The Club of Rome and the Great Reset

The real history of anti-industry green agendas.

A Great Reset by Klaus Schwab and evil villains in Switzerland, accused of fabricating climate change for greater governmental control, is propaganda invented by industry in order to discredit climate science and create doubt about the crisis in the public’s mind. It’s from the same play book as Bush’s 1980s Chief of Staff, John Sununu, who claimed that there was a socialist conspiracy among scientists, particularly the Club of Rome, that plotted to destroy industry.

According to Nathaniel Rich, author of the book above, it all began 1989. Sununu disliked the prominence of scientists, particularly those pointing out the effect of greenhouse gases on rising temperatures (he called it ‘technical poppycock’) and believed, that since the end of WW2, these scientists were involved in a socialist conspiracy.

Chief of Staff Sununu particularly disliked Paul Erlich’s ‘Population Bomb’ (unavailable so I can’t comment) as well as the Club of Rome (just like Yuval Noah Harai you’ve been brainwashed into thinking that they are evil personified) (and yes they’re funded by an industry giant; Rockefeller: what could that be all about do you think?) who were a group of scientists, industrialists and economists who noted that finite planetary resources would run out if capitalist expansion continued unabated. NB I didn’t think that resources being finite could be argued with: but I’ve been proved wrong, oil is allegedly self replenishing!

The Club of Rome were believed to be anti-growth and anti-industry. However, as time went on both its funder, Rockefeller, and industry realised that population wasn’t a problem at all and that the oil wasn’t running out. Fast forward to today they and their colleagues in Saudi Arabia are doing their level best to get Africa ‘addicted to oil’. However a vague understanding of the history of the Club of Rome is still used to create fear of an anti-industry ‘green agenda’.

In the 1980s the oil industry knew all about pollution and climate change, it’s impossible to deny that. So the industry set about creating doubt in the public’s mind and made sure that they also controlled climate scientists and environmentalists.

Rockefeller controlled both sides of the argument by funding the Club of Rome. From the Spouter; ‘They knew that if they could control both sides of the conversation, they could control the complex system of the discourse and stabilize it into a self-regulating system that maintained their status quo by just making minor adjustments to the relative public positions of the two opponents, Industry and Environmentalists. And so, Rockefeller started writing grants.’

Both Sununu’s hated ‘socilist conspiracy’ of the Club of Rome and the annoying Just Stop Oil (funded by Getty oil) are therefore funded and controlled by industry.

From the Spouter ‘For the Club of Rome, planetary boundaries, limits, and thresholds all exist, but the substance that crosses them is not really pollution—that was the focus of Carson’s environmentalist movement. That concern needed to be displaced by the threat of resource depletion. The Club of Rome is worried that the oil might run out some day, not that we will poison or insulate our animal selves to death first, smothering ourselves in carbon. But now we know what will win that race.’ If I’ve lost you; the climate crisis will get us before the oil runs out; though reaching peak oil, when extraction costs exceed profits, which will happen soon if not reached already, will cause some serious issues.

Back to Sununu in the 1980S: and entering stage left the two Jameses; James Lovelock and James Hansen. James Locklock worked for both Shell and Dupont. He claimed that the earth could self heal from humanities actions ‘because Gaia will “learn to cope.”

From the Spouter: ‘That was borne out of Lovelock’s study of dimethyl sulfide, which is the visible component of petroleum smog. Smog was exerting a measurable cooling effect in its local climate that temporarily overpowered the early signals of global warming. In tracing dimethyl sulfide in the marine environment, Lovelock found that certain types of algae emit it. Therefore, not all the dimethyl sulfide in the world could be attributed to the products of his employer; the chemical was a natural component of life which could be metabolized by the earth system.

‘Lovelock publicly claimed credit for healing the ozone hole, since he had invented the mass spectrometer, the instrument that scientists used to detect and measure CFCs in the atmosphere. This helped everyone forget that he had testified and strategized for duPont. I don’t know if he ever argued that he had to work with duPont to get them to do the right thing. Nonetheless, the ozone hole was key victory to legitimize the moderate-capitalist wing of the environmentalist movement, consolidating its reach within the machinery of American Empire—the Military-Industrial- Complex.

‘This was the ascendant corporate environmentalism that received the 1988 hearings on global warming at which James Hansen become famous. Carbon is fundamental to profit-seeking enterprise in a way that CFCs are not. The movement as it existed in the late 80s was entirely unable to deal with this reality. Right when humanity needed it most, the environmentalist movement was utterly incapable of putting up a meaningful resistance to imperialism.’

Now returning back to see what happened to Sununu. He managed to scupper any policy changes from the US government to limit carbon emissions. All governments wanted to pay lip service and be seen to be doing something, while not imposing any ‘draconian’ measures themselves. If political commitment had existed in the 80s renewables could have replaced oil. Carbon emissions would have been significantly reduced at the beginning of the 80s and climate change greatly reduced.

Sununu resigned in 1991 after being caught taking a military aircraft to a dental appointment in New Hampshire. The genius of political climate denialism is that they make us believe that they themselves believe what they’re saying which, with exception of Sununu, author Rich doesn’t accept. The players admit human impact but that’s it’s not understood, it’s not so bad, that we have time or technology to save us, but that any action to harm industry and the economy must be avoided. However, they all know that climate change is a real and present threat.

In the present day Klaus Schwab Square Pants, who is flattered and playing up to his role as a super villain, though really he’s just an old man behind a curtain, plus his little club of rich industrialists, have also been painted into the story. The WEF have played along with the fairytale by writing books about depopulation and the ‘you will own nothing and be happy’ lark. They actually want us to keep consuming and using the industries that made them rich. They do not want increased regulation. They are not anti-growth. But they serve to turn degrowth, equality, sustainability and ecosocialism into dirty words.

Yes, there is overwhelming climate crisis consensus, the more specialist a scientist is in climate, the more consensus, and a survey sent to non climate scientists of whom 31,000, a small percentage, signed saying they didn’t believe it, is neither here nor there. A very few papers in the 1970s postulated that temperatures might cool but the overwhelming majority showed warming; which have now been corroborated with observations.

And yes political and industrial elites (themselves responsible for 25% of emissions) continue to destroy lives by flying around the world pretending to be trying to save them.

Big oil and gas are actually delighted that the polar ice caps are melting (the ice contributes to cooling by reflecting the sun so it melting leads to yet more warming) as this allows greater access to the billions of tonnes of oil and gas underneath it. The US (with Sweden and Finland joining NATO) is in a race with Russia and China to claim it.

Update 2025- Trump wants to colonise Greenland and Canada and to take over choke points (some of which are already partially owned by BlackRock) to control the shipping lanes and resources as the Arctic ice rapidly melts; as they knew it would.

What about the players in the pandemic? Do Baric, Daszak, Drosten and Fauci believe there was a virus? Absolutely not. But their motivation was to impose draconian measures as in this case it would benefit, not harm, their own interests and those of the pharma industry, particularly Pfizer. Politicians went along this time, as they always do what industry says, and are also shareholders in it.

And in contrast to Fergusons ridiculous predictions, which he himself ignored and didn’t believe in, James Hansen’s predictions from 1988, which he did believe in, have come to pass. Scenario A shows no reduction, B shows some reduction in carbon dioxide levels and C shows complete reduction such that temperatures ceased to rise in 2000. When the averages of all the models from other institutions are taken there is even greater accuracy. Observed temperatures follow the predictions made for some changes in human behaviour.

Hansen points out that the model also predicts rain. Water evaporates with increased warming. The phrases climate change and global warming have been used interchangeably since the 1960s. The term climate change is used more often now because it’s more accurate, not because global warming isn’t happening.

The impact of human activity is, of course, not limited to the climate. There are also the issues of the sixth mass species extinction, ecosystem fragility, air quality, landfill, dead and polluted oceans, loss of pollinators, soil infertility and inequality.

Given the lucky latitudes and how climate change will disproportionally affect those with black or brown skin and those living in the global south, ignoring the evidence and continuing with our consumption will actually be a way to depopulate the planet in a certain way. Many people will try to migrate north. Good luck with that. The UK is already ‘stopping the boats’ (which have increaed in proportion to other routes though applications for asylum have decreased from 2001). Here is a model of which areas of the planet will be the most suitable for human life in 2070 if we continue with present emissions.

Millions (or rather billions, it is estimated that there will be about 1.2 billion climate refugees over the next 30 years) who have had almost nothing to do with causing climate change, will starve, or they will die trying to reach the lucky latitudes or they will be killed once they get there. The continued promotion of burning fossil fuels and animal agriculture is achieved with propaganda that there is an evil socialist agenda to stop us using oil, to buy up land, cull animals (which increases price and demand) and take away our right to eat animal products. The posting of media with the same old climate denial nonsense that causes doubt in the undiscerning increases climate change and supports centralised power, imperialism and industry profits and makes the depopulation of people who aren’t white scenario much more likely.

The fate of the suitability of earth for humans to live on ‘has nothing to do with the planet’s tolerance for higher temperatures and everything to do with our species ‘tolerance for self-delusion.’

🐒