This story emerged from an unlikely source involving Glenn Beck’s recent vacation to Europe. As reported at The Blaze, while Beck was overseas he had a disturbing conversation with his travel agent. He was told, “You should see Europe now while you can.” The reason is that the United Nations has been rolling out “sustainability goals” for the travel industry, particularly when it comes to air travel. They are trying to force airlines to get to “net zero” in terms of emissions. As we recently discussed here, the technology doesn’t currently exist to achieve net zero for commercial airlines without vastly increasing the cost for travelers. So the alternative will be to simply shut down air travel for “nonessential” purposes such as tourism, at least for “the little people.”

Glenn explains the unfortunate situation that’s coming for travel-lovers across the globe.

There’s official documentation showing that in Europe, “air travel … [will be] diminished until they get to zero … there will be no travel unless it is mass travel on trains – easier for Europe; impossible for the United States,” he explains.

They’re already “closing or preparing to close all airports [in the UK] except for Heathrow and Glasgow.”

This has already started happening in the UK. The Telegraph was warning back in February that most regional airports would be closing because of their inability to meet the operating costs imposed by new climate restrictions, among other challenges. The airport at Doncaster-Sheffield began preparing to close last September. Before long, the only major public airports remaining in operation will be Heathrow and Glasgow.

The phrase “public airports” is important in this context. Can you guess which airports aren’t closing? Those would be the private airports that serve smaller private jets and those who are wealthy enough to afford their own small planes. No worries about emissions from private jets, apparently. But the rest of you will need to travel by train or other public transportation options.

Great Britain is only a test run for this concept. If you think that the idea won’t take off among climate alarmists in the United States, you’re fooling yourself. The drumbeat has already begun on this side of the pond. Just this week, The New Yorker published an essay titled “The Case Against Travel.” Granted, it was written by a philosopher named Agnes Callard and she was arguing that travel is a selfish waste of time because it fails to “transform” the individual or add to the lives of the people living at the travel destination. But it’s also the perfect excuse for climate alarmists to demonstrate how those who travel for leisure are selfish, evil people who are contributing to the end of the world or whatever.

A push to end air travel also adds to the overall theory of most globalists who seek greater centralized governmental power and less individual freedom. People who travel tend to meet new people and even talk to them. Some of them will inevitably wind up exchanging “dangerous ideas” that are not approved of by the government. Travelers also get to see the frequently deteriorating conditions in other places, likely brought about by bad governmental policies.

But people who remain home and get all of their information from mainstream media and social media, either directly or covertly shaped by the government, tend to be more placid and obedient. Poorly informed people are easier to control and less likely to object to the erosion of their freedoms. That brings us back to the true goals of the “climate agenda” and so much of the rest of this government nonsense. ‘Stay in your pods and eat your bugs. Don’t gather in large numbers. Make do with less and be happy we’re allowing you to have even that much.’ It turns out that George Orwell was more prescient than even the most skeptical among us could have imagined.