A new ruling from the United Nations has tightened the grip of climate change catastrophism.

In a 40-page mandate released on Wednesday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) told nations to fall in line or face the World Court’s wrath.

Countries that fail to align with what amounts to Gaian worship will be punished with a similar ferocity of “justice” to those that commit war crimes, the court warned.

Consequences for not taking climate justice seriously, the ruling said, include “paying full reparations, restitution, compensation, and/or satisfaction.”

The ICJ added that any nation in breach of its Carbon Zero commitments — as outlined by the 2015 Paris Agreement, among others — must “employ all means at their disposal to ensure compliance.”

Despite the mandate not defining what compliance by “any means necessary” would look like, it’s fair to assume this means mutating Carbon Zero into Carbon Communism.

Lockdowns, personal carbon credit scores, carbon taxes, petrol car bans, energy rationing, and carbon passports are all measures prescribed by today’s climate catastrophists.

Carbon passports have already been tabled in the United Kingdom’s Net Zero nanny state, and are defined by the Institute of Sustainability Studies as:

Notably, the ICJ admitted climate change reparations may be “difficult to calculate, because of uncertainty about the role anthropogenic climate change played in causing the damage.”

Acknowledging its limited reach, the World Court concluded that it could only offer judicial advice in response to questions about who’s to blame and for what. At the same time, the ICJ said its latest “climate justice” ruling is unprecedented.

Climate catastrophism “is more than a legal problem,” the court determined. Rather, it is an “existential problem of planetary proportions that imperils all forms of life and the very health of our planet.”

Unsurprisingly, the IJC finished by implying that the “lasting solution” was compliance with Carbon Communism.

The only satisfactory answer, it said, is social and political action that “changes our habits, comforts and current way of life in order to secure a future.”

Overall, the World Court’s so-called urgent and “game-changing” determination is toothless. It is ultimately only the opinion of the UN court in answer to young climate activists who claim that islands like Vanuatu are shrinking.

It’s of no surprise that UN boss and “global boiling” believer Antonio Guterres was overjoyed by his court advocating COVID-like, climate crisis mitigation mandates.

Following claims that the so-called “climate crisis was laying waste to lives and livelihoods,” Guterres welcomed the ICJ’s ruling.

“They have made it very clear,” he said, “that States are obligated under international law to protect the global climate system.”

“This is a victory for our planet, for climate justice and for the power of young people to make a difference.”

The science justifying the World Court’s opinion is based on social justice, not a complete rendering of all the facts and variables that make up climate science. If you think I’m exaggerating, note that the language of “oppressor and oppressed” is implied in the repeated use of “climate crisis” and “climate justice” — whatever the latter even really means.

The mandate is also non-binding. Unlike war crimes tribunals, the UN’s Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change is not enforceable. Not yet enforceable, anyway.

As I’ve noted above, lockdowns, personal carbon credit scores, carbon taxes, petrol car bans, energy rationing, and carbon passports are exactly what the 40-page ICJ advice points us towards.

This mitigation mandate is a glimpse of an encroaching darkness that has little to do with science and everything to do with socialism.

What activists mean by “climate justice” is Carbon Communism. That’s the shadow cast by this new globalist dictate, as it green-lights the growth of the Net Zero nanny state.

The science justifying the World Court’s opinion is based on social justice, not a complete rendering of all the facts and variables that make up climate science.

If you think I’m exaggerating, note that the language of “oppressor and oppressed” is implied in the repeated use of “climate crisis” and “climate justice” — whatever the latter even really means.

The mandate is also non-binding. Unlike war crimes tribunals, the UN’s Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change is not enforceable.

Not yet enforceable, anyway.

As I’ve noted above, lockdowns, personal carbon credit scores, carbon taxes, petrol car bans, energy rationing, and carbon passports are exactly what the 40-page ICJ advice points us towards.

This mitigation mandate is a glimpse of an encroaching darkness that has little to do with science and everything to do with socialism.

What activists mean by “climate justice” is Carbon Communism.

That’s the shadow cast by this new globalist dictate, as it green-lights the growth of the Net Zero nanny state.

The science justifying the World Court’s opinion is based on social justice, not a complete rendering of all the facts and variables that make up climate science.

If you think I’m exaggerating, note that the language of “oppressor and oppressed” is implied in the repeated use of “climate crisis” and “climate justice” — whatever the latter even really means.

The mandate is also non-binding. Unlike war crimes tribunals, the UN’s Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change is not enforceable. Not yet enforceable, anyway.

As noted above, lockdowns, personal carbon credit scores, carbon taxes, petrol car bans, energy rationing, and carbon passports are exactly what the 40-page ICJ advice points us towards.

This mitigation mandate is a glimpse of an encroaching darkness that has little to do with science and everything to do with socialism.

What activists mean by “climate justice” is Carbon Communism. That’s the shadow cast by this new globalist dictate, as it green-lights the growth of the Net Zero nanny state.