I really hate putting on my tinfoil hat to consider what the elites are planning for us all, but then the bozos over at the World Economic Forum keep coming out with junk like this:

"Alternative proteins" is newspeak for things like soy, algae, crickets, and lab-grown meat.

Sounds dEliCiOuS.

While the post claims this is all about climate change and will "drive profits," this parody account hit the reasoning for such measures right on the head:

What's more alarming though is the graph in this picture.

The WEF estimates that only 13 million metric tons of "alternative proteins" were consumed in 2020 out of a total 574 million metric tons' worth of all proteins globally.

They lament that the average person ate about 165 pounds of meat, fish, dairy, and eggs last year (while I couldn't be more proud).

The WEF wants to grow this to 97 million metric tons by 2035, hoping to have nearly a fifth of all consumed proteins come from such "alternative" sources.

In this chart, they predict what a best-case (for them) and worse-case scenario would look like.

The latter highlights "resistant consumers" in red.

Because you know they don't just want to stop with a fifth of the market, let's think of the long-term implications of this:

1. First, you're talking about tens of millions of ranchers and farmers ousted in favor of Bill Gates' mystery-meat labs and cricket farms.
2. Second, if said overhaul of the global food chain fails, you're talking about mass hunger and government dependency. Historically, the reason humans have adapted the diets they have is because those things are the easiest and cheapest to produce at the local level. In this case, I'd be dependent on 𝚂̶ ̶𝚘̶ ̶𝚢̶ ̶𝚕̶ ̶𝚎̶ ̶𝚗̶ ̶𝚝̶ ̶ ̶𝙶̶ ̶𝚛̶ ̶𝚎̶ ̶𝚎̶ ̶𝚗̶ crickets from Malaysia to feed my kids.
3. Third, what about the entire side of the nutrition and medical community that says animal fats and proteins are essential for good health? I guess it's just another example of following "teh sCiEnCe."

I'm not opposed to creative technology that grows apace in a free market. If the food is nutritious, tasty, and has some environmental benefits, I'm not opposed to it.

What the WEF is proposing here though is a massive government-subsidized push to disrupt the food chain that obliterates the free market. It will prop up a woke, alarmist view of climate change that destroys the resiliency of local people to produce and sell their own food.

Remember how such woke government subsidies led to the building of inefficient wind turbines in Texas, and what happened when said wind turbines failed in a winter storm?

Yeah, now imagine that with food.

This also puts the power of food itself in the hands of a few elites. I can't think of any powerful people who controlled the food supply in history to keep the peasants in order...

So to all our betters at the World Economic Forum: kindly shove off and let me enjoy my eggs and bacon in peace.