Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing so-called carbon passports" now. It has been interesting to watch roughly going on a half-decade now, watching all of these sort of technocratic attempts from international opinion makers or whatever you want to call them coming up with these ideas about how we need all these different kinds of passports and travel documentation, that quite honestly we have never needed before and don't make any sense to me whatsoever. So let's just dig into it here. 

I thought of making this video after reading a recent article from CNN so edition.cnn.com under the title: It's time to limit how often we can travel abroad - ’carbon passports' may be the answer. First of all I am so tired of this in the media where they just present a premise, where it is just "it's time to limit how often we travel abroad?" Who said? Who came up with that idea? Why? I am tired of this just constant "this is a given!" No, it is not a given; nobody thinks it is time we limit often we travel abroad. So under the sub-headline: What is a carbon passport? Quoting directly: "The idea of a carbon passport centers on each traveler being assigned a yearly carbon allowance that they cannot exceed. These allowances can then "ration" travel." Quoting further: "This concept may seem extreme but the idea of personal carbon allowance is not new." Now they go into, and then they go into further just gobbledygook about all of this but I like the methodology of the sort of delivering the narrative on this where they say: "this concept may seem extreme but the idea of personal carbon allowances is not new." Well there are a lot of old ideas that are terrible: Marxism is one of them; the Tenants of National Socialism, and 1930s Germany. Those are old ideas. Does that make them good? I mean come on, what does that mean? Then meanwhile, this whole notion that we need to be assigned a "yearly carbon allowance"? Why? No one has been able to explain to me the "science" behind all of this talk. Nobody has ever been able to explain to me why exhaling a trace gas in the form of carbon dioxide is somehow in and of itself detrimental to life on earth as we know it. In fact it seems to be the antithesis of that because plants breathe what we exhale and they exhale what we breathe. So it seems to be, and not to get too "Disney" on you here, in The Lion King it is kind of the Circle of Life is my understanding. 

Meanwhile, aren't all humans made of carbon and all life on the planet derived from carbon? So to have a "carbon allowance", what does that mean? We are supposed to be bagged and tagged like some kind of living serfs or something. All of this is just nonsensical. Then when you read this stuff, it's like something, truly - I remember reading, there's a book that is on this back shelf called Stasiland; I have also read a number of books over the years about the former Soviet Union and I actually got to go to Russia in '99 and talk to people who had actually lived through it and seen sort of vestiges of it and everything, this is the kind of nonsense that leads to those kind of systems. This isn't helpful to anyone and I am sure there's some, for lack of a better term, grift out there where somebody is going to be making money off this. I am here to tell you coming off the COVID situation, there is money in totalitarian tyranny. When people have to pay to do every little thing in their life, there's a lot of money to be made, but does that mean that's a good system? No, by no stretch of the imagination does it mean it is a good system. Look, at the end of the day and this is fully enshrined in not only the American founding documents where there's a right to travel enshrined therein, but also under the UN. The UN Charter of Human Rights notes a right to travel. It doesn't say a right to travel unless you are a carbon-based life form or whatever premise they are using to go ahead and say that this new nonsense has to be imposed upon all of us hoi polloi out here in the world because God knows we have to have our "travel ration" because we are carbon life forms or whatever. 

Again at the end of the day, I don't understand the premises of these arguments and the end result is a conclusion that basically leads to more totalitarianism. So at the end of the day, I can't see how in any way it's a good idea to have any kind of 'carbon passport'.