Global Business Leaders Join The United Nations To Destroy Capitalism And Free Enterprise
The elite drivers of globalization are bonding with the United Nations to promote Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy, and hasten the destruction of Capitalism and Free Enterprise.
Members of the new alliance include Allianz, Bank of America, Citi, Calpers, UBS, Standard Chartered, Infosys and numerous global equity funds.
The UN is openly pledged to destroy Capitalism and Free Enterprise in order to implement its global economic system called Sustainable Development. ⁃ TN Editor
In a bid to scale up investment efforts to reach sustainable development targets, the Secretary-General on Wednesday convened the first meeting of a new UN-backed corporate alliance to discuss plans for spending on sustainability, likely to be in the trillions of dollars.
The Global Investors for Sustainable Development Alliance (GISD), a UN-supported coalition of 30 business leaders, works to provide decisive leadership in mobilizing resources for sustainable development, with the core objective being to identify incentives for long-term sustainable investments.
“We face widening inequality, increased devastation from conflicts and disasters and a rapidly warming Earth. These leaders have seized our sense of urgency, recognizing that our pace must be at a run, not a crawl”, António Guterres told business leaders. “They are committing to cooperate across borders, across financial sectors and even with their competitors, because it is both ethical and good business sense to invest in sustainable development for all people on a healthy planet.”
The Alliance will operate on a two-year timeline, from October 2019 through October 2021, focusing on solutions related to long-term SDG investment, identifying such investment opportunities for developing countries, and enhancing the impact of private funding in development efforts.
Development needs are estimated at trillions of dollars per year, and even if funding from all public sources is maximized, there will still be significant shortfalls. The mobilization of the private sector “will be critical to the implementation of the SDGs”, the UN’s Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) has said.
Formation of the alliance comes amidst growing recognition in the corporate community that the success of companies is “inextricably linked” to a sustainable future for the world.
“The Alliance has come together to help drive financing for the 2030 Agenda as we enter a crucial decade of action to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)” Deputy Secretary-General Amina Mohammed said “and, in particular, to help forge concrete solutions for securing the long-term finance and investment necessary to achieve the SDGs.”
“This is a very important day. But it is only the beginning. Over the next two years the GISD will help drive the Decade of Action toward success and report back to the Secretary-General on a regular basis”, she added.
A few of the actionable solutions the alliance is expected to advance, include encouraging innovation in financial instruments, revisiting existing and new business models aligned with the 2030 Agenda, and addressing industry obstacles to long-term investment in sustainable development.
As for UN support, GISD members are backed by a number of actors within the organization’s system, and other partners who will assist the alliance in implementing the coalition’s plan of action. View the full list of supporters here.
A prolonged global recession could signal a death knell for UN plans to conquer the world’s economic system as contributions dry up. President Trump may be less than generous in making up the difference. ⁃ TN Editor
The United Nations is running a deficit of $230 million, Secretary General Antonio Guterres warned on Monday, and may run out of money by the end of October unless world governments immediately meet their financial obligations.
U.S. taxpayers would most likely be hardest hit by any immediate cash injection into the global organization.
The United States is by far the U.N.’s biggest financial contributor, providing 22 percent of its operating budget and funding 28 percent of peacekeeping missions, which currently cost $8 billion annually.
The next two major contributors are Germany and the U.K.
In a letter intended for the 37,000 employees at the U.N. secretariat and obtained by AFP, Guterres said unspecified, “additional stop-gap measures” would have to be taken to ensure salaries and entitilements are met.
These might include holding less meetings and cutting back on travel and associated entitlements.
“Member States have paid only 70 per cent of the total amount needed for our regular budget operations in 2019. This translates into a cash shortage of $230 million at the end of September. We run the risk of depleting our backup liquidity reserves by the end of the month,” he wrote.
Donald Trump has long pushed for reform of the U.N. and just last week warned the “future does not belong to globalists” in a warning to the organization’s leaders:
In December 2017 Nikki Haley, the then United States Ambassador to the organization, announced the federal government had reduced its contribution to the U.N.’s annual budget by $285 million, as Breitbart News reported.
Green Fascists Charge Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro With Ecocide Over Amazon Fires
Green Fascist radicals have the ears and pages of mainstream media like the New York Times to openly demonize a duly elected President of a sovereign nation in order to bully, intimidate, slander and generally promote their insane causes. This is the epitome of the worst sort of hate speech and fake news but is of no concern to major media outlets.
Ecocide is defined as:
“the extensive destruction, damage to or loss of ecosystem(s) of a given territory, whether by human agency or other causes, to such an extent that peaceful enjoyment by the inhabitants of that territory has been severely diminished.”
Americans (and Brazilians) need to understand that these forces of Green Fascism, aka Technocracy, will not be silenced until they are completely rejected by citizens everywhere. If these control-freaks were ever to rise to power, their jackboot would stamp out freedom and liberty everywhere.
⁃ TN Editor
Since August, as vast stretches of the Amazon rainforest were being reduced to ashes and outrage and calls for action intensified, a group of lawyers and activists who have been advancing a radicalidea have seen a silver lining in the unfolding tragedy: One day, a few years from now, they imagined Brazil’s president, Jair Bolsonaro, being hauled to The Hague to stand trial for ecocide, a term broadly understood to mean the willful and widespread destruction of the environment, and one that, they hope, will eventually be on par with other crimes against humanity.
There is no international crime today that can be used to neatly hold world leaders or corporate chief executives criminally responsible in peacetime for ecological catastrophes that result in the type of mass displacements and population wipeouts more commonly associated with war crimes. But environmentalists say the world should treat ecocide as a crime against humanity — like genocide — now that the imminent and long-term threats posed by a warming planet are coming into sharper focus.
In Mr. Bolsonaro they have come to see something of an ideal villain tailor-made for a legal test case.
“He has become a poster boy for the need for a crime of ecocide,” said Jojo Mehta, the co-founder of Stop Ecocide, a group that is seeking to give the International Criminal Court in The Hague the jurisdiction to prosecute leaders and businesses that knowingly cause widespread environmental damage. “It’s awful, but at the same time it’s timely.”
In his keynote address at the conference, Mr. Palme argued that the world urgently needed a unified approach to safeguard the environment. “The air we breathe is not the property of any one nation, we share it,” he said. “The big oceans are not divided by national frontiers; they are our common property.” That idea got little traction at the time and Mr. Palme died in 1986 having made little headway in the quest to establish binding principles to protect the environment.
During the 1980s and 1990s, diplomats considered including ecocide as a grave crime as they debated the authorities of the International Criminal Court, which was primarily established to prosecute war crimes. But when the court’s founding document, known as the Rome Statute, went into force in 2002, language that would have criminalized large-scale environmental destruction had been stripped out at the insistence of major oil producing nations.
In 2016, the court’s top prosecutor signaled an interest in prioritizing cases within its jurisdiction that featured the “destruction of the environment, the illegal exploitation of natural resources or the illegal dispossession of land.”
That move came as activists seeking to criminalize ecocide had been laying the groundwork for a landmark change to the court’s remit. Their plan is to get a state that is party to the Rome Statute — or a coalition of them — to propose an amendment to its charter establishing ecocide as a crime against peace. At least two-thirds of the countries that are signatories to the Rome Statute would have to back the initiative to outlaw ecocide for the court to get an expanded mandate, and even then it would only apply to countries that accept the amendment. Still, it could change the way the world thinks about environmental destruction.
Richard Rogers, a lawyer who specializes in international criminal law and human rights, said that if ecocide campaigners and countries suffering the effects of climate change put forward a narrow definition of the crime, it could quickly garner widespread support. “We’ve seen in the past few years a huge shift in public opinion, and we’re entering a phase where there is going to be huge pressure on governments to do more,” said Mr. Rogers, a partner at Global Diligence, a firm that advises companies and governments on risk mitigation.
Given the number of countries and businesses that would recoil at the prospect of being held criminally responsible for environmental damage, he said, it is vital to come up with criteria that reserve prosecution for cases in which “massive and systematic” environmental destruction is done “knowingly or intentionally.”
Environmental activists say there is no shortage of culprits who could be put on trial if the world were to decide to outlaw ecocide. But few are as compelling as Mr. Bolsonaro, a far-right former Army captain who campaigned on a promise to roll back the land rights of indigenous people and open protected areas of the Amazon to mining, farming and logging.
From an evidentiary standpoint, Mr. Bolsonaro is an attractive potential defendant because he has been so starkly disdainful of his own country’s environmental laws and regulations. He vowed to put an end to fines issued by the agency that enforces environmental laws. He has asserted that protecting the environment matters only to vegans. He complains that Brazil’s 1988 Constitution set aside too much land to indigenous communities who “don’t speak our language.”
Mr. Bolsonaro is by no means the only world leader reviled by environmentalists. President Trump has been assailed for rolling back environmental regulations and pulling out of the Paris climate accord.
Facing a cascade of international pressure and a boycott of some Brazilian exports, Mr. Bolsonaro last month ordered a military operation to put out fires in the Amazon. But the government’s overriding message has been that the world’s angst about the Amazon is an unwelcome and unwarranted intrusion on Brazil’s sovereignty.
Brazilian President Bolsonaro Schools UN On Amazon, Freedom
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro blistered the United Nations to correct outright falsehoods by rejecting environmentalist hysteria over the Amazon and defending its sovereign right to self-determination.
Needless to say, environmental extremists immediately cried ‘Foul!’ and claimed that Bolsonaro does not speak for Brazil and that he is purposely destroying the Amazon rain forest. Bolsonaro further aggravated atheists and worshipers of ‘Mother Earth’ by quoting John 8:32: ‘And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.’
⁃ TN Editor
74th Session of the United Nations General Assembly General Debate Statement by Mr. Jair Messias Bolsonaro, President of the Federative Republic of Brazil 24 September 2019
Mr. President of the General Assembly, Tijjani Muhammad-Bande, Mr. Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, Heads of State, Government, and Delegations, Ladies and gentlemen,
I present to you a new Brazil, one that reemerges from the brink of socialism. A Brazil that is being rebuilt on the basis of the yearnings and ideals of its people.
In my government, Brazil is on a path to rebuilding trust with the world, lowering unemployment, violence and the risk for business activities. We are doing so by cutting red tape, regulations and, above all, by example.
My country has been on the verge of socialism, which has put us in a state of widespread corruption, serious economic recession, high criminality rates and unending attacks on the family and religious values that underpin our traditions.
In 2013, an agreement between the Workers Party government and the Cuban dictatorship brought to Brazil 10 thousand physicians with no professional registration. They were prevented from bringing their spouses and children, had 7 5% of their wages confiscated by the regime and were denied basic freedoms, such as that of coming and going.
True slave work, believe it …
With the support of human rights agencies from both Brazil and the UN!
Even before I took over, almost 90% of these physicians left Brazil due to unilateral action by the Cuban regime. Those that stayed on will undergo medical qualification in order to able to practice their profession.
This is how our country stopped supporting the Cuban dictatorship, no longer sending Havana 300 million dollars every year.
History shows that as early as the 1960s, Cuban agents were sent to several countries to help establish dictatorships.
A few decades ago they tried to change the Brazilian regime and that of other Latin American countries.
They have been defeated!
Brazilian civilians and military were killed and many others had their reputation destroyed, but we won that war and safeguarded our liberty.
These agents from the Cuban regime were also taken to Venezuela by Hugo Chavez. Today around 60 thousand of them control and interfere with every area of local society, especially in intelligence and defense.
Venezuela, once a thriving and democratic country, undergoes today the cruelty of socialism.
Socialism is working in Venezuela!
Everyone is poor and has no freedom!
Brazil also feels the impact from the Venezuelan dictatorship. A part of the 4 million people that escaped the country, fleeing hunger and violence, migrated to Brazil. We have done our part to help them through Operation Welcome, an operation conducted by the Brazilian Army that has gained world-wide acclaim.
We have been working with other countries, including the United States, with a view to reestablishing democracy in Venezuela. We are also making a serious effort to ensure that no other South American country has to experience this nefarious regime.
The Forum of Sao Paulo, a criminal organization established in 1990 by Fidel Castro, Lula and Hugo Chavez in order to spread and implement socialism in Latin America, remains alive and must be fought.
Ladies and gentlemen,
The search of prosperity requires us to adopt policies that bring us closer to nations that have developed economically and consolidated their democracies.
There can be no political freedom in the absence of economic freedom. And viceversa. Free market, concessions and privatizations are all present today in Brazil.
The economy is recovering and breaking with the vices and chains of almost two decades of fiscal recklessness, factionalism in the state apparatus and widespread corruption. Economic opening, professional management and productivity gains are primary goals of our government.
We are opening the economy and integrating ourselves to global value chains. In only eight months, we have concluded the two biggest trade agreements in our history, those between Mercosur and the European Union and between Mercosur and the European Free Trade Area. In the upcoming months a number of other agreements will follow.
We are also ready to start the accession process to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). We are already at an advanced state, adopting best practices at every level, from financial regulation to environmental protection.
Ms. Ysany Kalapalo, now let’s talk about the Amazon.
First of all, my government is solemnly committed to environmental preservation and sustainable development, to the benefit of Brazil and the world.
Brazil is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of biodiversity and mineral resources.
Our Amazon rainforest is larger than Western Europe and it remains virtually untouched. This shows that we are one of the countries that protects the most its environment.
This time of the year, dry weather and winds favor both spontaneous and criminal fires. It is also important to mention that indigenous and local populations also use fire as part of their culture and means of survival.
All countries have their issues. However, the sensationalist attacks we have suffered from much of the international media due to the Amazon fires have aroused our patriotic sentiment.
It is a misconception to state that the Amazon is a world heritage; and it is a misconception, as scientists attest, to say that our forest is the lung of the world. Resorting to these fallacies, some countries, instead of helping, have followed the lies of the media and behaved disrespectfully, with a colonialist spirit.
They have questioned what is most sacred to us: our sovereignty!
One of them, at the last G7 meeting, dared to suggest imposing sanctions against Brazil without even listening to us. I am grateful to those who have not accepted to carry out this absurd proposal.
I am especially grateful to President Donald Trump, who well epitomized the spirit that must prevail among UN Member States: respect for the freedom and sovereignty of each of us.
Today, 14% of the Brazilian territory is demarcated as indigenous land, but we must understand that our natives are human beings, just like any of us. They want and deserve to enjoy the same rights as all of us.
I want to make it clear: Brazil will not increase its already demarcated indigenous lands to 20%, as some Heads of State would like it to happen.
There are 225 indigenous peoples in Brazil, as well as references from 70 tribes living in isolated places. Each people or tribe has their chief, their culture, their traditions, their customs and especially their way of seeing the world.
The views of an indigenous leader does not represent that of all the Brazilian indigenous population. Often some of these leaders, such as Cacique Raoni, are used as a ploy by foreign governments in their information warfare to advance their interests in the Amazon.
Unfortunately, some people, both inside and outside Brazil, with the support of NGOs, insist on treating and keeping our natives as cavemen.
Brazil now has a President who cares about those who were there before the Portuguese arrived. Indigenous people do not want to be poor landowners on rich lands – especially on the richest lands in the world. This is the case of the Ianomami and Raposa Serra do Sol reserves. In these reserves, there is plenty of gold, diamond, uranium, niobium and rare earths, among others.
And these territories are huge! The Ianomami Reserve alone has approximately 95,000 km2, the size of Portugal or Hungary, although only 15,000 indigenous live in the area.
This shows that those who attack us are not concerned with the indigenous human being, but with the mineral wealth and biodiversity in these areas.
OPEN LETTER TO THE INDIGENOUS POPULATIONS OF BRAZIL
The Indigenous Farmers Group of Brazil, composed by various ethnic groups and with representatives in all units of the Brazilian Federation, which inhabit an area of over 30 million hectares of the Brazilian territory, comes, respectfully, before the Brazilian society, to fully endorse the indigenous YSANI KALAP ALO, of the Xingu-Mato Grosso Indigenous Park, so that she can explain to the United Nations General Assembly, in New York, the reality lived by the Indigenous Peoples of Brazil, as well as uncover the lies disseminated by the national and international media, which insist in keeping the indigenous peoples of Brazil as an endless market reserve, serving the purposes of countries that still see Brazil as a colony without rules and without sovereignty.
Brazil has 14% per cent of its national territory demarcated as indigenous land, and many communities are thirsting for the development of this part of the country to finally take place, without ideological or bureaucratic constraints, which will improve quality of life in the areas of entrepreneurship, health and education.
A new indigenous policy in Brazil is needed. Time is running out!
Bold measures can and should be encouraged in the pursuit of indigenous economic autonomy. Certainly, if a set of decisions comes along these lines, we can envision a new model for the Brazilian indigenous issue.
A new time for indigenous communities is of utmost importance. The situation of extreme poverty we are living in, surviving only from welfare and basic food supply, has never represented dignity and development.
Radical environmentalism and outdated indigenous studies are out of tune with what indigenous peoples want. They represent backwardness, marginalization and utter absence of decisiveness.
The reality now requires that the world, in the United Nations General Assembly arena, know our wishes and aspirations in the voice of the indigenous YSANI KALAP ALO, who will share the real picture of the environment and the Brazilian indigenous communities.
Therefore, YSANI KALAP ALO enjoys the trust and prestige of the indigenous leaders who want development, empowerment and protagonism, and is able to represent a list of ethnic groups that endorsed this letter.
The United Nations has played a key role in overcoming colonialism and cannot accept this mentality to return to these halls and corridors under any pretext.
We must not forget that the world needs to be fed. France and Germany, for example, use more than 50% of their territories for agriculture, while Brazil only uses 8% of its land for food production.
61 % of our territory is preserved!
Our policy is zero tolerance for crime, including environmental crimes.
I reiterate that any initiative to help or support the preservation of the Amazon rainforest, or other biomes, must be treated in full respect of Brazilian sovereignty.
We also reject attempts to instrumentalize environmental issues or indigenous policy in favor of foreign political and economic interests, especially those disguised as good intentions.
We are ready to harness our full potential sustainably through partnerships and added value.
Brazil reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the highest human rights standards, with the promotion of democracy and freedom – of expression, of religion and of press. This is a commitment that goes hand in hand with the fight against corruption and criminality, which are urgent demands from the Brazilian society.
We will continue to contribute, within and outside the United Nations, to build a world free of impunity, with no safe havens for criminals and corrupts.
In my government, the Italian terrorist Cesare Battisti escaped from Brazil, was arrested in Bolivia and extradited to Italy. Another three Paraguayan and one Chilean terrorists who lived in Brazil as political refugees were also repatriated.
Terrorists under the disguise of a politically persecuted person will not find asylum in Brazil anymore.
Recently, socialist presidents that came before me embezzled hundreds of billions of dollars, corrupting part of our media and our Parliament, all for a project to attain absolute power.
They were judged and punished thanks to the patriotism, perseverance and bravery of a judge who is an icon in my country: Dr. Sergio Moro, our current Minister of Justice and Public Security.
These presidents also transferred a considerable amount of resources to other countries, aiming at promoting and implementing similar projects throughout our region. This funding source has dried up.
The same authorities came here every year and made uncommitted statements about issues that never addressed the real interests of Brazil nor contributed to world stability. Despite that, they were praised.
In my country, we had to do something about the nearly 70 thousand killings and countless violent crimes that annually tore apart the Brazilian population. Life is the most basic human right. Our policemen were the preferred target of crime. Only in 2017, around 400 policemen were brutally murdered. This is changing.
Measures were implemented and we managed to cut murder rates in more than 20% in the first six months of my government.
The seizure of cocaine and oth????r drugs has reached a record high.
Brazil is safer and more welcoming today. We have just extended visa exemptions to countries such as the United States, Japan, Australia and Canada, and we are currently considering the adoption of similar measures for China and India, among others.
With more safety and convenience, we want everyone to be able to visit Brazil, and particularly our Amazon rainforest, with all its vastness and natural beauty.
The Amazon is not being destroyed nor consumed by fire, as the media is falsely portraying. Each one of you may check what I am saying.
Do not hesitate to visit Brazil. It is way different than the country portrayed in many newspapers and television shows.
Religious persecution is a scourge that we have to tirelessly fight against.
In recent years, we have witnessed, in different regions, cowardly attacks that victimized the faithful gathered in churches, synagogues and mosques.
Brazil strongly condemns all these acts. It is ready to cooperate with other countries to protect those who are oppressed because of their faith.
Brazil is particularly concerned with the growing persecution, discrimination and violence against missionaries and religious minorities, in different regions of the world.
That is why we supported the creation of the “International Day Commemorating the Victims of Acts of Violence Based on Religion or Belief’.
On this date, we will annually remember those who have suffered the nefarious consequences of religious persecution.
It is unacceptable that, in the 21 st century, with so many instruments, treaties and organizations whose aim it is to safeguard all sorts of rights, there are still millions of Christians and people of other religions that lose their lives or their freedom because of their faith.
The devotion of Brazil to the cause of peace is evidenced by its solid history of contribution to United Nations missions.
For seventy years, Brazil has effectively contributed to United Nations peacekeeping operations.
We support all efforts to make peacekeeping missions more effective, bringing real and tangible contributions to host countries.
In different scenarios – whether in Haiti, Lebanon, or the Democratic Republic of Congo – Brazilian troops are recognized for their outstanding work and their respect for local communities, for human rights and for the principles that guide peacekeeping operations.
I reaffirm our willingness to uphold our tangible contributions to United Nations peacekeeping missions, including through training and capacity building, areas where we have well-known experience.
Throughout this year, we have established a broad international agenda, aimed at restoring Brazil’s role in the world stage, as well as at reestablishing Brazil’s relationships with key partners.
Last January, we were in Davos, where we presented our ambitious reform program for investors from all around the world.
Last March, we went to Washington, DC, where we launched a bold and comprehensive partnership with the government of the United States covering all areas, most notably political coordination and economic and military cooperation.
Also in March, in a visit to Chile, the Forum for the Progress and Development of South America (PROSUR) was established. This is an important initiative to ensure that South America consolidates itself as an area of democracy and freedom.
We then visited Israel, where we identified numerous opportunities for cooperation, especially in the area of technology and security. I thank Israel for their support in the fight against recent disasters in my country.
We also visited one of our great partners in the Southern Cone: Argentina. With President Mauricio Macri and our partners from Uruguay and Paraguay, we pushed ideology away from Mercosur. We also have been able to achieve important victories in terms of international trade, by successfully finalizing negotiations that had been going on for decades without a conclusion.
Later this year, we intend to visit key partners both in the Middle East and in East Asia. These visits will allow us to strengthen friendship ties and deepen relations with Japan, China, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Qatar. We are committed to continue improving our relations with the entire Arab world and Asia.
We are also looking forward to visiting our partners, and friends, m Africa, Oceania and Europe.
As you can see, ladies and gentlemen, Brazil is open to the world and eager to establish partnerships with all those interested in working for prosperity, peace and freedom.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Brazil I represent is a country that is recovering and rising again, reinforcing its partnerships and restoring trust in itself, in political and economic terms.
We are prepared to take on our responsibilities in the international system.
Over the past few decades, we let ourselves be seduced by ideologies that sought not the truth, but absolute power.
Ideology has settled in the domains of culture, education and communications, dominating the media, universities and schools.
Ideology has invaded our homes and tried to dismantle what is the celula mater of any healthy society: the family.
It has also tried to destroy the innocence of our children in an attempt to corrupt even their most basic and elementary identity: the biological one.
“Political correctness” came to dominate the public debate, expelling rationality and replacing it with manipulation, recurring cliches and slogans.
Ideology has invaded the human soul itself to reap it apart from God and from the dignity He has bestowed upon us.
And with these methods, ideology has always left a trail of death, ignorance, and misery wherever it went.
I am a living proof of this. I was cowardly knife-stabbed by a leftist militant and only survived by a miracle. Once again I thank God for my life.
The United Nations can help us fight the materialistic and ideological environment that undermines some basic principles of human dignity. This Organization was created to promote peace between sovereign nations, as well as social progress with freedom, in accordance with the preamble of the UN Charter.
When it comes to matters related to climate, democracy, human rights, to the equality of rights and duties between men and women, and many others, all we need to do is contemplate the truth, following John 8:32:
– ‘An ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.’
All our means, both national and international, should ultimately be directed towards this goal.
We are not here to erase nationalities and overrule sovereignty in the name of an abstract “global interest”.
This is not the Global Interest Organization!
This is the United Nations Organization. And so it must remain!
With humility and confidence in the liberating power of truth, let me reassure you that you will be able to count on this new Brazil that I represent.
China Pledges Green While Building New Coal Power Plants
China is proving that green climate hysteria is antithetical to real economic growth. Its official rhetoric pledges to Sustainable Development and Green economy, but it is building record energy capacity with coal generation. ⁃ TN Editor
China, which has pledged that projects built under its Belt and Road Initiative will be green and sustainable, will fund more fossil fuel power projects in Southeast Asia even as western, Japanese and South Korean financiers increasingly walk away from them over sustainability concerns.
This will be the case until the host nations – such as Indonesia – have come up with good enough financial incentives and expanded power transmission and distribution infrastructure to make mass renewable energy projects viable, according to Martin David, Asia-Pacific head of projects practice group at international law firm Baker McKenzie.
“While Chinese officials have signaled a move towards more sustainable projects in BRI nations, I don’t see this materially changing Beijing’s [actual] funding of infrastructure projects [there],” he said in an interview. “It will take some time for this to manifest into an obvious change.”
Chinese developers – mostly state-backed construction firms – still prefer to build large fossil fuel projects, on effort and return considerations, he added.
This is because bidding and contract preparation work involved in developing a power project typical requires similar effort, whether for a US$40 million renewable project or a US$1 billion thermal power project.
The BRI, initiated by President Xi Jinping in 2013, aimed to foster closer trade and investment ties with nations in Asia, Europe, Africa and Latin America, initially through mostly China-funded infrastructure projects.
Xi told the second Belt and Road Forum in Beijing in April this year that infrastructure projects built under the BRI must be green and sustainable, adding there will be a focus on transparency and zero tolerance for corruption to ensure “high-quality” growth.
The signalling of a recalibration of China’s approach to BRI projects came amid increased international scrutiny on debt-servicing sustainability, corruption and environmental concerns, besides delays or cancellations of key projects.
Push-backs from interest groups at host nations – such as Indonesia and Kenya – may pressure Chinese firms to pare back their ambition on building coal-fired plants in BRI nations, said Charles Yonts, head of power and environment, social and governance research at CLSA.
He cited the recent high profile case of environmentalists and anti-graft campaigners asking the Indonesian corruption watchdog to look into China Huadian Engineering’s role in a US$900 million coal-fired power project, after its local partner was jailed for bribing to win the project.
Rockefeller Foundation Launches ‘National Opportunity Zones Academy’
TN was correct in pegging Opportunity Zones as a vehicle to railroad Sustainable Development in underserved areas in cities and counties. Now, Rockefeller Foundation has jumped in with a major new program.
The Rockefeller Foundation and Smart Growth America (SGA) today announced the launch of the National Opportunity Zones Academy, which will help cities drive sustainable growth in Opportunity Zones by attracting socially responsible investment. Five cities have been selected to participate in the Academy including Chicago, Greater Miami and the Beaches, Pittsburgh, Seattle, and Norfolk, VA.
The Foundation will award a $400,000 grant to Smart Growth America (SGA) to fund the Academy. SGA’s technical assistance team and its LOCUS program will work directly with each participating city to create place based, community-led approaches to developing sustainable growth and development strategies that help transform selected Opportunity Zones into economically-thriving and socially-inclusive, walkable neighborhoods. The announcement of the Academy follows the Foundation’s launch of its Community Capacity Building Initiative which will benefit vulnerable communities through Opportunity Zones created in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
“Communities have the potential to be completely transformed by the billions of dollars in capital created by the Opportunity Zone tax credit – but only if we make a deliberate effort to ensure investments benefit those the policy is intended to serve,” said Dr. Rajiv J. Shah, President of The Rockefeller Foundation. “The Opportunity Zones Academy will prioritize mobilizing capital and helping cities meet the needs of those who live and work in Opportunity Zones.”
The Opportunity Zones Academy will give member cities access to three core benefits. These include 1) bespoke technical assistance to increase local capacity to achieve equitable development in Opportunity Zones; 2) socially responsible investors through curated introductory events and online investment portals, and 3) sharing best practices through peer-to-peer learning amongst the five participating cities. Smart Growth America and its LOCUS coalition have deep experience working with and empowering communities to be more economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable, and will leverage that expertise to develop and facilitate this program.
“Today’s news of five cities banding together illustrates the urgency of community leaders accessing the tools, resources and data they need to ensure equitable, sustainable and community-beneficial investment in their Opportunity Zones,” said Calvin Gladney, President and CEO of Smart Growth America, a national non-profit dedicated to ensuring that all Americans can share in the prosperity that comes from building livable, walkable and healthier places. “Through our LOCUS national coalition of triple-bottom line developers and investors, we will leverage our thought leadership on Opportunity Zones to co-create practical win-win solutions with this impressive roster of cities—examples that countless other community leaders, investors and elected officials can follow.”
About The Rockefeller Foundation
The Rockefeller Foundation advances new frontiers of science, data, policy, and innovation to solve global challenges related to health, food, power, and economic mobility. As a science-driven philanthropy focused on building collaborative relationships with partners and grantees, The Rockefeller Foundation seeks to inspire and foster large-scale human impact that promotes the well-being of humanity throughout the world by identifying and accelerating breakthrough solutions, ideas and conversations. For more information, sign up for our newsletter at rockefellerfoundation.org and follow us on Twitter @RockefellerFdn.
About Smart Growth America and LOCUS
Smart Growth America envisions a country where no matter where you live, or who you are, you can enjoy living in a place that is healthy, prosperous, and resilient. We empower communities through technical assistance, advocacy, and thought leadership to realize our vision of livable places, healthy people, and shared prosperity. LOCUS, a program of Smart Growth America, is a national coalition of real estate developers and investors who advocate for sustainable, equitable, walkable development in America’s metropolitan areas. LOCUS has been a leader in the Opportunity Zone space and produced the National Opportunity Zones Ranking Report that identifies which Opportunity Zones are positioned to bring positive social, environmental, and economic returns, by ranking all Opportunity Zones by their smart growth potential and current social equity. Second, the report includes policy recommendations for communities to ensure that development results in more walkable places that are healthy, prosperous, equitable and resilient. Learn more at www.smartgrowthamerica.org/program/locus/.
Australia’s ‘Greens’ Seek To Destabilize And Destroy Economic System
Green New Dealers are the same in every country, led on by the United Nations’ Sustainable Development policies. Same groups, same tactics, same objectives to destroy Free Enterprise and Capitalism.
However, Greens represent Technocracy (aka Sustainable Development) that seeks to cover the planet with its crackpot resource-based economic system and total social control.⁃ TN Editor
Greens know that Australia could not electrify our cities, farms, mines, refineries and factories, nor power our road, rail, air and sea transport with just solar, wind, hydro and batteries. Yet green activists, their adoring media, their tax-funded academics, their subsidised green “industries” and their vote-seeking politicians keep babbling about “zero emissions”.
Greens know that Australia could not feed itself without farmers, graziers and truckies using electric and diesel-powered pumps, tractors, harvesters and trucks to produce food and deliver it to the cities every day. Yet they tax and vilify diesel and make electricity more expensive and less reliable. And they lock up productive grasslands and open forests thus producing pest-ridden “parks” and “protected” vegetation infested with feral animals and invaded by inedible and fire-prone eucalypt weeds.
Greens know that we need more water storage just for today’s population. Yet they continue to sterilise potential dam sites, delay new dams, and waste conserved water on “environmental flows”. At the same time they boost water consumption with more tourists, games, immigrants and “refugees”.
Greens know they need a crisis in power, food and water to achieve their goal of centralised UN control of all aspects of our lives. Thanks to the many fools and quislings in Federal, State and Local governments, and in tax-funded academia, education and bureaucracy, this sinister hidden agenda is well advanced.
And all of this will provide ZERO climate benefits.
Maybe the Greens are just the old reds in Green uniforms?
UN’s Sustainable Development Calls For ‘Deep Transformation’
Sustainable Development represents the final plundering of the planet by the global elite, and the lockdown of Technocracy, or Scientific Dictatorship. The UN has been using the term ‘deep transformation’ for years but people have paid no attention to what it implies. ⁃ TN Editor
The Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change call for deep transformations that require complementary actions by governments, civil society, science, and business. IIASA contributed to a new study outlining six major transformations that will be required to achieve these ambitious goals.
The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) focus on time-bound targets for prosperity, people, planet, peace, and partnership — collectively known as the five Ps. By adopting the 2030 Agenda with its 17 SDGs and the Paris Climate Agreement, UN member states effectively created a framework for national action and global cooperation on sustainable development, while the Paris Agreement committed signatory countries to achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by the middle of the century. SDG 13 on climate change specifically links to the Paris Agreement noting that the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change “is the primary international, intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change.” Despite the interconnectivity and clear aims of these global goals, stakeholders seem to lack a shared understanding of how the 17 SDGs can be operationalized.
Building on previous work by The World in 2050 — a global research initiative established by IIASA — the authors of the study published in the journal Nature Sustainability propose six transformations to organize SDG interventions through a semi-modular action agenda that can be designed by discrete, yet interacting, parts of government. According to the paper, the proposed framework may be operationalized within the structures of governments while still respecting the strong interdependencies across the 17 SDGs. The authors also outline an action agenda for science to provide the knowledge required for designing, implementing, and monitoring the SDG Transformations.
“The 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement have given the world an aspirational narrative and an actionable agenda to achieve a just, safe, and sustainable future for all within planetary boundaries. The six transformations provide an integrated and holistic framework for action that reduces the complexity, yet encompasses the 17 SDGs, their 169 targets, and the Paris Agreement. They provide a new approach to shift from incremental to transformational change; to identify synergies using sustainable development pathways; formulate actionable roadmaps; and a focus on inter-relationships to uncover multiple benefits and synergies,” explains study co-author Nebojsa Nakicenovic, executive director of The World in 2050 (TWI2050) research initiative at IIASA.
In their paper the researchers considered which key interventions would be necessary to achieve the SDG outcomes and how their implementation might be organized into a limited set of six transformations namely education, gender, and inequality; health, wellbeing, and demography; energy decarbonization and sustainable industry; sustainable food, land, water, and oceans; sustainable cities and communities; and digital revolution for sustainable development. To simplify the discussion of interlinkages between interventions and SDGs, the authors further identified intermediate outputs generated by combinations of interventions, which in turn contribute to the achievement of each SDG. Each SDG transformation describes a major change in societal structure (economic, political, technological, and social) to achieve long-term sustainable development, while also each contributing to multiple SDGs. Excluding any of them would make it virtually impossible to achieve the SDGs.
Pursuing the six transformations will require deep, deliberate, long-term structural changes in resource use, infrastructure, institutions, technologies, and social relations, which have to happen in a relatively short time window.Previous societal transformations, like industrialization in 19th century Europe, were initiated by technological changes like the steam engine and were largely undirected, while 20th century technologies like semiconductors, the Internet and Global Positioning Systems, were promoted through directed innovation to meet military aims. The authors emphasize that it is crucial that SDG transformations are formally directed in order to meet time-bound, quantitative targets, such as net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century.
Should Military Invade Brazil To ‘Save’ The Amazon Rainforest?
The global elite (via Foreign Policy Magazine) are floating a dangerous narrative: first, by suggesting the possibility that radical leftist Gavin Newsom could be a future President and second, that the U.S. might lead a military action against Brazil to ‘save’ the Amazon rainforest from destruction.
As outrageous as it is, this editor has seen many such trial balloons over the years, and they serve to manipulate public perception while hinting at their actual future plans. When media demonizes a people, nation or idea to this extent, you can see their endgame.
This very dangerous rhetoric is radiated through the United Nations to create anger amongst climate activists throughout the world. ⁃ TN Editor
Aug. 5, 2025: In a televised address to the nation, U.S. President Gavin Newsom announced that he had given Brazil a one-week ultimatum to cease destructive deforestation activities in the Amazon rainforest. If Brazil did not comply, the president warned, he would order a naval blockade of Brazilian ports and airstrikes against critical Brazilian infrastructure. The president’s decision came in the aftermath of a new United Nations report cataloging the catastrophic global effects of continued rainforest destruction, which warned of a critical “tipping point” that, if reached, would trigger a rapid acceleration of global warming. Although China has stated that it would veto any U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing the use of force against Brazil, the president said that a large “coalition of concerned states” was prepared to support U.S. action. At the same time, Newsom said the United States and other countries were willing to negotiate a compensation package to mitigate the costs to Brazil for protecting the rainforest, but only if it first ceased its current efforts to accelerate development.
The above scenario is obviously far-fetched—at least I think it is—but how far would you go to prevent irreversible environmental damage? In particular, do states have the right—or even the obligation—to intervene in a foreign country in order to prevent it from causing irreversible and possibly catastrophic harm to the environment?
I raise this issue in light of the news that Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro is accelerating development of the Amazon rainforest (60 percent of which is in Brazilian hands), thereby imperiling a critical global resource. As those of you with more respect for science than Bolsonaro know, the rainforest is both an important carbon sink and a critical temperature regulator, as well as a key source of fresh water. Deforestation has already damaged its ability to perform these crucial roles, and scientists in Brazilian estimate that increasingly warm and dry conditions could convert much of the forest to dry savanna, with potentially catastrophic effects. Last week, the pro-business, free market-oriented Economistmagazine’s cover story was “Deathwatch for the Amazon,” which frames the issue rather nicely. To restate my original question: What should (or must) the international community do to prevent a misguided Brazilian president (or political leaders in other countries) from taking actions that could harm all of us?
This is where it gets tricky. State sovereignty is a critical element of the current international system; with certain exceptions, national governments are free to do whatever they want inside their own borders. Even so, the hard shell of sovereignty has never been absolute, and various forces have been chipping away at it for a long time. States can be sanctioned for violating international law (e.g., by defying U.N. Security Council resolutions), and international law authorizes countries to go to war for self-defense or when the Security Council authorizes military action. It’s even legal to attack another country’s territory preemptively, provided there is a well-founded basis for believing it was about to attack you first.
More controversially, the “responsibility to protect” doctrine sought to legitimate humanitarian intervention in foreign powers when the local government was unable or unwilling to protect its own people. And as a practical matter, states routinely accept infringements on their own sovereignty in order to facilitate beneficial forms of international cooperation.
When push comes to shove, however, most states resent and resist external efforts to get them to change what they are doing inside their own borders. And even though destroying the Amazon rainforest presents a clear and obvious threat to many other countries, telling Brazil to stop and threatening to take action to deter, punish, or prevent it would be a whole new ballgame. And I don’t mean to single out Brazil: It would be an equally radical step to threaten the United States or China if they refused to stop emitting so many greenhouse gases.
It’s not as if world leaders haven’t recognized the seriousness of the problem. The U.N. long regarded environmental degradation as a “threat to international peace and security,” and the former European Union foreign-policy representative Javier Solana argued in 2008 that halting climate change “should be in the mainstream of EU foreign and security policies.” Scholars have already identified various ways the Security Council could act to prevent it. As the researchers Bruce Gilley and David Kinsella wrote a few years ago, “it is at least legally feasible that the Security Council could invoke its authority under Article 42, and use military force against states it deemed threats to international peace and security by virtue of their unwillingness or inability to curb destructive activities emanating from their territories.”
The question, therefore, is how far would the international community be willing to go in order to prevent, halt, or reverse actions that might cause immense and irreparable harm to the environment on which all humans depend? It might seem far-fetched to imagine states threatening military action to prevent this today, but it becomes more likely if worst-case estimates of our climate future turn out to be correct.
But here’s a cruel paradox: The countries that are most responsible for climate change are also the least susceptible to coercion, while most of the states that might conceivably be pressured into taking action aren’t significant sources of the underlying problem. The top five greenhouse gas emitters are China, the United States, India, Russia, and Japan—four of them are nuclear weapons states, and Japan is a formidable military power in its own right. Threatening any of them with sanctions isn’t likely to work, and threatening serious military action against them is completely unrealistic. Moreover, getting the Security Council to authorize the use of force against much weaker states is unlikely, because the permanent members wouldn’t want to establish this precedent and would almost certainly veto the proposal.
This is what makes the Brazilian case more interesting. Brazil happens to be in possession of a critical global resource—for purely historical reasons—and its destruction would harm many states if not the entire planet. Unlike Belize or Burundi, what Brazil does could have a big impact. But Brazil isn’t a true great power, and threatening it with either economic sanctions or even the use of force if it refused to protect the rainforest might be feasible. To be clear: I’m not recommending this course of action either now or in the future. I’m just pointing out that Brazil might be somewhat more vulnerable to pressure than some other states are.
One can also imagine other remedies for this problem. States could certainly threaten or impose unilateral trade sanctions against environmentally irresponsible states, and private citizens could always try to organize voluntary boycotts for similar reasons. Some states have taken steps in this direction, and it is easy to imagine such measures becoming more widespread as environmental problems multiply. Alternatively, states that happen to govern environmentally sensitive territory could be paid to preserve it, in the interest of all mankind. In effect, the international community would be subsidizing environmental protection on the part of those who happen to possess the means of doing something about it.
Silicon Valley Is Building A China-Style Social Credit System
I have warned that America will walk in China’s footsteps on Scientific Dictatorship because our citizens simply don’t understand it. Time is running out to say “No!” ⁃ TN Editor
Have you heard about China’s social credit system? It’s a technology-enabled, surveillance-based nationwide program designed to nudge citizens toward better behavior. The ultimate goal is to “allow the trustworthy to roam everywhere under heaven while making it hard for the discredited to take a single step,” according to the Chinese government.
In place since 2014, the social credit system is a work in progress that could evolve by next year into a single, nationwide point system for all Chinese citizens, akin to a financial credit score. It aims to punish for transgressions that can include membership in or support for the Falun Gong or Tibetan Buddhism, failure to pay debts, excessive video gaming, criticizing the government, late payments, failing to sweep the sidewalk in front of your store or house, smoking or playing loud music on trains, jaywalking, and other actions deemed illegal or unacceptable by the Chinese government.
It can also award points for charitable donations or even taking one’s own parents to the doctor.
Punishments can be harsh, including bans on leaving the country, using public transportation, checking into hotels, hiring for high-visibility jobs, or acceptance of children to private schools. It can also result in slower internet connections and social stigmatization in the form of registration on a public blacklist.
China’s social credit system has been characterized in one pithy tweet as “authoritarianism, gamified.”
At present, some parts of the social credit system are in force nationwide and others are local and limited (there are 40 or so pilot projects operated by local governments and at least six run by tech giants like Alibaba and Tencent).
Beijing maintains two nationwide lists, called the blacklist and the red list—the former consisting of people who have transgressed, and the latter people who have stayed out of trouble (a “red list” is the Communist version of a white list.) These lists are publicly searchable on a government website called China Credit.
The Chinese government also shares lists with technology platforms. So, for example, if someone criticizes the government on Weibo, their kids might be ineligible for acceptance to an elite school.
Public shaming is also part of China’s social credit system. Pictures of blacklisted people in one city were shown between videos on TikTok in a trial, and the addresses of blacklisted citizens were shown on a map on WeChat.
Many Westerners are disturbed by what they read about China’s social credit system. But such systems, it turns out, are not unique to China. A parallel system is developing in the United States, in part as the result of Silicon Valley and technology-industry user policies, and in part by surveillance of social media activity by private companies.