Written by Sarah Williams.

In a move that has sparked both outrage and applause, Kamala Harris has declared her intention to ban meat in America if she becomes president. During a CNN town hall on September 4, 2019, Harris aligned herself with the World Economic Forum’s Net Zero agenda, aiming to transform the dietary habits of millions.

When asked by Caroline Coursant, an audience member visibly affected by muscular weakness, about the connection between climate change and meat consumption, Harris responded with an ambitious vision. “The balance that we have to strike here, frankly, is about what government can and should do around creating incentives and then banning certain [dietary] behaviors,” she stated, emphasizing the need for governmental intervention in eating habits.

Coursant had linked manmade climate change to red meat overproduction. Harris agreed, asserting that dietary control should be a top priority for the highest level of government. Her remarks underscored a commitment to changing how Americans eat, despite her personal fondness for cheeseburgers.

Government’s Role in Diet Control

Harris’s stance is clear: the government must take an active role in reshaping national eating habits. She admitted her love for cheeseburgers but stressed the necessity of encouraging healthier eating. “As a nation we actually have to have a real priority at the highest level of government around what we eat and in terms of healthy eating because we have a problem in America,” Harris said.

She emphasized the importance of creating incentives to promote moderation and educate the public about the environmental impacts of their food choices. Harris argued that the government needs to do a better job in guiding citizens towards healthier, more sustainable eating practices.

During the town hall, the moderator pointed out that fake meat alternatives don’t quite measure up to the real thing. Harris didn’t dispute this, highlighting the challenge of shifting public preference from traditional meat to plant-based substitutes.

Tech Surveillance and Meat Consumption

The discussion on dietary regulation didn’t stop with Harris. Back in 2008, Alex Jones and Jason Bermas reported that AI computer surveillance systems and biometric identification could be used to monitor and control people’s meat consumption. This prediction seems to align with the current push by some political leaders to regulate eating habits more strictly.

Harris is not alone in her mission. Infowars previously reported that Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu has a similar plan to restrict meat consumption. The alignment of these leaders suggests a growing trend among policymakers to intervene in dietary choices for the sake of environmental and public health goals.

Our Take

Kamala Harris’s proposal to ban meat marks a significant step towards governmental control over personal choices. While some argue it’s a necessary measure for environmental sustainability, others see it as an overreach that infringes on individual freedoms. This move represents a shift towards a nanny state where the government dictates even the most personal aspects of life.

This policy could set a dangerous precedent. If the government can regulate what we eat, where does it stop? It’s a slippery slope towards increased surveillance and loss of autonomy. While the intention behind such measures might be to improve public health and combat climate change, it raises concerns about the balance between collective good and individual rights.

The broader implications for society are profound. Increased governmental control could lead to a loss of personal freedoms and a society where every aspect of life is monitored and regulated. This encroachment on individual choices is a step too far, potentially doing more harm than good.