Elite billionaire organizations and foundations, government agencies, and radical pressure groups are funding and coordinating a global war against modern agriculture, nutrition, and the poorest, hungriest people on Earth. [emphasis, links added]
Instead of helping more families gain access to nutritious food, better healthcare and a higher standard of living, they are doing the opposite, harming biodiversity in the process.
The World Economic Forum wants to reimagine, reshape and transform the global food system to eliminate greenhouse gases from food production.
At the heart of the program are animal-based protein alternatives: mealworm potato chips, bug burgers instead of beef patties, and patties and sausages made from lake flies, for example. Fixing the toxic workplace at the World Economic Forum is not a priority.
A report from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (UNFAO) suggests that turning “edible insects” into “delicious” food could create thriving local businesses and even promote “women's inclusion”.
Aiming to alleviate global poverty, World Bank sees 'man-made climate crisis' posing greater threat to poor households than contaminated water, malaria and other deadly diseases, hunger or even Two billion people still burn wood and dung because they don’t have reliable, affordable electricity.
It unilaterally announced that 45% of its funding (an additional $9 billion in fiscal 2024) would be used to help the poor “better resilient to the ravages of climate change.”
(The World Bank also decided to donate more taxpayer funds — $300 million instead of “just” $70 million — to the Palestinian Authority, which pays terrorists to murder Israelis.)
certainly, Most well-known and lesser-known environmental pressure groups are also deeply involved in food, agriculture, and energy policy movements: Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, Pesticide Action Network, Center for Food Safety, La Via Campesina (La Via Campesina), African Food Sovereignty Alliance, and many more.
Like other members of the “agroecological” movement, they ridicule and denigrate modern agriculture, viewing it as a scourge caused by greedy big corporations. They oppose fossil fuels, pesticides, herbicides and biotechnology.
They praise “food sovereignty” and “the right to choose”. But their policies reflect top-down tyranny and bullying, leaving little room for poor farmers to adopt modern agricultural technologies and practices.
In addition to the World Economic Forum, these hard green organizations are supported by the FAO and the World Bank, and receive ideological, organizational and financial support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), EU institutions, and many progressive and far-left American figures. Other foundations.
The American Agricultural Ecology Fund was created by the Christensen Foundation, the Newfield Foundation, and the Swift Foundation.
Its funding and projects are overseen by the New Venture Fund, which helps “philanthropic” and “educational” organizations Direct funds to programs that align with what many call neocolonial and eco-imperialist goals.
Other major players include the Schmidt Family Foundation, the Packard Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation and the Ben and Jerry's Foundation.
That’s a lot of money—hundreds of millions of dollars a year in funding for food, agriculture and climate change.
This completely overshadows the paltry $9,000 that Kenyan farmer Jusper Machogu raised through donations to his Climate Realism website — most of which went to his neighbors so they could Dig a well, purchase a propane tank, or connect to the local power grid.
However, Mr Majogu has angered the BBC's “climate disinformation officer”. (Yes, the Beeb does take this position.)
The CDO attacked him for tweeting false and misleading claims about climate change and said Africa should develop oil, gas and coal reserves rather than rely solely on intermittent, weather-dependent wind and solar power.
To make matters worse, the farmer had the temerity to accept donations from non-Africans, including “individuals with ties to the fossil fuel industry and groups known for climate change denial.”
Rockefeller Philanthropic Advisors is another major donor to agroecology organizations. It's part of the guilt-ridden oil money left behind by John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Co. trust fund.
This legacy includes nearly 1,000 climate-related institutions, foundations and activist organizations.
As the Canadian Border Center puts it, “Every time you hear the horror stories about climate change, [the person writing it] Paid. He was Rockefeller's puppet. He may not know it, but his profession is completely corrupt.
Worse, I might add, the author and his (or her) organization are complicit Perpetuating global poverty, energy poverty, hunger, disease, and death—because fear-mongering drives destructive energy and food production policies.
Individually or collectively, these policy corruptors should not be underestimated in the battle to protect and expand modern energy, agriculture, and global nutrition.
Thankfully, resistance is mounting. Many families simply do not want to be trapped in poverty, disease, mud thatched huts, lack of educational opportunities for their children and a future of hard, dawn-to-dusk labor on tiny subsistence farmlands.
This is especially true when movies, news reports, and cell phones illustrate American and European agricultural equipment and practices—and the crop yields, wealth, health, family, leisure time, and opportunities that accompany these modern farming systems.
Poor farmers have also seen China, India, Indonesia and other countries rapidly industrialize and modernize using oil, gas and coal.
They see changes taking place in many countries that are working to chart their own course toward fossil fuels as the energy base for growth. They reject the eco-colonialism and eco-imperialism that wealthy Westerners seek to impose on them.
The news they got was Humanity has faced climate fluctuations and extreme weather events throughout history…surviving them, coping with them, adapting to them, and thriving.
There is no real-world evidence that human-made greenhouse gas emissions—especially trace amounts from agriculture—have replaced the powerful natural forces responsible for past climate change.
They increasingly realize that to achieve the same yields, organic and subsistence farming require more land than modern, mechanized agriculture—land that would otherwise become a habitat for wildlife. Plowing these habitats destroys plant and animal diversity.
Locking in fossil fuels and relying instead on biofuels and plant feedstocks to produce thousands of basic products will require more land.
The same goes for mining vast quantities of metals and minerals to create wind, solar and battery technology.
The most important thing is, They understand that humans today have more wealth, more knowledge, better technology and resources than any previous generation.
It is simply ridiculous to suggest that we cannot adapt to climate change, or survive and recover from extreme weather events.
To suggest that farmers should revert to…or continue to cling to…ancient agricultural practices and technologies—to save the world from computer-generated man-made climate catastrophe—is ecological imperialism at its most lethal.
South Africa's electricity minister recently said South Africa would not “become a guinea pig for the global Green New Deal”.
Hopefully all developing countries will soon adopt the same attitude towards anarchists who use the world's poor as guinea pigs for global agriculture and nutrition experiments.
Popular photo on Unsplash by Annie Spratt
Paul Driessen is a senior policy analyst at the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author Eco-imperialism: green power, the Black Deathand other books and articles on energy, environment, climate and human rights issues.
