Are Oxfordshire ‘Traffic Filters’ a Trial Run for So-Called ‘Climate Lockdowns’? Despite Objection from Officials, All Signs Point to Yes (Opinion)
“Conspiracy theorists” are claiming that the so-called “traffic filters” set to be implemented in Oxfordshire (a county in south-central England) will serve as a test run for “climate lockdowns.” While the council members implementing the filters—which will be enforced with surveillance cameras and fines—are adamant that’s not the case, all signs do indeed point to their ultimately becoming authoritarian means of control that will be abused under the guise of “sustainability.”
Many “conspiracy theorists” are deeply worried about totalitarian control measures that will be implemented on peoples from all nations for the sake of preventing “climate change.” So-called “traffic filters” that are set to be implemented in Oxfordshire, a county in south-central England, are going to be a test run for these measures, they say. But will the highly restrictive and overbearing traffic-control measures actually evolve into tools for “climate lockdowns”? All signs point to yes.
As the Oxford Mail reported in December of last year, the Oxfordshire County Council and Oxford City Council were compelled to post a joint statement online in order to combat viral claims—see immediately above—that with the traffic filters, the county’s officials were, in effect, implementing “climate lockdowns.”
“The traffic filters are not physical barriers of any kind and will not be physical road closures,” the governmental entities wrote in their post. “They are simply traffic cameras that can read number plates.”
Indeed, as OxforshireLive reported, “Contrary to the viral article’s claims, there will be no ‘physical barriers,’ with the restricted zones monitored by Automatic Number Plate Recognition Cameras (ANPRs).” The outlet added that “Up to 100 day passes per year” will be available to residents and businesses affected by the filters, “enabling them to travel through the filters without penalty.”
The outlet went on to explain that residents in Oxford, as well as some areas outside the city, will be able to apply for “permits” that will allow them to drive through the traffic filters “for up to 100 days per year.” Each affected resident will be eligible for a single permit to drive through the filters for 100 days a year, with each affected household limited to a maximum of three permits.
While the council members are adamant that the traffic filters have nothing to do with climate lockdowns, however, all signs point to their being abused in the future as such. Take, for example, the fact that when Oxfordshire residents were asked to comment on the traffic “scheme,” 45% of respondents had something negative to say, while only 7% had something positive to say.
“The traffic/pollution will move to other areas of the city” 1,240 out of the 4,814 respondents said. Seven-hundred-and-sixty-four respondents said that they “Disagree with the schemes/Can’t see benefits.” Four-hundred-and-forty-four respondents even agreed that the “Plan will increase congestion/traffic,” and 333 said the plan is “Unrealistic.”
These stats already evince two signs of authoritarianism: One: that the majority of residents don’t actually want implementation of these traffic filters and Two: the council members are going ahead with the measures anyway.
Despite the fact the council members largely deny the traffic filters have anything to do with climate change per se, they noted in their rebuttal to the accusation that these measures are a part of the way to address Oxford needing “a more sustainable, reliable, and inclusive transport system for everyone… .” The word “sustainable,” of course, is synonymous with climate change, and “inclusive” is a word that oozes signs of the “Woke Mind Virus.”
The fact that Duncan Enright, an Oxfordshire County Cabinet Member for Travel & Development Strategy—who’s also a “he/him” on Twitter as of this writing—is also pro “zero carbon” emissions also does not bode well for the good nature of these traffic filters. The “zero carbon” strategy, of course, is being pioneered in large part by the World Economic Forum, which desperately wants “mandatory carbon allowances” for average citizens the world over.
Finally, the fact that the traffic filters use cameras instead of barriers and the fact that they only serve to minimally impede people’s freedom of movement are, contrary to what the Oxfordshire council members claim, very, very bad signs that the measures willy likely be abused to authoritarian ends. Encroachments on freedom begin inch by inch, after all, but ultimately grow by leaps and bounds.
The cameras, of course, also stand as an Orwellian “Big Brother” tool for control. They closely monitor citizens’ behavior and exist solely to harass supposedly free people with fines. Not to mention cameras such as these are a key pillar of the kinds of “digital prisons” that are now being erected around the world, which will function to hem people into their own little confined areas of movement. (Read more on that via the post embedded immediately above.) How long, people should ask, before the Oxfordshire Council Members, who are all about “sustainability,” apparently, say the cages must be tightened in order to prevent the weather from changing?
Additionally, look at the World Economic Forum (WEF) illustration immediately above taken from a March, 2022 post. In its post, the organization—associated with dictatorial leaders like Klaus Schwab and his “Young Global Leader” minions—noted that “the 15-minute city concept is taking hold in a way that it would not have before the [COVID-19] pandemic.” Of course, to any objective thinker, it’s beyond easy to see how Oxfordshire’s filters will play into these severely limited “communities.”
Feature image: Micaël / World Economic Forum
Here’s How Authorities Could Generate a Marburg ‘Pandemic’ as a Way to Reinstate and Bolster Tyrannical Control Measures [Opinion]
Here is an overview of how tyrannical authorities such as the WHO, federal governments across the West, the Bank of International Settlements, et al....
An expat from California breaks down everything the state has "killed"—from a reliable power grid to freedom of speech—in a new op-ed.