The United Kingdom has set forth an ambitious plan known as “Net Zero,” aiming to reach zero net contribution of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. Whether we’re talking about carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, or other greenhouse gases, the stated goal is clear: the UK will not add to global emissions.
On paper, this sounds noble. But the way the plan is being executed reveals a different reality. Rather than truly reducing emissions, the UK has been relocating heavy manufacturing overseas to export-processing zones in the developing world (the world that transnational corporations are underdeveloping) and importing energy from abroad. This strategy doesn’t eliminate the emissions—it merely moves them around geographically.
In practice, this geographic shuffle means that emissions continue at roughly the same level, but now in countries with weaker environmental protections and less-developed capacity to capture or offset carbon. The pollution still enters the atmosphere and affects the global ecosystem. Pretending the UK is somehow insulated from these effects is an illusion.
Yet the problem is not purely environmental. In fact, it isn’t about biospheric integrity at all. Moving high-wage, capital-intensive manufacturing jobs overseas impoverishes the domestic population. The UK has outsourced not only its production but also the livelihoods of its citizens. As industries leave, wages fall, and communities dependent on manufacturing are hollowed out.
The economic harm from offshoring is compounded by mass immigration, which imposes additional costs on the British taxpayer. The government’s welfare systems must now support a growing migrant population while native citizens experience declining purchasing power and reduced living standards. Cheap imports produced by third-world labor may lower the price of some goods, but they cannot compensate for the erosion of secure, well-paid employment at home. (See Marx the Accelerationist: Free Trade and the Radical Case for Protectionism.) Higher energy prices from importation raise the prices of locally produced goods and services.
In short, the transnationalization of production sacrifices the working class without achieving the stated environmental benefits. Pollution levels remain global; only the map of point source emissions changes. The domestic population faces rising taxes, unemployment, weaker wages, higher prices in some sectors, and an increasingly strained welfare state.
All of this raises a question: what is the real purpose of these policies? When examined from a distance, the pattern suggests that “climate change” initiatives like Net Zero are not about saving the environment. Rather, they provide cover for a transnational agenda—offshoring industry to maximize corporate profits by exploiting cheap foreign labor, while also importing cheap labor into the UK itself. This not only disrupts the country’s economic base but also changes its demographic and cultural composition, undermining national solidarity and sovereignty.
Seen this way, which is the way to see it, the Net Zero plan isn’t merely a flawed environmental strategy; it’s part of a broader process by which globalist and transnational corporate interests seize control of government policy to weaken and reshape a country for integration into a larger, post-national order.
freedom and reason 