‘Green Antoinettes’ Preach Sacrifice While Jetting Off In Luxury

Politicians, celebrities, and billionaires who lecture ordinary people about their carbon footprints often live by another set of rules. [emphasis, links added]

They travel by private jet, dine in excess, and retreat to mansions powered by the very energy sources they want banned. It’s a spectacle of hypocrisy so pervasive that the media barely blinks.

Even scientists who scold the public about emissions fly thousands of miles to United Nations climate conferences — racking up the same greenhouse gases they claim will destroy the planet.

This is two-tiered climate morality: Those with power indulge, while everyone else is told to sacrifice. Preaching austerity from a private jet has become the “let them eat cake” of our age.

Hypocrisy That Pays

The real question isn’t whether the hypocrisy exists but why it’s so tolerated. The answer, in part, is that too many people have found ways to profit from it — through subsidies, grants, and the ever-expanding green grift.

According to data from Yard, celebrities such as Taylor Swift and Leonardo DiCaprio emitted between 3,000 and 4,400 tons of carbon dioxide in 2022 from private jet travel alone — hundreds or even thousands of times the annual emissions of an average citizen.

For perspective: Bangladesh emits about 0.71 tons of carbon dioxide per person annually. Ghana emits 0.74, Ethiopia 0.13, and Kenya 0.4.

A single year of indulgence by an American climate icon outweighs the lifetime footprint of entire villages in the developing world.

The Climate Elite

Filmmaker Steven Spielberg, who condemns “climate deniers” as morally deficient, has a carbon footprint equivalent to nearly 280 average Americans or more than 2,200 Indians.

DiCaprio built his global brand on climate activism — then took a private jet from Europe to New York to collect an environmental award.

If the hypocrisy of celebrities is glaring, the behavior of politicians is worse.

Records show that Sen. Bernie Sanders’ campaign spent over $221,000 on private jets in just one quarter — even as the Vermont socialist voted for laws that punish fossil fuel use and floated the idea of criminal charges for energy executives.

New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Fighting Oligarchy tour, meant to challenge wealth and privilege, relied on carbon-intensive travel of its own. The Bronx Democrat later scaled back her private jet use after criticism — by switching to first-class flights instead.

The Priesthood Of Carbon

At United Nations climate conferences, the hypocrisy reaches liturgical heights. The gatherings are usually held in luxury destinations like Dubai, Glasgow, or Sharm el-Sheik.

Each transcontinental flight emits roughly two tons of carbon dioxide per traveler — the annual output of a citizen in many poorer nations.

Yet these same scientists and bureaucrats are pushing for energy restrictions in developing countries, demanding that millions forgo affordable electricity to meet arbitrary “net-zero” targets. Their supposed moral authority rests not on sacrifice but on self-congratulation.

A Reckoning Awaits

The hypocrisy would be merely irritating if the consequences weren’t so destructive. The push for “net-zero emissions” — a fantasy that defies both physics and economics — is driving up the cost of gasoline, electricity, and food while shrinking personal freedom.

Families pay more and travel less, while the jet-setters congratulate themselves for “saving the planet.”

They’re not leading an energy transition. They’re entrenching a new aristocracy — one in which elites keep their privileges while the working class bears the pain in the name of the “greater good.”

The rise of Donald Trump and other skeptics has interrupted this march toward a green oligarchy, but the climate faithful persist. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s alliance with the Vatican to “terminate” global warming is only the latest display of moral vanity.

Eventually, voters will see through this 21st-century version of aristocratic corruption. The public may not wield guillotines, but the electoral version will do just fine. Off with their subsidies!

Read more at The Blaze