NC Governor's Buyouts Spark Land Grab Controversy Amid Storm


In a controversial move following the devastation of Hurricane Helene, North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper has confirmed that entire communities will not be rebuilt, igniting allegations of a government "land grab" under the guise of climate change adaptation. With a focus on buyouts over rebuilding, Cooper argues that such actions are necessary to mitigate future risks, but residents are left feeling betrayed and powerless. The situation has prompted widespread anger, as many question the motives behind this strategy and whether corporate interests, including potential investments from firms like BlackRock, are driving the state's decisions. As the community grapples with loss and uncertainty, suspicions grow that this is just the beginning of a larger agenda that could reshape their homes and livelihoods.

TPV: North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper has confirmed that entire communities affected by the storm will not be rebuilt, confirming what many are calling a government “land grab” disguised as climate change adaptation.

“We’ve spent a lot of time on the way we approach rebuilding… in some areas, you just shouldn’t build back,” Governor Cooper admitted in a recent statement. He went on to reveal that the state is actively buying out entire communities, rather than helping them rebuild their homes and lives.

“We’ve been able to convince certain communities and people that buyouts are better,” he continued, justifying the controversial strategy by citing climate change as a key reason for abandoning the communities.

The governor’s admission fuels theories of a massive land grab in North Carolina, with allegations that BlackRock stands to profit from the crisis by purchasing the land, including a globally important quartz mine, for pennies on the dollar.

While Governor Cooper frames the buyouts as a practical solution to mitigate future climate risks, North Carolina residents are furious.

The buyout program is leaving families with few choices: accept government compensation and leave their homes for good, or face a future without the support to rebuild.

The problem is compounded by the governor’s statement that “we know these events will become more and more intense.” Residents are asking: how can the government be so certain about future climate events unless they are part of a larger, hidden agenda?

The aftermath of Hurricane Helene is now seen by some as an opportunity for state authorities to enact what they’re calling a “land grab” under the guise of climate change resilience.

Many are questioning how the government can so confidently predict the increasing severity of natural disasters unless something more sinister is at play. Is this part of a larger global agenda?

Critics point to the government’s repeated use of climate change to justify policies that displace communities, warning that this is just the beginning of a broader effort to seize land for other purposes.

This move, they argue, fits into the larger narrative of “Build Back Better,” a global initiative that many see as a smokescreen for increasing government control over humanity.

The idea of a land grab isn’t just speculative. In many of the areas hardest hit by Hurricane Helene, valuable coastal land is being cleared out. These buyouts raise questions about the true purpose behind the state’s decision not to rebuild certain areas. Is this part of a larger effort to free up land for corporate interests or development projects?

The feisty folk of North Carolina are starting to push back, demanding answers from the state government about the future of their communities. For now, the official explanation is climate change, but many believe the state has ulterior motives.

The intersection of disaster recovery and land use policy has become increasingly contentious in recent years, especially as climate change intensifies the frequency and severity of natural disasters. Governor Cooper's admission regarding the abandonment of certain communities has sparked significant debate over the ethics and implications of such buyouts. Many residents see these policies as a betrayal, raising concerns about transparency and accountability in government actions. Critics argue that the framing of these buyouts as climate resilience strategies obscures deeper motivations, such as the potential for lucrative land deals that benefit large corporations. This situation reflects broader trends of how emerging climate policies may disproportionately affect marginalized communities, leading to fears of corporate overreach and loss of local autonomy. The narrative surrounding "Build Back Better" further complicates matters, suggesting that what may appear as disaster recovery could also serve as a vehicle for increased governmental and corporate control.

Follow us on TruthSocial, X-Twitter, Gettr, Gab, VK, Anonup, Facebook and Telegram for interesting and mysterious bonus content!
To Donate to Planet-Today.com 👉 Click Here.

Planet Today

Disclaimer: This article only represents the author’s view. This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. Planet-Today is not responsible for any legal risks.

Previous Post Next Post

Contact form