Thanks to ecological trepidations, it becomes easy to put in place increasingly coercive and increasingly violent policies as the injunctions increasingly encroach on the fundamental freedoms of individuals. The latter having the nerve to exist and not always agree, it will therefore be necessary to crush them (including nevertheless) in order to guarantee that the small ecological projects are set up without obstacles.

Thus, in the Netherlands and despite such growing discontent as evoked in a biased way by a press at the appalling level of propaganda, the idea of ​​eliminating a major part of small and medium-sized agricultural holdings continues to gain ground. The protests do not change anything: democracy, a river that is played only when it comes to finding pretexts to increase taxes or go to war, no longer interests anyone here.

In France, if the words are translated, the music remains the same: gently, and without much discretion, the first seeds of a forced agricultural decrease are planted by a Court of Auditors which has become the astonishing transmission belt of the Far East. Macronian Center. For her, it's obvious, we must “define and make public a strategy for reducing the cattle herd”.

It is not a question of nitrogen pollution (the stupid excuse used by the excited Batavians) but rather the methane emissions of cattle, another idiocy proudly put forward by the enraged French to pass their nonsense. The argument is disarmingly stupid, but it is nevertheless this: the climate is warming up, it is therefore the fault of human activities, it is therefore because of its consumption of meat, it is therefore because the cattle fart on methane, so it is necessary to reduce the herd (by half, let's say, because it is an easy ratio to understand).

Do not look in the “therefore” for any logic, any reasoning. It is the environmental Science™ that speaks, therefore the Truth™.

read the article