Like Father, Like Son: Eco-Hypocrites Charles And Harry Scold About Climate From Private Jets
Climate doomsdayers Prince Harry and Meghan Markle took a 40-minute private jet ride to a Katy Perry concert this past weekend. The Sun revealed Tuesday that the Sussexes flew in a Texan oil heir’s private plane along with actress Cameron Diaz and her husband Benji Madden, as well as actress Zoe Saldana.
Ironically, for years, the pampered prince has been preaching about society reaching “net zero” goals, warning of the supposed impending end to life on earth and fretting that “the world is on fire.” Harry even founded Travalyst, an organization dedicated to promoting “sustainable” travel — the antithesis of private jets.
Harry has generated a firestorm of negative press not just because he’s an eco-hypocrite but because after bowing out of his royal duties he’s started numerous, embarrassing public squabbles with his family overseas. To most, it appears Harry and his father King Charles III have little in common. However, fear-mongering about the climate and advocating for dystopian environmental policies that they themselves do not have to follow is something the father and son apparently agree on.
Last week, the royal family’s official X account shared a video of Charles and Queen Camilla aboard the luxurious “RAF (Royal Air Force) Voyager” on their way to Africa, sparking warranted criticism.
Charles is a poster boy for the infamous World Economic Forum’s “Great Reset” initiative. In 2020, Charles traveled to Davos, Switzerland in a private jet to launch the Reset, declaring that the supposed climate crisis calls for “nothing short of a paradigm shift, one that inspires action at revolutionary levels and pace.”
Last year, Harry made a similar proclamation for radical change, calling on delegates at a United Nations (UN) conference to “make the decisions—the daring, transformative decisions—our world needs to save humanity.”
But what are these revolutionary climate policies that will supposedly bring humanity to “net zero” carbon emissions? To start, many of them aren’t voluntary.
In France, the government has outlawed short-haul domestic flights if the same trip could be made by train in less than two and a half hours, and the entire European Union is considering doing the same.
A Michael Bloomberg-run globalist climate organization known as the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group has a 2030 “ambitious target” of limiting air travel to “1 short-haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every 3 years per person.” Nearly 100 cities across the globe are members of C40, 14 of which are American. By 2050, the UN wants all flights to produce “net zero” emissions, effectively meaning they would have to use sustainable aviation fuels, which even leftists admit is impractical and extremely expensive.
Both the UN and C40 Cities’ plans would effectively annihilate commercial air travel. Since C40 Cities make up about one-twelfth of the global population, limiting air travel to one short-haul return flight every three years per person would dramatically decrease the revenue of already-struggling commercial airlines. Likewise, the changes necessary to make air travel produce zero emissions would cause the price of air travel to skyrocket, making it only affordable to wealthy elites like Charles and Harry.
Climate activists are also aiming their fire at privately owned vehicles. Of course, places like the U.K. and California already have plans to eradicate gas-powered vehicles by the 2030s. However, the ultimate goal, according to the C40 Cities, is the elimination of all personal vehicles, gas or electric.
What all these climate policies essentially get at is keeping people from being able to freely travel. Climate policies will either outright ban air and vehicle travel or price regular people out of it.
Note also that an immobile populace will not benefit the planet, but will destroy major industries that employ millions of people globally. Studies consistently show that nations with wealthier populations have cleaner environments, yet the climate cult is advocating for the impoverishment of the global populace through their stated environmental goals. Meanwhile, people like Harry and Charles will continue to travel in SUVs and private jets while they try to restrict the rest of us from driving cars or flying commercially.
Prince Harry and King Charles’ climate lectures and hypocrisy are the pair’s most reprehensible deficiency (and that’s saying something). Both men are pushing for policies that are impoverishing regular people and eroding basic freedoms such as movement.
To the public in the U.K. and America, there should be no “sides” in the never-ending Harry and Charles feud because they are ideologically on the same side: pushing for terrifying Orwellian climate goals. The father and son duo are the epitome of “let them eat cake” politicians who deserve nothing but mockery and contempt.
Evita Duffy-Alfonso is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, and her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at evita@thefederalist.com.
Comments are closed.