Sustainable Development

Sustainable Development: The Evil Facing America

On July 23, 2004, I addressed the fifth annual Freedom 21 Conference in Reno, Nevada. Freedom 21 was the first coalition of limited government/private property advocacy groups. Freedom 21 eventually sponsored 10 national conferences and educated and trained a cadre of leaders to fight Agenda 21. But in 2004, George Bush was in the White House and still pushing the Sustainable policies two years after the devastation to individual liberty, free enterprise and private property that defined the Clinton Presidency. Yet, even then, so many Americans failed to understand the threat they faced. Our movement was divided into fractured issues. Even most major Conservative organizations refused to mention Agenda 21 (and many still refuse to use the term).

So, to this gathering of Freedom 21, I delivered a call to arms. We had circled the wagons so tightly that we seemed to have only one left. I said we needed to charge! Stop being on the defensive. Go straight at the Sustainablists. Take it to the people. Amazingly, this was five years before the tactics that I had called for in 2004 began to take shape though the creation of the TEA Party. That movement brought our people together in a unified force and I was able to help them focus on the dangers of Sustainable Development. Finally, the issue began to gain national attention. Spokane, Washington became one of the first communities to begin to debate Sustainable policy. Then Richard Rothschild and his gallant fellow Commissioners in Carroll County, Maryland fired the first real shot as they ended the county’s membership in ICLEI – the first to do so. More than 150 communities followed, taking that same action against the main perpetrator of sustainable policies in local communities. Several state legislatures began introducing legislation to stop the spread of Sustainable Development. And the perpetrators like ICLEI and the American Planning Association became “concerned.”

Keep all of that in mind as you read this speech, given so early in the fight, when we hadn’t made a single advancement in our battle. This was back when even people in our own movement thought we were crazy conspiracy theorists. As the title of my first book reads (which covers much the activity during this time) “Now Tell Me I Was Wrong!” Most importantly, take it to heart, because I could still give this speech today, calling for the same actions. We made a lot of headway when we joined forces and fought together. But today I see the return of the fracturing as our movement once again forgets the roots of the policies we oppose, and returns to fighting the branches. As a result, Sustainable policy is on a rampage through local and state governments because our opposition is not unified. We will only win when we unite in one mighty fist to wipe out the complete agenda that ties them all together – the enemy we face is Sustainable Development. – Tom DeWeese


Address to the Freedom 21 National Conference, July 23, 2004

By Tom DeWeese

My friends, we come here today from many walks of life. A wide variety of reasons got each of us started on the road to activism. Some of us started simply because we noticed something funny about our child’s curriculum in school. Some of us were outraged by government trying to take away our guns. A good many of us suddenly found government agents and members of private groups plotting to take away our land. Some have had their livestock confiscated. Some have found themselves facing jail just for doing what their fathers and grandfathers had done on the same land for decades.

Some of us just wanted to be allowed to go to church, pray to God, and celebrate Christmas without being fined for it. A few of us would even like to be able to go to a restaurant and order food we like — even if it is greasy, fattening, and full of carbs and calories.

All of us just want to live in an America where our rights and pursuit of happiness is protected. And so we fight. And now we’ve found ourselves here today in a room with hundreds of others in the same boat.

We Can’t Win This Way

I have one thing to tell you. You are not going to win in the manner we are fighting now, because the other side has cut us up into little pieces. They’ve divided and conquered us.

They’ve succeeded because you think your fight is against gun control. Because you think your fight is against bad schools. Because you think your fight is against the Endangered Species Act and roadless programs, wetlands regulations, water rights, and Heritage Areas. Because you think your fight is against Democrats and not Republicans. Because you think it’s a fight between evil liberals and good guy conservatives.

You’re wrong. Your fight is against a well-planned, well-orchestrated agenda for the complete transformation of America. And unless you learn that fact now, today… and unless you fully educate yourselves to every aspect of that agenda and fight it on the proper terms… then you cannot win!

I’m here to tell you that every one of these issues you are facing is interrelated. There is an agenda being implemented before your very eyes. It’s called Sustainable Development. And I will tell you now, if you want to keep your guns, your property, your children and your God, if you love liberty, then Sustainable Development is your enemy!

So what is Sustainable Development? Imagine an America in which a specific “ruling principle” is created to decide proper societal conduct for every citizen. That principle would be used to consider everything you eat, what you wear, the kind of homes you live in, the method of transportation used to get to work, the way you dispose of waste, perhaps the number of children you may have, even your education and employment decisions.

Sustainable Development is that “ruling principle” for the implementation of what former Vice President Al Gore said we must all suffer through in order to purify our nation from the horrors of the Twentieth Century’s industrial revolution. In his book, Earth in the Balance, Gore called it a “wrenching transformation of society.” Those are pretty powerful words that should concern anyone who values liberty. It’s a warning that the rules are changing and that a new power elite is taking control.

Perhaps you are beginning to notice such changes as you go about your daily routine, but haven’t understood where those changes, and the ideas behind them, are coming from. But Sustainable Development is a very difficult concept to grasp. It’s written in an almost foreign language — designed to mislead and refrain from alarming you.

Let me put it in the simplest language I possibly can. The Atkins Diet is not sustainable. Now, why do I say that? Because on page 350 of the UN’s Global Biodiversity Assessment Report it says that the grazing of livestock, including cows, sheep, goats, and horses, is not sustainable. One reason for that concept is because Sustainablists contend that the animals pollute streams and damage the river banks. Getting us to stop eating beef is a major effort needed to fully implement the Sustainable Agenda. Since they are cowards who fear your reaction to an outright banning of eating meat, they have to try to trick you into thinking that not eating meat is your idea. So they use scare tactics. For years they have told you that eating meat raises your cholesterol. Fat is bad for you. Meat causes heart attacks. With PeTA’s help they were succeeding in turning us all into little sissies, eating salads.

Then along comes Dr. Atkins who shows us that a low carb beef diet will help you lose weight in a healthy way. Suddenly the nation has gone Atkins crazy. Beef sales are skyrocketing. The Sustainablists are in a tailspin. They’ve lost control of your eating habits. Now watch what they are doing to get you back on track. Suddenly reports are being published in leading women’s magazines about Atkins being dangerous to your health. Lawsuits have begun to pop up against the diet.

Do you see how it works? That’s how the Sustainable Development agenda is implemented. Behavior modification based on fear. Freedom of choice is not part of Sustainable Development. And so I repeat, the Atkins Diet is not sustainable.

Sustainable Development: A Life Plan Chosen By Someone Else

  • Now, perhaps you’ll understand why there are Sustainable Development papers, guidelines and regulations to impose the ruling principle:
  • On our public education system — to prepare our children to live in a sustainable world.
  • On our economy — to create partnerships between business and government, making sure business becomes a tool to help implement the policies.
  • On the environment — leading to controls on private property and business.
  • On health care — the new drive against obesity is leading directly toward controls on what we eat
  • On farming — Sustainable Development policies affect farmers’ ability to produce more crops by regulating or banning free farming practices that have fed America and the world for 200 years.
  • On our social and cultural environment — where political correctness is controlling policy, including hiring practices, immigration policy, multiculturalism, marriage laws, etc.
  • On our mobility — with emphasis on carpools and public transportation and away from the freedom of personal transportation.
  • And on public safety — where the rule of law and the court system is being challenged by new regulations that affect the right to privacy and unreasonable search and seizures.

It’s important to understand that these leading issues we face today are not just random concerns that find their way into the forefront of political debate. They are all interconnected to the policies of Sustainable Development. And you must understand that Sustainable Development is the official policy of the government of the United States of America — and every state, city and small burg in the nation. It is completely bi-partisan. It is being equally implemented by Republicans and Democrats. No matter the outcome of any election — the Sustainable Development agenda moves forward unabated.

What I am telling you here today is that Sustainable Development isn’t just some land use policy. It is a complete transformation of American society; away from the rule of law; away from the ideals of property ownership, free enterprise, free travel and even free association.

Step-By-Step Stealth Enforcement

And Sustainable Development is not a myth, or a theory or a conspiracy — as I’ve heard some in our own movement call it. Since the 1970s literally hundreds of issue papers, charters, guidelines, and treaties have been presented at scores of international meetings, each becoming a building block in the creation of what would eventually become Sustainable Development. Finally in 1992, the UN’s Earth Summit in Brazil brought all of these ideas together in two major documents called Agenda 21 and the Biodiversity Treaty. Here the ideas were officially presented to world leaders that all government, on every level, needed to be transformed into top-down control over housing, food production, energy, water, private property, education, population control, gun control, transportation, social welfare, medical care, and literally every aspect of our lives.

To get the full picture, add to these, the UN’s Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, both of which create UN-mandates on abortion, child rearing, and government interference on families.

In 1993, President Clinton created the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. From that Council came a flood of policy papers and recommendations to enforce it as government policy. And the Clinton Administration didn’t need Congress to get into the act. All Cabinet officials had to do was change some wording of existing programs and reroute already approved funding to begin to implement the agenda – without Congress and without debate. Former Commerce Secretary Ron Brown told a meeting of the President’s Council that he could implement 67% of the Sustainable Development agenda in his agency with no new legislation. Other agencies like Interior, EPA, HUD and more did the same thing. To help it all along, Clinton issued a blizzard of Executive Orders.

The American Heritage Rivers Initiative was born that way. So were roadless policies designed to stop logging in national forests. National parks have become core biosphere reserves designed to shut out any human activity. And the buffer zones around them are designed to shut off existing human activity, allowing the core to continually grow like a cancerous tumor.

Any possible excuse to control human development or activities began to sprout up — from rails-to trails bikeways — to wet lands regulations — to historic preservation projects. Endangered species, real or made up, have been used to close down industry and steal private lands. Valuable natural resources have been locked away in national parks and preserves. In this way, an international agenda to transform the world into global governance under Sustainable Development policy took hold and became official policy of the United States of America.

The red states from the 2000 election are made up of the desperate Americans who rushed to the polls hoping to get a breath of fresh air — a champion to turn these smothering policies around. But in four years, other than throwing a few bones on roadless areas, President Bush has yet to undo a single Clinton Executive Order on Sustainable Development. It is still the official policy of the United States government.

Every day more of the agenda is implemented. This is what you are fighting at home — no matter what the issue. Almost every community in America now has some sort of “visioning statement” designed to control development and property use while dictating rules for business, transportation, water use, food production, and much more.

Our public schools have been transformed, away from academic institutions, becoming, instead, factories that pump out a worker class to fill the needs of a centrally-controlled, sustainable economy. Christianity has come under attack because it is the foundation of Western Civilization, which is the root of the ideas of limited government and individual freedom. Those ideals must be crushed in the new Sustainable world where individual thought would turn the well-ordered society of Sustainable Development into chaos. And in such a world, you dare not have any armed citizens. As I said, it is all one crushing transformation stemming from Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development.

It’s a House of Cards and They Know It!

But so many of us fail to see that. We just focus on our one issue, refusing to see that we are fighting a massive power structure. Do you think it’s just a coincidence that school curriculum makes no sense? If so, you’re looking at it all wrong. You still think the schools are supposed to teach your children academics. You think your job is just to fix some misguided policies. The fact is the public school system is working perfectly for what it was designed to do. And, if you understand the Sustainablist agenda, it will all make perfect sense.

Do you think it’s just a coincidence that all of these environmental regulations have popped up to lock away the land? Read Agenda 21 and you will find that every issue your facing, from endangered species, to wetlands, to grazing policy to water policy to smart growth to the expansion of national parks are all described in detail. Read it and everything will be as clear as a road map. Ignore it and you will be rolled on your single issue.

If you don’t grasp the fact that you are dealing with an agenda that is driving all of these issues — and that they are not just single issues — then you cannot win! I am not saying change the issues you are involved in. Of course, keep fighting on your individual issues as you always have, but just know that there is an over-all agenda behind your adversaries. Can you imagine what we could do if we all “got it”? If we all came to the realization that we are fighting the same foe, the same agenda? Divided we lose. United we can blow down their house of cards. Because that’s what it is, a house of cards built on lies and very bad policy.

Do you know that, as we sit here feeling down and somewhat hopeless, that the other side is terrified of you? They fear that you will finally understand their agenda and that you will unify and begin to fight back as an effective force rather than in a bunch of splinter groups. Did you know that the web has been burning up with e-mails and memos about this Freedom 21 meeting here this week in Reno, at the Nugget? You see, the Nugget was the site of a series of meetings in the nineties called the Wise Use Movement. Those meetings were the first attempts for property rights advocates, ranchers, timber and mining industries to organize and fight back. Those meetings were what brought me, and lots of other folks in this room, into the fight.

The Sustainablists did everything possible to vilify us as violent reactionaries who just wanted to pave the Earth. They call us the “astro-turf crowd.” Now, here we are again with some of the original organizers of the Wise Use Movement on our program. That has set off the alarm bells in Sustainablist circles. But now there are three times more of us and we’re not just ranchers and timber people. I believe that the inclusion of Niger Innis and the Congress on Racial Equality (CORE) is one of the most important developments in the past ten years for our movement. In addition, we’ve joined forces with Second Amendment advocates and academic education activists and many more.

Down at the politburo, their heads are spinning. One of the groups, which has been sending out hysterical briefing memos on Freedom 21, is the Anti-Defamation League, one of the most vicious groups in the nation. There are many more such groups involved, but I have personally seen those from the ADL, so I mention them. They view themselves as the keepers of moral thought and they view you as equal to the KKK.

We Choose Freedom

Some of their lackeys may be among us today with the mission to report back to their handlers about what is said here at Freedom 21. Well here’s the message I want them to take back. Tell them that this week at Freedom 21 our movement has been reborn. Tell them that property rights and multiple-use activists understand that the Sustainable Development agenda is the core of all of the individual land use issues facing us; property rights activists “get it” and choose liberty over Sustainable Development.

Tell them that education activists now understand that the true agenda isn’t just misguided education policies, but a transformation of the process to implement the Sustainablist agenda. Education activists “get it” and choose liberty over Sustainable Development.

Tell them that Christians understand that the assault on their religion is necessary to destroy Western Culture in order to replace it with Sustainablism. Christians “get it” and choose liberty over Sustainable Development.

Tell them that gun owners understand that the universal drive to disarm the nation is necessary in order to implement the Sustainablist agenda. Gun owners “get it” and choose liberty over Sustainable Development.

Tell them that Niger Innis and the Congress on Racial Equality understand that Sustainable Development is starving and killing blacks around the world and destroying the hopes and dreams of blacks here in America. CORE “gets it” and chooses liberty over Sustainable Development.

That’s the message I want the lackeys to take back to those who are working every waking hour to enforce their philosophy of death on free Americans.

How To Fight Back

Now, let me quickly give you one idea that we might use to effectively fight back and stop Sustainable Development. There is a flaw in their implementation system. The fact is Congress does not pass laws making regulations mandatory for implementation of the Sustainable Development agenda. That would be a violation of the 10th Amendment. To get around it, Congress sets up a system of grants that come with strings. In order to get the money you have to “voluntarily” comply with the rules that go with it. The system has been set up with the help of groups like the Sierra Club, the National Education Association, and Planned Parenthood, to name a few. They all fully understand the game and its rules. And they have over 12,000 fellow organizations on the state and local levels to agitate and enforce those rules by applying pressure to local community councilmen and commissioners. That’s how the Sustainable Development agenda is being implemented in every single community and school in the nation.

My friends, there are about 3,300 counties in this nation. I propose that as we continue to pressure Congress and State Houses on our chosen issues, that we spend a major part of our efforts to elect county commissioners and city councilmen. We have to find men and women of integrity who understand the Sustainablist agenda. They would have to be activists who could resist the pressure and not accept the federal Trojan Horse of grant money. If we could do this successfully in just 10 or even 5 counties in the country, the news would spread like wildfire and more would join us.

No, it won’t stop the Forest Service and the Park Service SWAT teams from invading your land, but it will begin to change the dynamics of the battle. Congress will respond. Whether you’re supporting a third party or doing it through one of the two major parties, we would build an unstoppable power base that would spread across the nation. I can tell you now, that if we keep trying to pressure Congress as our only tactic or try to elect a President who will listen, we will fail.

To save liberty in America, Sustainable Development must be stopped. We have to start at the local level where our grassroots efforts are strongest. Where it’s easiest to win. We can find five county commissioners. We can get them elected one at a time. And then get more to join them. And we can begin to build a prairie fire across the nation.

Do these things my friends, first understand that whatever issue you have chosen to fight for is actually part of the Sustainable Development scheme. Arm yourselves with that knowledge, and then step-by-step work to elect local representatives who will resist the Sustainablist agenda and its money. The money is the key. Take back your communities and in that way, step-by-step, take back America.

UN To Use Blockchain Tech For Sustainable Development Goals

Talk of blockchain tech and crypto-currency at the UN is indicative of its efforts to transform the world into Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. Fintech is the model for future financing of the green economy. ⁃ TN Editor

Recently, the United Nations was recognised for its use of blockchain technology in Forbes’ second Blockchain 50 List. The 75-year-old organisation, which has an important role to play in global humanitarian efforts, has been looking to leverage the emerging technology in several areas.

From assisting in the fight against climate change to disbursing funds to Syrian refugees using blockchain-verified iris scans instead of ID cards, the UN has looked to advance its cause with the help of a technology that is still finding its niche.

The idea of blockchain for good is not a foreign one, as the technology has such far-reaching disruptive potential that it has often been aimed at charitable exercises and situations where good can be achieved, or at least featured, through this new technology.

The UN, at the top rung of global efforts to further humanitarian causes, has proven its willingness to get on board with blockchain technology to be a more effective force. In fact, United Nations secretary-general António Guterres has said the intergovernmental giant needs to embrace blockchain.

It has become apparent that we currently sit on the precipice of a new industrial revolution that will be predicated on the advancement of new and currently emerging technologies. Artificial Intelligence, Internet of Things, Blockchain and others, are all finding their feet in this new digital age.

For blockchain especially, it is being spread across many different sectors, with its impact being heavily felt, and sought, in the financial sector thanks to the cryptocurrency side of things. However, enterprises have also started recognising the potential for the technology to bolster business, and the UN is not letting this slide by them either.

“For the United Nations to deliver better on our mandate in the digital age, we need to embrace technologies like blockchain that can help accelerate the achievement of Sustainable Development Goals,” said Guterres in the statement provided exclusively to Forbes.

Read full story here…

Digital panopticon

Technocracy: The Digital Panopticon Of The World Economic Forum

The World Economic Forum is totally supporting all of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), aka Technocracy. Here is an A to Z analysis of each SDG and what they really mean.

Please take time to read through each point, listen to each short video and then share as widely as possible. Also note that this article introduces new TN contributor, Jacob Nordangård, PhD from Sweden. ⁃ TN Editor


A week before World Economic Forum’s 2020 meeting, the report Unlocking Technology for the Global Goals was released by WEF’s Global Future Council Working Group on 4IR for Global Public Goods. The report, written in collaboration with the audit and consulting firm PwC, reviews how the advanced technologies of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (4IR) will contribute to meeting the objectives of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations.

The work is part of WEF’s new initiative Frontier 2030, led by Danish Anne Marie Engtoft Larsen (who also contributed to Klaus Schwab’s book Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution). Noteworthy is that six of the seven main authors of the report are women. Big Mother coming to our rescue?

The world, if all goes according to plan, is to be completely transformed over the course of a decade. Just like Maurice Strong at the first Stockholm Conference in 1972, the United Nations claims that we have “only ten years” to save the world, and both the UN and WEF have dubbed the next ten years the Decade of Action.

This campaign is very well coordinated and includes governments, international organisations, and representatives of “civil society”. Also onboard are the big tech giants who all see great opportunities for profit (read: tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars) in “saving and improving the world”. All according to WEF’s principle of Public-Private Partnership (originating with Mussolini, implemented in Sweden, and successfully propagated internationally by David Rockefeller).

The United Nation’s 17 Global Goals give a blueprint for what we globally and collectively must do if we are to end extreme poverty, protect our natural environment, revert climate change and create a more sustainable, equal and prosperous future for all. (Unlocking Technology for the Global Goals)

So, what is this technological solution all about?

The report gives an overview on how 4IR could help reach the 17 SDGs. This is a plan that promises Utopia but offers only Technocracy as a solution, with no other options available.

The report presents a technocratic society where the whole world is to be controlled and governed with the help of AI, satellites, robotics, drones, the Internet of Things, and with artificial food on the menu. A global digital panopticon where all human activities are to be recorded, analysed, and corrected with the help of Social Credits – yes, even here in the West!

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is now openly displayed as a powerful weapon against the masses with a digital god (AI) who will judge and control us in real time. This is the ultimate form of social engineering and a serious threat to the freedom of humanity.
In this vision, man is also meant to be altered to become something other than a human being.

It is conceivable, on the other hand, that geocybernetics will follow completely different (or complementary) courses that lie more in the realm of social management. Here the demographic issue overrides other themes: Is there an optimal number of human beings to be supported by the ecosphere ? What is the right mix of condensing people in cities and dispersing them across landscapes? (Hans Joachim Schellnhuber)

WEF’s solution to each of the Sustainable Development Goals

Here are some examples of the many 4th Industrial Revolution measures for Goal 1-16 proposed by the World Economic Forum (with examples from Youtube by corporations marketing their version of each solution).

Goal 1. No poverty

“Poverty alleviation and social protection”


  • AI-enabled digital footprint for credit/mobile money access
  • Blockchain digital identity solutions to enable economic identities, incl. for refugees

= The first example includes an AI analysing a person’s credit rating through his or her digital footprint (Facebook, Twitter, etc.). The second includes collecting information about individuals through Blockchain technology to ensure their background, skills and also implicitly bad habits and behaviours. Thus, the same system as Social Credits in China, which began as Zhima Credits developed byAnt Financial to assess customer credit-worthiness. Ant Financial (formerly Alipay) is Alibaba’s finance company. Alibaba is a strategic partner of the World Economic Forum and its founder Jack Ma is part of the WEF Board of Trustees).

Goal 2. Zero hunger

“Access to food, improved nutrition and food-production security”


  • Low-cost, low-GHG emissions synthetic proteins.
  • AI, sensors and blockchain to eliminate spoilage/loss in food value chain, including smart food storage

= Replace even more real food with synthetic edibles and use technology to monitor all processes that handle food, ideally resulting in zero waste or risk that stores run out of supplies of (synthetic) food.

Goal 3. Good health and well-being

“Advancing global health for all ages, and healthcare services”


  • Smart homecare, smart wearables and virtual healthcare assistants
  • Monitoring and predicting health metrics and disease, including smart implants, wearables

= Get diagnosed by an artificial doctor and have your body monitored via implanted sensors.

Goal 4. Quality education

“Inclusive access to education, quality of education and learning facilities”


  • AI-driven assessments to enable the delivery of continuous feedback
  • AI-designed digital curriculums, teaching plans and content across devices

= Leave the indoctrination to an AI. It never gets tired and will nag until you give up.

Goal 5. Gender equality

“Facilitating gender equality, protecting and empowering women and girls”


  • AI-enabled real-time gender data analytics
  • AI to identify unbiased selection to support inclusivity

= Replace human intelligence with an AI to avoid incorrect judgments. Analyse data to identify and correct unbalanced gender representations.

Goal 6. Clean water and sanitation

“Access to and sustainable management of water, and water sanitation”


  • AI-enhanced scenario modelling for water infrastructure risks and performance
  • Smart water-infrastructure predictive maintenance

= Monitor all water systems. Never mind those who don’t have any water at all.

Goal 7. Affordable and clean energy

“Adopting sustainable energy, and energy-system optimization”


  • 4IR-enabled decentralized and coordinated energy-grid management, incl. IoT, AI
  • Smart infrastructure for operational efficiency and maintenance

= Monitor all energy systems in real time.

Goal 8. Decent work and economic growth

“Sustained and inclusive job creation and productivity, and improving workers’ rights”


  • Robotics for process automation for increased productivity
  • AI-enabled digital support hubs for workers

= Replace workers with robots and use AI to guide the remaining workforce.

Goal 9. Industry, infrastructure and innovation

“Building inclusive, resilient and sustainable infrastructure and industry”


  • IoT-enabled tracking and optimization of industrial machinery
  • Robotics for manufacturing and construction process automation

= Monitor all industrial processes and automate to make people more and more irrelevant.

Goal 10. Reduced inequalities

“Facilitating equality and international collaboration”


  • AI-enabled digital footprint for mobile money access
  • Next-gen demographics data analytics

= Analyse data to identify and correct unwanted differences between countries and regions.

Goal 11. Sustainable cities and communities

“Building smart, inclusive, safe and resilient urban systems”


  • “Sensor-based grid and AI-based urban network management (pollution, waste, water, energy)”
  • “Next-gen satellite, drone and IoT landuse detection and management”

= Develop Smart Cities with real-time monitoring using AI, drones and satellites; surveillance cameras with facial recognition and self-driving cars.

Goal 12. Responsible consumption and production

“Supply-chain optimization and sustainable consumption patterns”


  • “AI- and IoT-enabled consumption and production data analytics”
  • “AI-optimized logistics and distribution networks to minimize costs, emissions and waste”

= Monitor and analyse everyone’s consumption habits in order to lower each individual’s carbon footprint.

Goal 13. Climate action

“Combating climate change and its impacts”


  • “Earth management big data platform e.g. monitoring carbon emissions”
  • “Smart and transparent land-use management”

= Build a global panopticon for monitoring all processes of the earth system.

Goal 14. Life below water

“Conserving and managing the use of marine habitats and resources”


  • “Habitat monitoring and analytics (e.g. monitoring pH and pollution)”
  • “AI-enabled data platforms to monitor and manage fishing activity and compliance”

= Monitor the seas and penalise those found guilty of illegal activities.

Goal 15. Life on land

“Protecting and restoring terrestrial ecosystems”


  • “Real-time habitat and land-use mapping, monitoring and detection of illegal or adverse activities”
  • “4IR-enabled wildlife tracking, monitoring, analytics and pattern forecasting and real-time detection, e.g. disease, animal capture”

= Monitor all forests and penalise those found guilty of illegal activities.

Goal 16. Peace, justice and strong institutions

“Promoting peaceful society, building effective institutions”


  • “AI-enabled identity tax fraud identification (using browsing data, retail data and payments history)”
  • “Blockchain-enabled citizen loyalty and reward platforms”

= Introduce Social Credits to create obedience to authorities and punish unwanted behaviours.

In addition, a number of technologies are listed that are in a developing phase (low maturity) which could potentially be used to meet the goals. Here we find, among other things:

  • Genetic rescue and genome modification for endangered and extinct species and resilience
  • Low-cost, low-GHG emissions synthetic proteins (AI and synthetic biology)
  • Decoding well-being and longevity using AI and sensors for personalized health maps and sequenced genomes and phenotypic data
  • Gene editing (e.g. CRISPR) to tackle human diseases driven by gene mutation

Goal 17: Partnerships for the goals

“Building sustainable global partnerships”

This last goal is not included in WEFs table of 4IR solutions, but both the UN and the Group of 20 (G20) are being strengthened at a rapid pace and the 4IR solutions for each goal that was introduced before the 2019 G20 Summit are strikingly similar.

Society 5.0 for SDGx

Risks of the new technology

The WEF report does see some risks with their Brave New World:

For all of the enormous potential that scaling Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies offer for accelerating action to reach the Global Goals, these technologies also have the potential to exacerbate many existing societal challenges, and to create new risks that could hinder the Global Goals.

  • The AI-led technology system may act prejudiced and biased.
  • It is difficult to achieve full employment if everything is to be automated.
  • Control and power over the technology risks being concentrated to a few actors.

Technology solutions, including AI, blockchain, the IoT, cloud services, 5G and quantum computing can consume large amounts of energy due to the computer processing power required and the number of operations or sensors feeding into the digital system or network.

  • The advanced technological system consumes enormous amounts of energy.
  • AI and computer vision can be used to find and exploit rare raw materials instead of protecting nature.
  • Electronic scrap from all the computers, sensors and devices needed for the technology solution can give rise to environmental pollution.

In 2021, the amount of e-waste generated is predicted to grow to 52.2 million tonnes,71 with just 20% formally recycled.

  • Abuse of the personal data collected can damage reputation, finances and security.
  • Cyberattacks can cripple the system.

Other Warnings

Dirk Helbing, head of the EU project FuturICT, has for some years warned that a fascist surveillance state is about to be built, more advanced than anything ever seen through history. Helbing notes that all functions that a fascist state may need have already been implemented digitally or are being implemented, and can be used on a universal scale at any time.

We are faced with the emergence of a new kind of totalitarianism of global dimensions that must be stopped immediately. An emergency operation is inevitable, if we want to save democracy, freedom, and human dignity. (…) Arguments such as terrorism, cyber threats and climate change have been used to undermine our privacy, our rights, and our democracy.

The sheep have handed the control of the planet over to the wolves. We now need to take it back.

Just as the United Nations has declared the Decade of Action, it is time for all who stand up for free humanity and to reject the technocratic global surveillance state which now threatens us all.

Bicycle Era Fail: Fatalities Hit 25 Year High

This is ‘sustainability’? First, tell everyone to dump cars and ride bicycles. Second, build bike lanes everywhere so they can. Third, watch the death toll go up. Did planners ever consider this obvious consequence? ⁃ TN Editor

Alongside the surging popularity of bike shares and fitness cycling in California comes a sobering statistic: From 2016 through 2018, more cyclists died in traffic accidents across the state than during any three-year period in the past 25 years.

Traffic accidents killed 455 cyclists in California from 2016 through 2018, according to new data from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The figures translate to about 3.9 bike accident fatalities per million people, the highest rate over any three-year period since the mid-1990s, before many cities built extensive bike networks.

Nationwide, the fatal accident rate was lower, but also on the rise. From 2016 through 2018, 2,516 cyclists died in traffic accidents, a rate of about 2.6 per million people. That was the highest three-year death rate since the mid-2000s.

Experts point to a convergence of factors for the upsurge: a sustained rise in how much Americans are driving, the prevalence of distracted driving and a pronounced consumer shift toward big trucks and sport utility vehicles. Some analysts also said there are simply more bikes on the road.

“There’s definitely been an increase in popularity of cycling,” said Julia Griswold, a researcher at the University of California-Berkeley’s Safe Transportation Research and Education Center. “And then also since the economy has recovered from the 2008 crash, there’s been an increase in driving.”

With the unemployment rate near historic lows, more people are commuting to work, intensifying the mix of cars and bikes on city roadways. Bike-share programs are now common in many cities. At the same time, the advent of car ride-hailing services has led to more drivers cruising around waiting for their next pickup.

“The more people are driving, the higher the probability of an incident,” said Jennifer Boldry, director of research at PeopleForBikes, a national nonprofit that advocates for greater bike access and safety.

Exacerbating the risks: Smartphones are ubiquitous in much of America, and thousands of people die each year in accidents caused by distracted driving. Boldry cited a recent study by the National Transportation Safety Board showing that “midblock” collisions — wrecks in areas between intersections, where speeds are higher — tend to cause greater injury to cyclists. Often, drivers involved in those sorts of wrecks say they didn’t see the cyclist they hit.

“My conclusion from that is: It’s really tough to see someone if you’re looking at your phone,” Boldry said.

In addition, bigger autos like SUVs often have larger blind spots than those of smaller cars, making it more difficult to see a cyclist. They also sit higher, which can affect the area of impact. “Think about where an SUV hits you on a bike versus where a very low-riding sedan might hit you,” Boldry said. “You get hit in the leg, the injury is way less severe than if you’re hit in the chest.”

As with other types of fatal accidents involving cars, male cyclists in America die in crashes much more often than women. From 2016 through 2018 in California, almost eight men died in cycling crashes for every woman who died. In the state, men are about twice as likely as women to commute to work by bike, the latest census figures show.

Experts cited several ways to cut the number of bike fatalities, starting with a relatively simple fix: reducing speed limits. “Most people are going to survive a crash if they’re hit at 20 miles an hour,” Griswold said. “But the survival rate drops considerably with each increase in speed above that.”

Investing in appropriate infrastructure — set up to support a mix of autos, transit, bikes and pedestrians — is another key. The recent NTSB study calls for increasing the number of separated bike lanes and well-marked intersections. Boldry noted that increased bike ridership, especially when combined with good infrastructure, can actually enhance safety. The reasons for that are unclear, Boldry said, but it could be, in part, because drivers get used to seeing bikes and adopt safer driving behaviors.

Dave Snyder, executive director of the California Bicycle Coalition, or CalBike, said many California cities have made significant progress in improving infrastructure in recent years, resulting in safer roads for cyclists. Still, he said, more needs to be done in more places.

Some people “see 2,000-pound or larger vehicles going 40 to 60 miles per hour within a few feet of them, and they think, ‘No way. That’s not safe, and it’s not fun,’” Snyder said. “There’s no reason why that has to be. There’s no reason why we can’t create networks of bikeways, even on the main streets, that are protected from that high-speed traffic.”

Another way to lower fatalities is through technology. The NTSB report recommends that cyclists use reflective gear and bike helmets. Automobile sensors that can detect objects in a driver’s blind spot are also a boon, though that technology is sometimes better at seeing cars than at seeing bikes and people.

Boldry said relying extensively on those systems getting better instead of improving infrastructure would be a mistake.

“We’re optimistic that will help, but we want to make sure we’re doing everything we can on the design front to eliminate those conflicts from happening in the first place while we’re waiting on the technology to get good enough to have a positive impact,” she said.

Read full story here…


Starbucks To Dairy-Shame Customers To Skip ‘Environmentally Unfriendly’ Whipped Cream

Evil methane-producing dairy cows give milk that is made into heavy cream that becomes whipped cream in your favorite coffee drink. Starbucks will now help you modify your behavior to give it up in order to save the planet.

Of course, Starbucks has long been on the forefront of all things progressive. Now it has completely succumbed to Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, and will use social engineering techniques to force a change in your behavior, but not theirs. ⁃ TN Editor

Starbucks released the results of its latest sweeping ‘sustainability’ audit and announced plans to become ‘resource positive’ late Tuesday, prompting analysts to ask: What, exactly, does that mean?

And although the company and many of its institutional shareholders have made a big deal about Starbucks’ sustainability rhetoric and celebrated its decision to phase out plastic straws to save the sea turtles, on Wednesday, investors shunned Starbucks shares (they were down more than 1%) as the company unveiled what Bloomberg described as its “ambitious goals” to reduce the environmental footprint that produces more waste every year to equal two Empire State buildings.

To wit, by 2030, the cafe chain is targeting 50% reductions in the amount of water it uses, the carbon it emits and trash it sends to landfills.

In “A Message From Starbucks’ CEO”, a blog post published Tuesday evening, CEO Kevin Johnson regaled readers with a history of Starbucks’ commitment to environmental responsibility, while rattling off a list of accomplishments.

But in the report, which was analyzed by Bloomberg, Starbucks’ hired environmental consultants warned customers that the best thing they could do to reduce the company’s harmful impact on the planet would be to buy cheaper drinks, and forego the milk.

That’s right: Instead of buying fancy frappucinos and indulgent espresso-based desserts, customers would do better to buy simple plain black espresso.

And if customers must have the frappucino, they should think about skipping the whipped cream.

Adding whipped cream to millions of Starbucks Corp. drinks emits 50 times as much greenhouse gas as the company’s private jet. Overall, dairy products are the biggest source of carbon dioxide emissions across the coffee giant’s operations and supply chain.

As far as what Starbucks corporate can accomplish, the task does seem daunting.

The task is immense: Starbucks in 2018 was responsible for emitting 16 million metric tons of greenhouse gases, using 1 billion cubic meters of water and dumping 868 metric kilotons – more than twice the weight of the Empire State Building – of coffee cups and other waste. The audit was conducted with sustainability consultant Quantis and the World Wildlife Fund.

And Johnson admits that Starbucks can’t achieve its goals alone: It needs its customers to change their behavior as well.

“We know this journey will be challenging, we know we can’t do this alone, and we know this will require others to join us,” Chief Executive Officer Kevin Johnson said in an interview.

Read full story here…


Survey: The World Is Turning Against Capitalism

The United Nations’ propaganda war against Capitalism and Free Enterprise is paying off as a new global survey shows 56% agreeing that Capitalism does more harm than good. Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, is the only alternative offered. ⁃ TN Editor

A majority of people around the world believe capitalism in its current form is doing more harm than good, a survey found ahead of this week’s Davos meeting of business and political leaders.

This year was the first time the “Edelman Trust Barometer”, which for two decades has polled tens of thousands of people on their trust in core institutions, sought to understand how capitalism itself was viewed.

The study’s authors said that earlier surveys showing a rising sense of inequality prompted them to ask whether citizens were now starting to have more fundamental doubts about the capitalist-based democracies of the West.

“The answer is yes,” David Bersoff, lead researcher on the study produced by U.S. communications company Edelman.

“People are questioning at that level whether what we have today, and the world we live in today, is optimized for their having a good future.”

The poll contacted over 34,000 people in 28 countries, from Western liberal democracies like the United States and France to those based on a different model such as China and Russia, with 56% agreeing that “capitalism as it exists today does more harm than good in the world”.

The survey was launched in 2000 to explore the theories of political scientist Francis Fukuyama, who after the collapse of communism declared that liberal capitalist democracy had seen off rival ideologies and so represented “the end of history”.

That conclusion has since been challenged by critics who point to everything from the rising influence of China to the spread of autocratic leaders, trade protectionism and worsening inequality in the wake of the 2007/08 global financial crisis.

On a national level, lack of trust in capitalism was highest in Thailand and India on 75% and 74% respectively, with France close behind on 69%. Majorities prevailed in other Asian, European, Gulf, African and Latin American states.

Read full story here…

Trump Admin Will Approve Massive Alternative Energy Projects For Federal Land

Since President Trump has put the brakes on climate change policies, it is incongruous that the administration will now approve massive alternative energy projects on public lands, all of which will involve Public-Private-Partnerships. ⁃ TN Editor

The Trump administration is poised this year to do what congressional Democrats and other critics of the president’s “energy dominance” campaign have been demanding for months: advance large-scale renewable energy projects on federal lands.

By summer, the Bureau of Land Management plans to have issued records of decision (RODs) approving five commercial-scale solar and wind projects, as well as a major proposal to open 21,000 acres in Southern California for geothermal energy leasing, according to a BLM state-by-state priority project list obtained by E&E News.

To be sure, the priority list includes plenty of high-profile fossil fuel and mining projects, including issuing an ROD by April for a revised management plan that could open up sensitive wildlife habitat within the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska to oil drilling.

But the priority list under President Trump also includes target dates to issue final approvals for:

  • The Gemini Solar Project in Nevada, which would have the capacity to produce 690 megawatts of electricity, ranking it among the world’s largest photovoltaic power plants. Projected to sit on roughly 7,100 acres of BLM-managed lands about 33 miles northeast of Las Vegas, the project also includes a large solar storage capacity that would allow it to feed power to the energy grid after sundown.BLM in December published a final environmental impact statement (EIS) and proposed resource management plan amendment for the project in the Federal Register, kicking off a 30-day public protest period running through Jan. 27.
  • The Crimson Solar Project in California, which would have a capacity to produce 350 MW of electricity, or enough to power more than 100,000 homes. Proposed to be built on about 2,700 acres of federal lands in Riverside County, it also is projected to include a battery storage component allowing it to supply power after the sun goes down.It’s set for an ROD as early as February.
  • The Haiwee Geothermal Leasing Area, which would offer more than 21,000 acres in California for utility-scale geothermal power development. BLM has estimated that the proposed leasing area could spur $1 billion in investment in geothermal power projects capable of producing enough electricity to power about 117,000 homes.An ROD is expected in February.
  • The Walker Ridge Wind Energy Project in Northern California, which would string together about 42 wind turbines across 2,270 acres of federal lands and have the capacity to power about 145,000 homes.BLM is expected to approve the project by June.
  • The Borderlands Wind Project in New Mexico. The project in Catron County would have a capacity to produce up to 100 MW of electricity. The priority list forecasts issuing a final EIS for the project in March and an ROD approving it in July.
  • The Yellow Pine Solar Project in Nevada, which would have the capacity to produce up to 250 MW of electricity. It’s proposed to be built on roughly 9,000 acres of federal lands about 32 miles west of Las Vegas, and BLM withdrew the area from new mining claims for as long as two years while it conducts an EIS of the proposal. Yellow Pine is not as far along in the federal review process as the other projects on the list. A draft EIS is expected in January, followed by a final EIS in May. The project list forecasts issuing an ROD in July.

The projected approval dates come as conservation groups and congressional Democrats have criticized Trump’s focus on oil and gas drilling and mining on federal lands.

To date, BLM under Trump has approved only two solar power projects on federal lands, and no wind or geothermal projects.

BLM, as it has done for months, insists that solar, wind and geothermal energy have always been a part of the administration’s “all-of-the-above energy approach,” though the bureau added in an emailed statement that what projects get done are “subject to free markets.”

“The number of pending proposals for any type of energy development, including renewables, is driven by the number of applications we receive — which in turn is driven by market forces beyond our control,” the statement says.

BLM ‘caught in their own little box’

The list of renewable energy projects set for approval, though unusual, does not point to a sudden change of heart in the Trump administration’s views of renewable energy, said Scott Sklar, director of the George Washington University Solar Institute in Washington.

Rather, Sklar suggested the administration doesn’t have any choice but to make at least some effort to advance renewable energy projects, especially solar, now that “the industry is starting to get up to scale.”

If the Trump administration is going to conduct an American “energy dominance” campaign, he said, it can’t push to increase offshore oil production, for example, and not support offshore wind energy.

“Not that it’s in their hearts, but they can’t deny it,” he said of renewables’ place in the energy market.

“They’ve supported oil and gas development on federal lands, so why would you not support renewable energy? In the end, they’re caught in their own little box,” he said.

He added, “They are just sort of stuck, even though they probably wish [renewable energy] would just go away.”

The administration’s motivation is less important to congressional Democrats than the fact that solar, wind and geothermal power project applications are being processed.

Read full story here…


WEF: Future Cities Must Be Sustainable To Be ‘Smart’

The elitist World Economic Forum is 100% behind Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, claiming that the future Smart City should be ‘first and foremost a sustainable city to minimize its environmental impact.’ ⁃ TN Editor

And since biodiversity is a reasonable indicator of the overall health of an ecosystem, we should try to optimize it. In consequence we might improve the health of the inhabitants and liveability of urban environments.

How can cities of the future transform themselves to be more sustainable, healthier and biodiverse? Here are a few ideas.

A proposal for tomorrow’s cities

The goal of cities of the future should be to create a variety of undisturbed land-based and aquatic biotopes within urban environments, connected by corridors for animals to migrate and for seeds to spread. Green roofs, conventional parks, private gardens and green facades could create additional space for animals and plants to thrive.

Toronto is one example of a city that adapted development regulations according to this model, by passing the Green Roof Bylaw, which requires a certain ratio of green roofing for new developments above a certain size.

Toronto also offers subsidies for building owners willing to create green roofs with their Eco-Roof Incentive Program, something other cities should mimic; and some already do. While not all municipalities can create a costly incentive program like Toronto, they could, for example, reduce the mowing of public grasslands, sidewalks and other areas, which would improve living conditions for bees and other species. An even eco-friendlier policy might be to use animals for grazing these grasslands, providing natural fertilization and means of local food production. In Munich, one of Germany’s largest cities, a flock of sheep is using Englischer Garten, one of the largest urban public parks, as pasture, which could be model for other public parks.

Municipalities could also declare a certain part of their forests as protected areas or plant biodiverse forests with native trees, creating new biotopes. The same should be considered for certain ponds, lakes and creeks that should be situated in a perimeter prohibiting conventional agriculture, fostering eutrophication of close-by aquatic environments.

Such environmental strategies for future city development should be embedded into a strategic report accessible by all city stakeholders, providing explanations, guidelines and contact information for further help. One model for other cities is Vancouver, which is currently implementing its Greenest City Action Plan, comprised of local food production, strategic tree planting in public and private spaces, improving microclimate, food security and biodiversity. Governments could provide additional incentives, like free access to endemic seeds via community seedbanks, garden design assistance and subsidies or property tax reductions for those making positive contributions to the environment on their private propery.

Technology is key to quantifying biodiversity and understanding the evolution of urban ecosystems. Drone overflights feeding data into a wildlife-recognition model combined with geotagging could help us understand the evolution of the urban ecosystem. Sensors could analyse soil humidity, temperature and composition and monitor wildlife, informing strategic planning.

All cities should join together to create an open database so researchers across the globe can access data and provide insights to local communities. Based on this knowledge, cities could enhance their urban farming and gardening programs, increasing local organic food production and further improving the health of inhabitants. Such community food gardens also educate and inspire more sustainable behavior while providing many other benefits.

Read full story here…

World’s First Human Composting Facility Coming To Seattle In 2021

Earth worship is complete by offering your dead body back to nature as compost in the ‘death-care revolution.’. All that’s missing is the euthanasia center to hasten the process, as in the 1973 cult movie, Soylent Green. ⁃ TN Editor

In a move hailed as a positive step by environmentalists, Washington became the first U.S. state to legalize the composting of human bodies in May of this year.

And now, the Evergreen State will become home to the world’s first human composting facility in 2021 thanks to Katrina Spade, founder and CEO of Recompose, after the legislation she helped enact goes into effect in May 2020.

According to its website, Spade founded the revolutionary company with the goal of offering “natural organic reduction to the public,” a system that converts human remains into soil as an alternative to cremation or burial.

Recompose’s website explains the benefits of natural organic reduction:

“By converting human remains into soil, we minimize waste, avoid polluting groundwater with embalming fluid, and prevent the emissions of CO2 from cremation and from the manufacturing of caskets, headstones, and grave liners.

By allowing organic processes to transform our bodies and those of our loved ones into a useful soil amendment, we help to strengthen our relationship to the natural cycles while enriching the earth.”

In November, around 75 people attended what was described by the Seattle Times as “a housewarming party for a funeral home where bodies would not be burned or buried, but laid in individual vessels to become clean, usable compost.”

Spade told the crowd, made up of investors, doctors, architects, funeral directors, legislators, and lawyers:

“You are all members of the death-care revolution.”

When all is said and done, the process will yield about a cubic yard of soil per person. The soil can be taken home by friends or family and used to grow a tree or a garden. Remaining soil will be used on 640 acres of conservation land in southern Washington that will one day become an ecologically sustainable village.

In contrast, those who have opted to be cremated as a means to save money or take up less space geographically, have inadvertently left a burden on their family members. Spade explained:

“These days, some families regard even ashes from cremation as a burden, not a joy. As in, ‘we’ve had these ashes in the garage for six years.’ And we’re creating a cubic yard of soil.”

While Recompose is not yet up and running, the company is aiming for a $5,500 price tag for its natural organic reduction services while a green burial in the state of Washington averages around $6,000, cremation can range anywhere from $1,000-$7,000, and a conventional burial in a cemetery can set you back at least $8,000.

The idea may seem outlandish or uncomfortable to some, but Recompose is more than just a pipe dream. As an architecture student, Spade first became interested in the funeral industry back in 2012. She quickly delved into the idea of “environmentally sustainable, urban-focused method of disposition of the dead,” after seeing a lack of environmental ethic in both the cremation and burial industries.

In 2014 Spade’s idea took a turn toward reality when she received the Echoing Green Climate Fellowship. With the funding that followed she founded the non-profit Urban Death Project (UDP) and began working with soil science researchers, law professionals, and those in the funeral industry to lay the groundwork for a revolutionary system of death care the world had never seen.

Over the next few years Spade continued to work on UDP before securing over $90,000 via a Kickstarter campaign. Her idea also reached wide audiences through worldwide media coverage.

Then in 2017 Space founded Recompose, a public benefit corporation, to bring her idea to reality—a reality now taking shape in a warehouse in SoDo, where the company is ready to live out their mission to “offer a new form of death care that honors both our loved ones and the planet earth.”

Read full story here…

Lagarde: European Central Bank Demands ‘Key Role’ In Climate Change

Christine Lagarde, having switched from the IMF to heading the ECB, has shocked analysts by demanding a ‘key role’ in climate change matters. This is a tectonic shift in the mission of central banks.

Note also that the Minneapolis Fed chair states that its time for central banks to decide how to redistribute wealth.

The two go hand in hand, but confirm that the central banking system is fully complicit, if not causative, in the master plan to implement Sustainable Development, aka, Technocracy.

Ottmar Edenhofer, lead author of the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report in 2007 stated, “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.” ⁃ TN Editor

Having failed miserably to “trickle down” stock market wealth for a decade as was their intention, something Ben Bernanke made clear in his Nov 4, 2010 WaPo op-ed, central banks have moved on to more noble causes.

Over the weekend Minneapolis Fed chair Neil Kashkari suggested it was time to allow central banks to directly decide how to redistribute wealth, stating unironically that “monetary policy can play the kind of redistributing role once thought to be the preserve of elected officials”, apparently failing to realize that the Fed is not made up of elected officials but unelected technocrats who serve the bidding of the Fed’s commercial bank owners.

Failing to decide how is poor and who is rich, central bankers are happy to settle with merely fixing the climate.

Overnight, Bank of Japan Governor Haruhiko Kuroda joined his European central banking peers by endorsing government plans to compile a fiscal spending package for disaster relief and measures to help the economy stave off heightening global risks. Kuroda said that natural disasters, such as the strong typhoon that struck Japan in October, may erode asset and collateral value, and the associated risk may pose a significant challenge for financial institutions, Kuroda said.

In short, it’s time for central banks to target global warming climate change:

“Climate-related risk differs from other risks in that its relatively long-term impact means that the effects will last longer than other financial risks, and the impact is far less predictable,” he said. “It is therefore necessary to thoroughly investigate and analyse the impact of climate-related risk.”

Kuroda’s crusade to tame climate came just hours after the ECB’s new chief, Christine Lagarde pushed for climate change to be part of a strategic review of the European Central Bank’s purpose, “spearheading a global drive to make the environment an essential part of monetary policymaking.”

As the FT put it, the plan “underlines Ms Lagarde’s declared goal as president to make climate change a “mission-critical” priority for the central bank. It comes as European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, whose team on Wednesday was officially endorsed by the European Parliament, is about to unveil her first landmark climate policy package.

“We have reached the point where the reputational risk of doing nothing is large enough that they will have to announce something at the end of the review — the big question is what,” said Stanislas Jourdan, head of Positive Money Europe, a campaign group.

Funny Jourdan should bring up reputational risk: after all he was referring to the criminally convicted former IMF head, who recently incinerated tens of billions in IMF bailout funds in Argentina. The same former IMF head who in April 2016 admitted that for the IMF to “thrive”, the world has to “go downhill”, and that the IMF “to be sustainable” it needs to be “very in touch with our client base” while adding that “when the world goes well and we’ve had years of growth, as was the case back in 2006 and 2007, the IMF doesn’t do so well both financially and otherwise.”

Naturally, Lagarde’s attempt to hijack the ECB’s mission from one of failing to hit an inflation target for years, diverting from Mario Draghi’s disastrous bubble legacy, and from making the wealth divide between the rich and poor the widest it has ever been, and to one of virtually unlimited debt monetization and MMT under the virtue-signalling guise of monetizing fiscal deficits to “save the climate” was promptly frowned upon by real central bankers such as Bundesbank president Jens Weidmann, who said last month that he would view “very critically” any attempt to redirect ECB monetary policy actions to tackle climate change. Then again, as has long been the case, the general public is by now well aware of Weidmann’s “bad cop” act – when push comes to shove, the German always folds, he will fold again.

It wasn’t just Weidmann who was appalled by Lagarde’s mission creep. Overnight, Rabobank’s Michael Every wrote that “just 24-hours after the Daily made the joke that said central banks will be adding a CO2 target to their CPI target, we see the Financial Times report that ECB President Lagarde wants a key role for climate change in the upcoming ECB review; this is apparently being opposed by the Germans, who believe that central banks are only supposed to focus on not-getting CPI right.”

Read full story here…