Transferring Wealth to the Ruling Elite in Name of the Environment

The World Bank is not an organization devoted to capitalism, or to the free market, but to state-run corporate capitalism. Established and managed by a multitude of national governments, the World Bank promotes managed trade by which politically connected individuals and corporations enrich themselves at the expense of the poor and middle class... Western governments tax their citizens to fund the World Bank, lend this money to corrupt Third World dictators who abscond with the funds, and then demand repayment which is extracted through taxation from poor Third World citizens, rather than from the government officials responsible for the embezzlement. It is in essence a global transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. Taxpayers around the world are forced to subsidize the lavish lifestyles of Third World dictators and highly-paid World Bank bureaucrats who don't even pay income tax. - Ron Paul, Opening Statement, Committee on Financial Services, World Bank Hearing, May 22, 2007

A Haitian delegation rests before the second-day session begins in Copenhagen.
Photograph: Attila Kisbenedek/AFP/Getty Images

The global warming/climate change mythology is the greatest hoax the private International Monetary/Banking Cartel has ever tried to pull off: With the passage of the Copenhagen Climate Treaty provisions, world governance and unlimited taxes will fall into the hands of private, monopoly capitalists while many socialists, communists, and environmentalists ignorantly support this international takeover, falsely thinking that the treaty’s many laws, regulations, and directives are socialistic, and will thus help improve our badly deteriorating environment... The “Redemption for sale” provisions of all carbon emission’s regulations, directives, and laws will channel hundreds of billions – if not trillions – of American dollars, European Euros, and scores of other currencies to our “friends” in the International Banking Cartel, by way of their so-called World Bank, with little to none being spent on the crying needs of our dying environment. - J. Speer-Williams, Globalist Carbon Tax Scheme: Redemption for Sale, Infowars.com, December 12, 2009

1991 UN Policy Paper Describes Exact Purpose and Trajectory of Current Copenhagen Treaty

By Jurriaan Maessen, Infowars
December 10, 2009

A 1991 policy paper prepared for the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) by self-described ‘ecosocioeconomist’ professor Ignacy Sachs outlines a strategy for the transfer of wealth in name of the environment to be implemented in the course of 35 to 40 years. As it turns out, it is a visionary paper describing phase by phase the road to world dictatorship.

As the professor states in the paper:

“To be meaningful, the strategies should cover the time-span of several decades. Thirty-five to forty years seems a good compromise between the need to give enough time to the postulated transformations and the uncertainties brought about by the lengthening of the time-span.”

In his paper “The Next 40 Years: Transition Strategies to the Virtuous Green Path: North/South/East/Global,” Sachs accurately describes not only the intended time-span to bring about a global society, but also what steps should be taken to ensure “population stabilization:”

“In order to stabilize the populations of the South by means other than wars or epidemics, mere campaigning for birth control and distributing of contraceptives has proved fairly inefficient.”

In the first part of the (in retrospect) bizarrely accurate description of the years to come, Sachs points out redistribution of wealth is the only viable path towards population stabilization and -- as he calls it -- a “virtuous green world.” The professor:

“The way out from the double bind of poverty and environmental disruption calls for a fairly long period of more economic growth to sustain the transition strategies towards the virtuous green path of what has been called in Stockholm eco development and has since changed its name in Anglo-Saxon countries to sustainable development.”

“(…) a fair degree of agreement seems to exist, therefore, about the ideal development path to be followed so long as we do not manage to stabilize the world population and, at the same time, sharply reduce the inequalities prevailing today.”

“The bolder the steps taken in the near future,” Sachs asserts, “the shorter will be the time span that separates us from a steady state. Radical solutions must address to the roots of the problem and not to its symptoms. Theoretically, the transition could be made shorter by measures of redistribution of assets and income.”

Sachs points to the political difficulties of such proposals being implemented (because free humanity tends to distrust any national government, let alone transnational government, to redistribute its well-earned wealth). He therefore proposes these measures to be implemented gradually, following a meticulously planned strategy:

“The pragmatic prospect is one of transition extending itself over several decades.”

In the second sub-chapter, “The Five Dimensions of Ecodevelopment,” professor Sachs sums up the main dimensions of this carefully outlined move to make Agenda 21 a very real future prospect.

Agenda 21 - This global contract binds governments around the world to the UN plan for changing the ways we live, eat, learn and communicate--all under the noble banner of saving the Earth. Its regulations would severely limit water, electricity and transportation--even deny human access to our most treasured wilderness areas. If implemented, it would manage and monitor all lands and people. No one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system. - Berit Kjos, "Local Agenda 21 - The U.N. Plan for Your Community"

Sustainable Development - The concept of Sustainable Development basically says that there are too many people on planet Earth and that the population of the world must be reduced in order to have enough resources for future generations. [Under the New World Order plan,] the UN should be the global custodian of the Earth and all of its resources. This means that we will be measured by how much we produce and how much we consume as found in the "family dependency ratio." Every person will be valued according to their usefulness. In addition, the UN will control the Earth's resources--energy, water, food and so on. The concept of sustainable development can be found in the Communisto Manifesto and the 1977 USSR Constitution. - Joan M. Veon, The Women's International Media Group, Inc.

The first dimension he touches upon is “Social Sustainability:”

“The aim is to build a civilization of being within greater equity in asset and income distribution, so as to improve substantially the entitlements of the broad masses of population and to reduce the gap in standards of living between the have and the have nots.”

This of course means, reducing the standards of living in “The North” (U.S., Europe) and upgrading those of the developing nations (“The South and The East”).

This would have to be realized through what Sachs calls “Economic Sustainability:”

“Made possible by a more efficient allocation and management of resources and a steady flow of public and private investment.”

The third dimension described by the professor is “Ecological Sustainability:”

Which, among other things, limits “the consumption of fossil fuels and other easily depletable or environmentally harmful products, substituting them by renewable and/or plentiful- and environmentally-friendly resources, reducing the volume of pollutants by means of energy and resource conservation and recycling and, last but not least, promoting self-constraint in material consumption on part of the rich countries and of the privileged social strata all over the world.”

In order to make this happen, Sachs stresses the need of “defining the rules for adequate environmental protection, designing the institutional machinery and choosing the mix of economic, legal and administrative instruments necessary for the implementation of environmental policies.”

The fourth dimension: “Spatial Sustainability:”

“Directed at achieving a more balanced rural-urban configuration and a better territorial distribution of human settlements and economic activities (…)”

The fifth and last dimension described in the UN policy paper is “Cultural Sustainability:”

“Looking for the endogenous roots of the modernization processes, seeking change within cultural continuity, translating the normative concept of ecodevelopment into a plurality of local, ecosystem-specific, culture-specific and site-specific solutions.”

But to realize such a dramatic new direction for the world, Sachs once again stresses the importance of incremental implementation. A matter of boiling the frog slowly as opposed to throwing the poor animal into a boiling-hot cooking pan:

“Even if we know where we want to get, the operational question is how do we proceed to put humankind on the virtuous path of genuine development, socially responsible and in harmony with nature. It is submitted that UNCED 92 should give considerable attention to the formulation of transition strategies that could become the central piece of the Agenda 21.”

This is the word -- Agenda 21: the UN strategy for redistributing the wealth accumulated by the “North” in order to create a completely “balanced” world society -- under auspices of the United Nations of course and the private central banks controlling it. This can only come about by destroying the middle-class. A sudden redistribution and industrialization would not do -- for the middle-class would undoubtedly rise in defiance against it. Therefore, Sachs argues for an incremental and carefully planned dissolution of the middle-class, phase by phase:

“To be meaningful, the strategies should cover the time-span of several decades. Thirty-five to forty years seems a good compromise between the need to give enough time to the postulated transformations and the uncertainties brought about by the lengthening of the time-span. The retooling of industries, even in periods of rapid growth, requires 10 to 20 years. The restructuration and the expansion of the infrastructures requires several decades, and this is a crucially important sector from the point of view of environment.”

Then Sachs plunges into his most shocking statement:

“However, the single most important reason to consider the transition strategies over a minimum of 35 to 40 years stems from the non-linearity of these strategies; they should be devised as a succession of changing priorities over time. A good illustration is provided by the population transition. In order to stabilize the populations of the South by means other than wars or epidemics, mere campaigning for birth control and distributing contraceptives has proved fairly inefficient.”

Sachs argues that “an accelerated programme of social and economic development of the rural areas should be the outmost priority in the first phase of a realistic population stabilization scheme.”

Who or what is to coordinate all this, according to Sachs, and how exactly is the UN to take control?

“The solutions,” says Sachs, “can vary in terms of their boldness and take the form of global, multilateral or bilateral arrangements.” These arrangements should, as far as Sachs is concerned, ensure “at least partially the automacity of financial transfers by some form of fiscal mechanisms, be it a small income tax or an array of indirect taxes on goods and services whose production and consumption has significant environmental impacts.”

Over time, gradually, these taxes should increase:

“Starting the operation with a one per 10,000 tax and increasing it so as to reach one per 1,000 in 10 to 20 years seems a fairly realistic proposal, the more so that the scheme creates an interesting market for the private enterprises involved in R and D.”

Reading all this, the question as to what entity should take charge is not difficult to answer. Sachs:

“In order to generate maximum synergies between the national strategies and global action, the United Nations should create a forum for the periodical discussion and evaluation of these strategies and a research, monitoring and flexible planning facility to put them in a global perspective (…) The forum should have a fair representation of all the main actors involved: governments, parliaments, citizen movements, and the business world. Given its importance, it should be lifted from specialized agencies to a central place in the UN system.”

The “fair representation” Sachs is talking about is of course only a pretext to get everybody on board. As the recently surfaced “Danish Text” clearly illustrates, the IMF and World Bank will always have final say in the construction of any international system.

“The governments of Europe, the United States, and Japan are unlikely to negotiate a social-democratic pattern of globalization – unless their hands are forced by a popular movement or a catastrophe, such as another Great Depression or ecological disaster.” - Richard Sandbrook, "Closing the Circle: Democratization and Development in Africa," Zed Books limited, London, 2000.

Soros Wants Rich Nations to Finance IMF Scheme
Do Rich Nations Owe Poor Ones a Climate Debt?
AP and other news agencies' Facebook ClimatePool page
UN climate treaty secretariat
Denmark's Copenhagen climate conference site

Return to The Lamb Slain Home Page