The UN is the Enemy of You, Pt. 2
Some thoughts on international policy following some light fourth-reich reading. . .
A few days ago I published an article inspired by the protests of the European public against many of the UN’s agricultural policies and directives, many of which are laid out in the UN Agenda 2030. After reading the document in its entirety, I felt as though I still didn’t have a sufficient understanding of the nature of the Agenda and so I decided to peruse some the other UN documents and media resources. What I discovered was a treasure trove of fascist propaganda and open admissions of malevolence, all of course veiled behind vague and meaningless buzzwords and avoidant, repetitive rhetoric.
Take for example the following video, wherein a little girl gets affectionately indoctrinated by “Lexa,” which is an obvious representation of Amazon’s ‘Alexa’ which functions, as we all know, by a constantly operating microphone in user’s homes. In the video, the electronic babysitter that is “Lexa” terrifies the child with stories of a rapidly deteriorating world and the subsequent coming environmental apocalypse, guilt-trips her with the age old trope of finishing your food on behalf of kids in Africa (no investigation into the geopolitical causes of such matters, of course), and explains the Agenda’s hallmark “Sustainable Development Goals.” When you watch the video, try to remember that somewhere out there there exists a group of people the United Nations paid to create it.
This video from the European Union expands on some of the agricultural and environmental concerns laid out in Agenda 2030, informing the public of the damage inflicted upon the land as a result of “soil disturbance,” a process which used to be commonly to as tilling. Evidently such disturbances of soil release CO2 from the ground into the atmosphere. The obsession with carbon has always struck me as rather curious considering that, chemically speaking, carbon is the “organic” element that, when present, signifies life. In any event, the video also explains the coming changes as an opportunity for farmers to spend “less time on the field.” They will soon have far more time to spend in overcrowded flats in the cold sipping protein sludge from a paper straw with their compatriots, watching the world burn all the while.
All of this will be accompanied by the technological advancements and surveillance systems that will make our farms “smart.” Emerging smartphone applications will allow farmers, and regulatory agencies, to “precisely” dispense just the right amount of fertilizer for their crops. I’m not sure what the problem is with the current system, where farmers dump mountains of fertilizer on their crops in order to compete with oversized competitors, but I’m sure it will be solved by the “smart” farmer. And as our dear farmer applies just the right amount of fertilizer to his crops, the “smart” drone will fly overhead, spraying the crops with just the right amount of pesticides. The “smart” drone will also be able to detect pests and disease and alert the farmer. The farmer will be able to monitor the health of his crops 24 hours a day with the “smart” camera on his tractor.
As the crops ripen, the farmer will be able to monitor the ripeness with the “smart” camera on his tractor. All of this will be “smart” and “precise”, and will ensure that we will never have a food shortage again. Of course, this will require more and more farmers to join the “smart” farming movement, and fewer and fewer farmers will be needed to produce the same amount of food. And when the “smart” farmer is not farming, he can always get a job as an “Uber driver” or a “policeman.”
I am not opposed to technological development. History has shown that it is policy, not more efficient machinery, that leads to the degradation of opportunities for the working class—occupations with high risks of bodily injury, such as coal mining, serve as pertinent examples of this. The concern here is that the future the UN is forming for the world, veiled by the manipulative use of diplomatic rhetoric, is actively regressive in the sense that the working class will be driven off of their property and forced to live boarding-school style in rented flats and condos. . . What separates a man from a commodity?
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
Agricultural Policy in the European Union
The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
-The Shultz Report by M. Shultz