspiracy theory.
All of this is to say that we ought to once again see beyond the euphemistic statement of “a new relationship with nature”. In fact, when Shwab adds that this new relationship is about “preserving our oceans, preserving our soil, preserving our forests”, let it not be lost on you that the enjoyment of the earth by humans was not mentioned. Climate change advocates tend to see the preservation of the earth as necessitating significant restrictions on human life.
Finally, Schwab spoke about a move from the “Industrial World” into the “Intelligent World”. This is also a euphemistic transhumanist sentiment. First, if he proposes moving into a WEF-imagined intelligent world, it should be of concern that he does not detail who gets to programme the intelligence that would overwhelmingly be used, even to determine government policy and business direction. Secondly, the relationship between artificial intelligence and transhumanism must not be missed when it comes to the WEF, because they also see technology as an avenue for control. In fact, in the case of transhumanism, it is not about mere human augmentation. It is about an imagined society where technology is overwhelmingly co-opted into everyday life, and humans are one of the connected elements of this world. It is not.
Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso