As is always the case with the denizens of the radical left, they always end up telling you exactly what their final solution is if you just pay attention to what they actually say. Yesterday, MailOnLine.com carried a story detailing the fact that “scientists” at England’s University of Leeds have done exactly that in a newly-published “study.”

Where elite climate cultists want to take us; back to the past when we were dependent on government (them) for the basics of human life.

Here’s how the story starts:

Climate change could be tackled with the help of a World War II-style rationing of petrol, meat and the energy people use in their homes, UK scientists say.

They claim that this would help countries to slash their greenhouse gas emissions ‘rapidly and fairly’.

Researchers from the University of Leeds also said that governments could restrict the number of long-haul flights people make in a year or ‘limit the amount of petrol one can buy in a month’.

They said that previous schemes put forward as a way to fight global warming – such as carbon taxes or carbon trading schemes – would not work because they favoured the wealthy, who would effectively be able to buy the right to pollute.

The experts also made a comparison with the need to limit certain goods as they grew scarce in the 1940s, adding that trying to achieve this by raising taxes was rejected at the time because ‘the impact of tax rises would be slow and inequitable.’

You get that? The logic here is that a system of rationing of certain carbon-producing goods will be not just more efficient than the schemes created thus far by the wealthy elites of the world, but also more “equitable,” impacting everyone equally.

Sure. You betcha. Right. Uh-huh. Please, tell me more.

Even better, these “scientists” claim, the people of Britain really enjoyed the rationing system they suffered under during WWII, and for 9 years thereafter.

No really, they actually say this:

But rationing in Britain during the war was widely accepted, the authors wrote in their paper.

‘As long as there was scarcity, rationing was accepted, even welcomed or demanded,’ they said. [emphasis added]

The Brits didn’t just tolerate rationing, you see – they enjoyed it, nay, even demanded it!

You just cannot make this stuff up, folks. Never in a million billion years.

But at Leeds U., this kind of thinking is purely mainstream among the staff climate “scientists.” It was Leeds researchers who, in the summer of 2021, published a paper posing a similar final solution, only in softer language designed to disguise the true fascist/authoritarian nature of the plan.

I wrote about it in September, 2021. Here’s an excerpt from that story:

Led by sustainability researcher Jefim Vogel, this new study, titled “Socio-economic conditions for satisfying human needs at low energy use: An international analysis of social provisioning,” posits that climate targets being laid out by the IPCC, the Paris Accords and other international bodies cannot be met by mere expansion of renewables and EVs alone.

The authors find that meeting those goals will further require severe “social provisioning,” which is just a softer-language term for “forced government rationing.”

So, what do they propose to be rationed by your friendly government bureaucrats?

• Start with your living space, where they propose that a family of 4 should have no more than 640 square feet. That should be no problem, right?
• Or how about your daily energy usage? These Leeds people propose that you be forced to limit your annual energy use to no more than the average Bolivian currently uses, or 7,500 kWh per person. That’s less than 20% of what the average Texan currently uses.
• Then there’s transportation. They propose transportation miles for each person should be limited to no more than 3,000 to 10,000 miles per year, which is sure going to put a major crimp into the private jet usage of all those attendees of the various global “climate” conferences each year. But of course, the elites among us would surely find a way to exempt themselves from any such restrictions since their needs are … well, more important than yours.

I concluded that piece with this statement: That, my friends, is the climate change movement’s latest narrative, and if you think these people will just come to their senses and leave you alone, well, you will soon have another think coming.

That still stands, obviously.

Bottom Line: It is most likely no accident that the publication of this latest bit of evil advocacy from Leeds comes on the heels of the book published a week ago under the name of climate alarmism’s poster child, Greta Thunberg. The thesis posed by the Leeds “scientists” dovetails almost to the word with the assessment by Thunberg’s ghost writer that the only way to prevent 2 degrees of planetary warming over the next 80 years is to utterly destroy modern life as we have come to know it.

Hey, maybe Greta’s ghost writer works at Leeds. Seems probable.

This article originally appeared at the excellent Energy Transition Absurdities (subscribe today!) and is reposted here with the permission of the author.