Ethics in Action for Sustainable Development - Part III

When asked what I most strongly disagree with in Jeffrey Sachs and Owen Flanagan’s report, my answer is quite clear.

Everything.

This is the worst report I've read since my three-day Marxists.org binge.

Parts 1 & 2 here.

Ethics in Action for Sustainable Development - Part I

Ethics in Action for Sustainable Development - Part II

We continue with the chapter on ‘Ethics in Action for Sustainable and Integral Development on Peace’, which is yet another ‘Consensus Statement’… which are proving quite the convenient place for Owen and Jeff to hide atrocities -

‘The obligation to advance peace is a foundational moral and spiritual imperative across religious traditions. Accordingly, interpretations of religion that go against peace are self-contradictory‘

And that is a matter of definition. Because the meaning of ‘peace’ very much varies from religion to religion.

It carries on, redefining the meaning of the word even further - ie ‘peace in its widest connotation’ - coining the term ‘positive peace’, which further ‘calls for the unfolding of human dignity in a way that is linked directly to honoring rights and executing reciprocal responsibilities.’

I know, I know - I am as shocked, shocked, as you. ‘Peace’ now even bridges ‘rights and responsibilities’ aka ‘distributive/contributive justice‘.

’Positive peace is also realized through our common obligation to seek the good of the other and avoid evil by advancing shared well-being, which includes living in harmony with nature‘

And now we’ve established that ‘positive peace’ through ‘advanced shared well-being’ also integrates environmentalism.

‘The diverse religions affirm that this positive vision of peace calls for the patient and resolute cultivation of personal virtues and value-oriented institutions‘

Which, of course, will happen through gradual ‘lifelong learning’ and ‘global citizenship education’ as we saw in part 1. But - gasp - there’s a problem -

‘Peace is jeopardized whenever… institutions offend human dignity and fail to serve the common good.‘

Ie, even… no, especially those institutions have to comply with their arbitrary, cherry picked definition of ‘common good’. Per chapter 11 (covered in part 2) we do however know what ‘human dignity’ entail. It means you’re boxed into their little scheme of ‘rights and responsibilities’… which, of course, also are arbritrary, and ultimately lead to that very same ‘common good’.

‘A particular problem today is… the alarming pace of environmental degradation. In this light, climate change can be seen as a silent war on the planet and the Paris Agreement on climate change as a treaty of peace…‘

And we have now snapped - of all things - the Paris Agreement to the concept of ‘positive peace’. We’re back to me sitting, shaking my head in sheer disbelief. Catholics, is this really the religion you signed up for? No wonder they leave in droves, because this is quite simply atrocious.

‘The challenge facing Ethics in Action is to find practical steps for the unique wisdom, beauty, and shared moral convictions of the world’s great religious traditions to help guide the world back from the brink and reality of war— and toward a vision of positive peace rooted in the unbreakable link between unfolding human dignity and advancing shared well-being.‘

And how should that be done, you wonder?

‘Devise and implement a media-savvy, cross-cultural, inclusive strategy to change the narrative of Islam in the United States and Europe and…‘

Through a one-directional media blitz, propagandising Islam in the West.

‘Push for the establishment of a fund to reduce military spending…‘

Oh, and gee - ‘positive peace’ also requires billions of ‘advanced shared well-being’

‘Push for full implementation of the Paris Agreement, and raise awareness of the links between climate change and conflict‘

Raise awareness through media and educational propaganda, in short. As for engagement -

‘Produce a joint public statement by religious leaders that represents a collective call to action for reawakening morality and ethics to underpin the promotion of positive peace‘

But these, of course, will be the new set of ‘ethics’ aka Global Ethics, and not those latched onto religious traditionalism. No, the ‘new and improved’ set of ethics should, of course, be about environmentalism produced through a flimsy scientific consensus. That’s how all the best science which we should trust (tm) is produced these days, … as seen during the alleged pandemic.

‘Work with foundations to support grassroots interreligious initiatives in conflict-ridden multireligious communities‘

Oh look at how awesome foundations are, yet we should definitely not call them out for tax evasion, insider trading, large scale fraud, and funding projects for nefarious purposes.

Another ‘Consensus Statement’ follows, this one on Migration -

‘Preventing the mass forced displacement of peoples has become one of the great ethical challenges of the twenty-first century‘

… whose ethics?

‘The great religious traditions all emphasize the dignity of each person and the unity and common destiny of the entire human race in our common home‘

… ie ‘open the gates’…

‘Responding to the fundamental causes, the deep solutions to forced migration are peace, prosperity, and sustainability‘

As we saw in chapter above, ‘peace’ now means ‘positive peace’, which includes environmentalism, ‘prosperity’ we allegedly will achieve through redistributive economics such as generous transfer payments which only few nations can afford, and those SDGs earlier established earlier to be a panacea of all ills.

‘We recognized that frequent human-caused ecological disasters constitute a new and growing threat in our own time and a spur to mass migration.‘

You might have. I certainly didn’t agree with any of your forced-consensus quack science. In fact, you didn’t even invite my those of religious inclination while drafting this subversive Marxist trash. You absolutely do not represent me in any way, and there is absolutely no way this should be accepted.

‘We affirmed a moral obligation to welcome refugees and that such an obligation extends in particular to the countries responsible for causing the wars and environmental disasters that force people to move in the first place. We recognized that children in particular need a home, a safe haven, a decent education, and an appropriate response to any physical and mental health challenges‘

In other words, they will invent quack science which states that Western nations are teh evilz, and use that as justification for endless migration - while ignoring absolutely any inconvenient detail on the matter of…¹.

‘Overall, we called for an approach based on sustainable and integral human development—the fullest development of each person and all people, allowing them to become active agents of their own development. This notion includes the full integration of migrants into the economic, social, political, and cultural life of the nation in which they settle or the choice of a speedy and safe return to their homelands as circumstances permit‘

Is it starting to settle why they’re pushing for endless migration²?

In short, they will be allowed to settle - vote - almost immediately upon arrival³, be instructed to become ‘active agents’, connected to - say - Purpose Campaign, who through an Open Soros sponsorship will immediately use them as political pawns.

I fail to see how everyone involved in this isn’t explicitly guilty of outright treason, because the objective quite obviously is to undermine Western democracy - while at the same time suggesting that you ‘endanger democracy’ by speaking up⁴, thus lying like the good, little Marxist rats that they truly are.

‘As a component of the fundamental rights of peoples, legal guarantees of primary rights that foster an “organic participation” in the economic and social life of the nation in which migrants settle. Access to these economic and social goods, including education and employment…‘

The politicised migrants will further be pushed through an education system, with deep integration of UNESCO’s lifelong learning and Global Citizen education, and be allowed to compete vs the locals almost immediately, leading to a collapse in living standards for the local, thus leading to the lower income brackets of the population suffering a relative income drop, whilst simultaneously causing massive pressure on all services, from hospitals through dentists, schools and so on.

Politicians enabling this expressly work against the interests of their people⁵, and Keir Starmer - the executive committee Fabian Parasite that he is⁶ - is every bit as guilty of this as Resident Biden.

And of course the Fabian Parasites would never admit to this. No, no, no - they’ll simply apply soft pressure everywhere in the system, advocating a system which can take said endless flow - while violently disagreeing that they are to blame. But the reality is that organisations like the Fabian Parasites for far too long have skirted their responsibilities, and they should be held to account.

Especially, as they simultaneously preach that you should⁷.

‘Encourage and promote humanitarian corridors, targeting the most vulnerable asylum seekers and refugees, especially in nations that have space‘

And do you know what a ‘humanitarian corridor’ is? Wait, why don’t we have the Fabians explain, per above report -

‘A second strategy is for Labour to consider creating a safe, legal route for claiming asylum that would make English Channel crossings unnecessary.‘

Ie, they will run the ferries across the Channel themselves. And further -

‘Labour should consider more clearly signposting where to find support for asylum seekers at all air, ferry and rail international terminals. We should work with organisations like City of Sanctuary UK and others to help spread information about support and deliver it.‘

The Fabian Parasites also suggest to put up posters everywhere, so that said migrants can find their way - even to the extent of producing material and distributing said in presumably those origin nations.

And when was this report released, you ask? That’s right - during Keir Starmer’s tenure on the executive committee.

And what we also discover in the Keir Starmer approved Fabian Parasite report -

‘Labour should consider allowing asylum seekers to look for work in six months if no decision has been reached. They should be able to work in any job and should no longer be confined to the shortage occupation list‘

So, you see - when I said they would be allowed to compete against the local population almost immediately, it was because I’d already read this report.

The Fabians Parasites are to blame.

Anyway, we’ll return to the Fabian Parasites another day, because they certainly deserve more light shed onto them. In the meantime, you can find a large amount of their material on jstor’s site⁸.

‘Promote moral education—among children and adults alike—to inculcate the norms, virtues, and values of empathy, compassion, solidarity, and care for our common humanity and common home, which incorporates obligations toward migrants and refugees‘

And the Global Ethics education is centred around their cherry-picked definitions of ‘positive peace’, ‘social justice’, and so forth.

‘Encourage businesses to provide decent work and employment opportunities for newcomers…‘

See the Fabian report above.

‘Call upon all stakeholders—religious communities, civil society, business, and government—to take concrete steps to end wars, stop the arms trade, overcome poverty, and halt human-caused environmental degradation and climate change, as guided by Laudato si’, …, the SDGs, and the Paris Agreement on climate change‘

The Paris Agreement enables the foundations to cash out, the SDGs is your new - purposive - God (for the time being, anyway), and the ‘science’ is corrupt and certainly not ‘settled’. In fact, no legit science ever is.

‘Mobilize key stakeholders—the UN, development leaders, businesses, individuals with a high net worth, and religious communities—to direct billions of dollars of new financial resources to achieve the SDGs‘

Ie, through blended finance, modelled on 2008, intended as a mechanism, allowing those foundations to drain every penny out of the public purse, and thus - you.

Blended Finance

‘… provide scientific evidence of the roots of today’s forced migrations in wars, extreme poverty, social exclusion, climate change, and environmental degradation.‘

Yet, absolutely no-one who dissents will be allowed to contribute. That’s how the IPCC operates. That’s how Laudato Si - clearly - operates.

And that’s what Jeffrey Sachs and Owen Flanagan consider ‘ethical’ practise.

‘The UN Alliance of Civilizations is also called upon to prioritize this concern‘

Good, good, another point of interest.

‘Work with the United Nations to support… UN Global Compact for Migration to address large movements of refugees and migrants… including distribution mechanisms for refugees based on international agreements (ideally within the United Nations) and compensation by the rich countries for the first-entry countries that carry the large drivers of migration, human trafficking, and modern slavery.‘

And the Western democracies will pay for it all.

Level the United Nations with the ground. Forcibly deport Jeffrey Sachs and Owen Flanagan to North Korea.

Chapter 20 is the Jeff’s comments on ‘The Drivers of Migration’ -

‘It is true that by no means did every one of these international migrants move out of desperation. But many did, either because they were forced to leave because of macro-factors, such as violence and environmental destruction, or they were induced to leave because they could not earn a basic livelihood‘

So Jeff is essentially saying that Western nations have to accept migrants because they couldn’t make ends meet in their home nations.

’Whatever the exact numbers, vast numbers of migrants are moving because of economic desperation to seek material improvements in their livelihoods in other countries.‘

Yes, that is exactly what he’s saying.

‘Mobility is important, and we should visit one other as tourists, in our professional capacities and to promote art and cultural exchange. But we must create a world in which it is not necessary for tens of millions of people to flee to save their lives or to secure a decent future‘

Which would require top-down governance, as some sovereign nations are unfortunately ruled by the sort of Marxist who is presently attempting to gain global power - not forgetting, of course, the trillions of Western taxpayer cash to be exploited through onerous Blended Finance deals for benefit of the foundations.

‘Climate shocks, such as the extreme droughts that Syria experienced in the first decade of the twenty-first century and the one ongoing in Central America, lead to massive displacement.‘

We already addressed this, but to pin this exclusively on ‘climate change’ is as self-servingly corrupt and fraudulent as Jeff’s definition of ‘ethics’ in general.

‘Many of these countries are on the receiving end of global climate change processes that have been caused by the pollution and emissions of major economies like the United States,‘

And he’s back to blaming the United States, while - yet again - China goes ignored.

‘But we also need longterm responses to end the human-induced climate change, which is already on the brink of being out of control. Environmental forced migration will expand tremendously, even disastrously, unless we get the planet onto a safer trajectory, in line with the commitments that we’ve made in the SDGs and in the Paris Agreement on climate change.‘

Lie, lie, lie, and unless you bow down to our SDG God-like purpose (and the Paris Agreement cashing out mechanism), the end is neigh. We’ll all burn in the lake of fire, which already consumed us 2 or 3 times already during the alleged pandemic, according to the corrupt media.. which they control.

‘Migration owing to poverty can be seen in the flow of desperate people from sub-Saharan Africa to Europe and from Central America and Southern Mexico to the United States. In both cases, people are trying to find a place where they can guarantee livelihoods for themselves and their families because their home region does not provide the jobs or the incomes that make for a viable life.‘

No, Jeff really is saying that economic migrants should be let in.

‘We also need appropriate social and political responses at the receiving borders of the United States, Europe, and other countries receiving refugees and migrants. For that, we need compassion and a sense of our shared humanity to understand that people are fleeing desperate conditions.’

Shared humanity, again, indirectly refers to collectivism. He doesn’t care that people might want different things, because you are literally worthless to him.

’We must stop ripping children out of the arms of their mothers and fathers, as has been occurring at the U.S. border with Mexico in a kind of brutality that is shocking to witness from a country that is supposed to be governed by law and guided by decency.’

It’s so easy to shoot this down, because there’s a huge amount of child trafficking going on, but ultimately, what he’s hinting at is the MSM campaign pointing out the issue under Trump, which accelerated under Biden, but actually took off under Obama. But that same MSM… controlled by them… just didn’t care when Biden or Obama did it, and Jeff was ok with that - because those are the kinds of ‘ethics’ that he subscribes to.

’We need to understand that refugees have rights, as they are human beings. Refugees have the rights of the Geneva Conventions, and even if they will not become long-term residents or citizens of the receiving countries, those countries should provide them decent and hospitable conditions of dignity and temporary support until they can return home—when those homelands can offer opportunities for economic development, for jobs, and for a future that is safe for themselves and their families.‘

And now Jeff suggests we’re not allowed to send those migrants home again - until there are jobs for all. Of course, this is the same Sachs who also promotes ‘relative poverty’, under which set of conditions he can essentially always make the claim that they can’t return. And also, how the hell we’re supposed to guarantee jobs in nations elsewhere, please do explain that, Jeffrey Sachs - though I know you won’t.

Next chapter is on ‘Businesses as Agents of Sustainable Development’.

‘Today, the urgent challenges of sustainable development make clear that business fulfils its true purpose as a noble vocation when it produces “goods that are truly good and services that truly serve” by orienting its activities and directing its ends toward the common good and acting according to the requisite personal and social principles, values, and virtues.‘

Cherry picked definition of ‘good’ natural to follow.

‘The market principle also utterly fails when the market excludes the weak and the vulnerable from the benefits of gainful employment, human dignity, and adequate living standards. The market system can leave the poor literally to starve or to die from being unable to afford health care.‘

Unlike those planned economies whose internal death tolls and ‘human rights records’ you conveniently haven’t mentioned even once?

‘Too many business leaders either stand by idly or even contribute directly to the sin of extreme inequality and neglect of the poor and vulnerable.‘

First off - I’m certainly not going to suggest that especially some corporations don’t have a track record suggesting they should… even be in business at this stage - though, interestingly, those tend to be the corporations they typically defend. But that’s fundamentally something you address through legislation, and not some arbitrary definition of what constitutes ‘common good’…

‘In short, the business sector is a noble vocation when it operates in a moral framework. When businesses ensure that they are adding true value to society and meeting the needs of the poor…‘

… or even ‘true value’ which also is completely arbitrary. And as for the ‘moral framework’, that’s where the call for a ‘Global Ethics’ come in.

‘In this context, it must be frankly acknowledged that some elements of the institutional framework in which businesses operate today… thwart human dignity and the common good. Pope John Paul II, in the wake of Pope Paul VI in Populorum progressio, defined these destructive factors as “structures of sin.”‘

If the EcoPope says it’s a ‘structure of sin’, then… frankly, I couldn’t care less as he’s a fraud. As for human dignity and the common good, …

‘… in the case of the 2008 financial crisis, which was in fact a “crisis of ethics,” financial decision-makers engaged in rampant fraud, insider trading, …‘

Yet, when push came to shove, Jeff Sachs’ friends decided that those committing said rampant fraud should be bailed out.

‘Too many degrade human dignity across supply chains by denying workers just wages and by subjecting them to inhumane work conditions‘

Both of which - again - are a matter for the legal framework to sort out as opposed to some arbitrary, cherry picked ‘Global Ethic’.

‘We applaud the more than twelve thousand companies that have joined the UN Global Compact, committing businesses to sustainable development and honest business practices…‘

Those corporations are, essentially, the most corrupt of all.

Global Governance and the Role of Ethics

‘Without a moral framework guiding business, …‘

Two.

‘…, Ethics in Action calls for a reorientation of business activity around the common good… the individual human being, irrespective of institutional setting, must be personally accountable as a moral actor. Senior management has a particular responsibility to define and demonstrate the right values and to set “moral enrichment targets” within the corporation‘

Where those ‘values’ will be outlined through the ‘moral guidance’ that the ‘Global Ethics’ in business form will suggest, where said is more commonly known as ‘ESG’.

‘The pursuit of sustainable development requires a reform of the societal frame, creating greater harmony among business success, environmental sustainability, and social fairness. This effort also requires institutional reforms to dismantle the embedded structures of sin, including the criminalization of business and the relentless pursuit of profits at all costs, including harm to others.‘

Again, this is about shoving an arbitrary set of ‘ethical’ standards onto business, where the ‘common good’ is dictated by - well, you’re not supposed to know - leading to reforms, which will so obviously reflect some completely arbitrary set of ‘ethical’ standards, leading to your prosecution for being successful, as your perpetual motion machine solving the energy crisis forever fell onto the foot of a starving peasant in Mongolia, calling for an operation, which unfortunately - due to his distance from the nearest facility - led to his untimely death.

Yes, obviously, this is exaggerated. But the point stands. What in the living hell constitutes ‘relentless pursuit of profits at all costs’, and ‘harm to others'? Those non-definitions can be applied to absolutely any scenario. It’s just a matter of whether a commie judge is appointed in your case, which he of course will be, because you committed the crime of being successful and competent.

‘Business ethics can never be optional, and corporate social responsibility can never be an add-on, … it must begin with moral education at different levels—for children, in universities, and among CEOs and managers. A particular challenge lies in changing the curriculum of economics programs and business schools toward a healthier and  more  realistic vision of human nature, and one that aims at the common good‘

And - et voila - there’s that call for business ethics, obviously enabled through brainwashing kids and young adults in education, to see the error of our ways and commit to the never-been-tried-before Marxist ideals as promoted by Jeff and Owen.

‘Business leaders should take a professional oath, similar to the Hippocratic oath taken by medical practitioners. This must start with “first, do no harm”…, Ethics in Action proposes the following “Ten Corporate Commandments.”‘

What this ‘oath’ will become is an ‘ethics declaration’. And those medical practitioners who refused to push the fraudulent ‘vaccines’ or even questioned the ever-changing ‘science’ which we all had to ‘trust’ were generally fired for committing ‘ethics violations’ to the best of my knowledge. Oh yeah - not forgetting that some precincts even fired medical professionals who refused to accept said ‘vaccines’⁹.

Business, they’re coming for you. Sure, your profits are great right now, they will not continue to be. Let’s now take a look at their ‘ten corporate commandments’ -

‘Produce Goods and Services Not Only for Markets but Also for the Common Good‘

And never mind if no organic market exist. Corrupt governments will see to that. But the whole premise is completely absurd, because in terms of technlogy and unintended consequences, it calls for a prediction of the future, which - in no uncertain term - is chaos theory, which cannot be predicted.

Conseqeuntly, what it will actually lead to is a complete stifling of innovative thought - unless, of course, you control those ‘ethics panels’. And that is entirely the point.

‘Promote Sustainable Development‘

Accept your Lord and your Saviour.

‘Extend Responsibility and Accountability to All Stakeholders‘

And this is where the precautionary principle comes in, which will be applied at random. The argument is similar to that of the above - as future is unpredictable, engaging in any entrepreneurial activity is a gamble, quite possible involving your life under certain circumstances (which you do not control). And that’s essentially how it tends to work under authoritarian regimes, which is exactly what this document - and thus, by logical extension - ‘moral’ Jeff and ‘ethic’ Owen promotes.

‘Private property rights are not inviolate; they must accord with the common good and dignity for all. Firms should defend human dignity, …‘

And that means property rights count for absolutely nothing, because it forces you to practice their arbitrary religious rituals, or said property could be taken away.

‘Embed environmental sustainability in core business models. Accept that the main cause of climate change is human activity based on the use of fossil fuels…‘

Absolutely no-one should agree to this. Because this isn’t even science, this is an appeal to ‘settled’ science, where said ‘science’ is anything but settled. This will so obviously be used against you. This is them asking you to sign a guilty plea, where what’s on trial is ‘ecocrimes’ - regardless of actual scientific evidence on the matter. It’s manipulative to the extreme, but then, that’s Jeff and Owen for you.

‘Link Profit to Social Benefit‘

More taxes.

‘Set compensation for CEOs and senior executives based on factors such as avoiding social harms…, and contribution by the company to the SDGs. Keep a reasonable balance of the pay of the CEO and the workers in the firm, and publish the income differentials between management and workers.‘

I told you that ‘relative poverty’ will be applied at the high end as well. This is the thin end of the wedge. Eventually, some ratio will be upheld by law, because those people will never, ever, ever, ever stop voluntarily¹⁰.

And finally -

‘… work with the European Union in supporting corporate ethics and good governance.‘

Corporate ethics disclaimers, essentially. And good governance¹¹? That’s a set of values which include ‘participation’ (but who decides who should participate?), ‘accountability‘ (vdLeyen destroying evidence of corruption relating to Pfizer deal)¹², ‘transparency‘ (Pfizer seeking to bury ‘vaccine’ docs)¹³, and so forth. These are - in short - a set of rules which will apply to you, but not them.

Next up is the ‘Declaration of the Ethics in Action Meeting on Education’ -

‘… the world community bears an urgent moral responsibility to ensure quality education for all children…‘

And straight off, it’s a moral call. Whenever you see these, assume the worst.

‘… support African leaders’ plans to establish a special fund for African secondary education to help channel donor financing to African primary and secondary education, …‘

Ah, more Western taxpayer cash is called for. How unusual!

‘… the incremental international funds needed are very modest, roughly US$40 billion per year…‘

I see, well, start by draining all the cash out of Rockefeller Foundation, then Carnegie, then Gates, then Ford. Let’s talk when all four have shut down - for the common good.

‘Investing sufficiently in education may seem demanding, but the costs of ignorance are much higher. Domestically and internationally, peace is endangered by uneducated masses who are not integrated into society. Incremental funding should be raised from governments, philanthropists, religious organizations, and businesses.‘

Ah, and it’s such a good deal, because the costs are much higher if we do not immediately agree. They don’t even have to fabricate some fraudulent report (as was the case elsewhere), it’s self-evident because they say so!

‘In today’s world, we need new ways to teach and to train teachers… , ethical reflection, and moral skills… global citizenship… the goals of critical analysis… fake news, and demonization of the other‘

I slightly cut and pasted here to correct the intent relating to the final few.

‘We need to teach universal and ecumenical values and virtues as a core purpose of education. These include empathy, fraternity, commitment to justice and human rights, and pursuit of the common good. The challenges of globalization can be met only by a cosmopolitan education, rooted in a world ethos shared between religious and nonreligious people across all cultural divides. It is from this overlapping moral and multireligious consensus, rooted in human dignity and the common good…‘

It’s about indoctrinating kids with a ‘universal’, ‘worldwide ethos’ aka ‘Global Ethic’.

‘We need an educational system that promotes a fair, inclusive, and sustainable world… the foundations of a dignified life.‘

Yes, understand how to ‘Live with Dignity’ (do as you’re told) in Marxist Utopia.

Living with Dignity

‘Corporations also need to provide training and educational opportunities to foster lifelong learning, to inculcate virtue…‘

Lifelong, Marxist indoctrination, you mean?

‘Ethics in Action, Religions for Peace, the SDSN, and other interested partners will commit as a group to prepare a new course on the virtues of a sustainable society…‘

Marxist brainwashing.

Now, let’s hear what Jeffrey Sachs has to add. It’s Chapter 26; ‘The Challenge of Education’ -

‘Moreover, when societies confront complex sustainable development challenges such as pandemic diseases, climate change, and the loss of biodiversity that require behavioral changes (such as getting vaccinated), a better educated public will respond more rapidly and with less friction. When the public is poorly educated, fake news and propaganda are more readily believed and transmitted.‘

Wait, I just highlighted it all. Let’s do it bullet point, if for no other reason to show you exactly who Jeffrey Sachs is.

• Moreover, when societies confront complex sustainable development challenges such as pandemic diseases
  Yeah, like Covid-19, which so obviously was a scam, perpetrated by the likes of Jeff - who furthermore sat on the early Lancet panel and agreed with practically everything.

• … climate change, and the loss of biodiversity…
  Which will promptly be monetised through the GEF, and used to rinse the Western taxpayer clean.

• … that require behavioral changes (such as getting vaccinated)
  Ie, behavioural science, aka ‘nudging’, aka manipulative messaging, aka the sort of tricks which authoritarian regimes use all the time, and as advocated by Jeff.

• … a better educated public…
  A more compliant public…

• … will respond more rapidly and with less friction
  … will do as they’re told, regardless of how corrupt and ever-changing the ‘science’ that we must ‘trust’, and which leads to medical professionals speaking out against being fired…

• When the public is poorly educated, …
  Hurr UR Dumb

• … fake news and propaganda are more readily believed and transmitted.‘
  Which people like Jeff refuse entirely to debate, because they are well aware that ‘the science’ that we ‘should trust’ isn’t ‘science’ and certainly cannot be ‘trusted’.
  

Anyway, Jeff carries on -

‘The COVID-19 pandemic has made the situation far worse, with hundreds of millions of children having experienced school closings for part or all of the 2020 and 2021 school years.‘

That’s on you, Jeff. Team Jeff caused that. Are you going to accept responsibility?

‘Education for all is of top priority for every nation, yet it is still not being achieved… education for all children is too costly for low-income countries unless they receive help from richer countries.‘

Oh I see, Jeff is out to defraud Western governments yet again. Tell me, Jeff, tell me about the awesome deal I get, and how much money I ‘save’ as opposed to outright telling you to shove it -

‘Let us now consider the overall financing gap for education for all developing countries combined. For low-income countries, the education financing gap is around 15 percent of GDP. With a total GDP of $531 billion for the low-income countries, the financing gap is around $75 billion per year. If we suppose that middle-income countries need about the same financing to achieve education for all, the financing gap in total for both low- and middle-income countries would be on the order of $150 billion per year.‘

$150bn? Special deal only for you!

Nah, not good enough, mate. Shove it.

‘There are some important proposals on the table for how to address the education financing gap. Gordon Brown, the UN special envoy for global education, has called for an International Finance Facility for Education (IFFEd), …‘

Oh, Gordon Brown is involved? That changes everything! Please, both go shove it up Gordon’s ‘human rights’.

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights

‘Finally, to secure a quality education for all, we must promote the content of sustainable development in school teaching, as called for by SDG Target 4.7. We should teach a holistic sustainable development curriculum, including the science of sustainable development and the cultural dimensions of tolerance and peace‘

Ah, so now the goalposts have been moved to become a ‘holistic sustainable development curriculum‘. That inclusion is very interesting.

Also, please shove said ‘holistic curriculum’ right up Gordon’s ‘human rights’ as well… oh yeah, not forgetting your quack ‘science’. That, too, belongs right up there.

Almost done. Up next is ‘Climate Justice’.

‘We can point to five main challenges of injustice that threaten human dignity, undermine the common good, subvert democracy, and endanger our very survival and health owing to environmental degradation‘

Oh noes! Let’s hear then.

• Global promises by governments that are not kept
  But let’s not worry about the lies they told their voter

• The persistence of unequal distributions of income and wealth
  Agree, let’s immediately launch full investigations and raids against every major tax-exempt foundation, and central bank.

• Unjust redistributions from poor to rich
  That’s where those tax-exempt foundations and central banks come in again.

• Bullying associated with corporate lobbying
  As opposed to the foundations hiring, ie, Purpose Campaigns to drum up a fake protest? Should Soros - and his foundation - not be prosecuted for that?

• States that do not accept migrants while adding to the distress causing the migrations
  What does that even mean? What this alludes to is no respect for sovereignty whatsoever, because if I vote for a party who promise to stop immigration, I expect my government to go by that, and not listen to subversive, lying, Marxist frauds like Jeffrey Sachs.

‘In addition, for the first time in history, we are faced with the grave threat of human-induced climate change, the moral dimensions of which are a core feature of Laudato si’ and the Sustainable Development Goals‘

Yup, yup… which incidentally also serves as a reason why both must go.

‘We have examined the challenge of climate justice in light of these structures of injustice. We acknowledge that scientific evidence can attribute the harms of environmental degradation to identifiable agents, such as the major producers of fossil fuels and governments that fail to regulate economic activities for the public good‘

Yes, push intentionally falsified ‘science’, refuse anyone who disagree access to the negotiations, and use the court system to push through Marxist Utopia.

‘Ethics in Action identified several ways to address climate justice. These include public actions to regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Paris Agreement on climate change; behavioral and attitudinal changes by the lead managers of major companies; responsible investing by universities, foundations, insurance companies, pension funds, and others‘

Brainwashing, and asking the foundations to stop investing in fossil fuels. Well, they already did. In fact, they’ve consistently front-run every part of this scam, likely making all of this an explicit case of insider trading by said foundations.

Breakthrough Energy

‘… legal challenges to the behavior of companies and governments, including compensation paid to those suffering “losses and damages” from climate change and other environmental degradation (such as air and water pollution)…‘

We already have a framework enabling lawsuits should a corporation overstep the mark. But these cases will obviously be sent straight to the International Criminal Court, outside the purview of sovereign governments. And the ICC will rule on basis of legislation, pushed through at the UN level - as opposed to sovereign.

‘Ethics in Action members agreed that there is no single “magic bullet” to overcome climate injustice. Many tools should be deployed, and those tools should be tailored to the specific conditions and needs of different communities and parts of the world. A comprehensive and effective global effort should be top-down as well as bottom-up; through moral suasion as well as public policy; and through cooperation as well as litigation. All pathways will be needed, and urgently, given the grave and potentially irreversible consequences of unchecked global warming.‘

At what stage does this become outright collusion with activist groups? At what point in time should the likes of Jeffrey and Owen be prosecuted for causing damages to nation states by intent, thus leading to harm and suffering?

It’s time to turn the tables. Prosecute Jeff and Owen personally for every penny of harm incurred by states, on grounds of human rights. Because the taxpayer of Western states - they have human rights too, right - will ultimately be on the hook, leading to an overall loss of quality of service. And Jeff and Owen’s explicit advice will absolutely cause a loss to the state, leading to a damaged economic environment, and hence local suffering through loss of livelihoods, and reduced quality of service through rendered health services. Enough is enough. These ‘think tanks’ and other - if they seek to influence policy in ANY regard, then they should bloody well have to accept blame when it goes wrong.

Jeff, I know a lot of people are fairly upset in this regard, but did you ever accept blame for what took place in Poland, post-communism? No?

Then why the hell should we?

It finishes off with a hit list, suggesting which corporations should be sued, how said legal process should work, for what to sue, and seeking to influence investment decisions, strategies for ‘climate justice’ (as upheld by some radical judge), supporting efforts to price carbon emissions, especially through taxes.

Jeff and Owen quite literally just handed the activists a guide, and told them to go make trouble. Jeff and Owen should absolutely be held individually responsible.

And finally, we also find ‘ten commandments’ in this area of quack science and arbitrary ‘justice’, naturally calling for a deconstruction of energy in the West, while completely ignoring China’s breakneck speed coal plant construction, terrible advice like switching to EVs by 2030, reduce beef eating, and… naturally… for the activists to sue the oil producers.

The primary authors of this report - Jeff and Owen - should be held to account. They are quite literally stoking the fire, yet will lie to dodge personal responsiblity, while insisting you’re held to account.

Some ‘ethics’, huh?

Next up is the ‘Common Consensus on Corruption’ -

‘…the importance of embedding the economy in a proper ethical framework centered on the common good‘

… which is about ‘ethics disclaimers’ in context of economics, hence Global Ethics…

‘Ending corruption will also require the development of social norms that deter fraud, ... It calls for the development of personal and social virtues that emphasize the common good over greed, self-interest, and a might-is-right mentality. All this in turn requires better role models, ethical education, and a strong role for religion.‘

… also to be reflected through ‘social virtues’ and thus - naturally - ‘ethical education’.

Finally, ‘Ethics in Action on the Future of Work' -

‘These are indeed the greatest challenges of work today: automation accelerated by artificial intelligence, intolerable pollution, and marginalized populations excluded from full participation in society and decision-making‘

Right, so I assume this is an indirect ‘request’ for migrants to ‘participate’ through employment, as in, leading to an enforced, gradual replacement of the local people?

‘The most important challenge of work is therefore not its specific type or sector… nor the earnings of a job, but whether work fulfills the deeper purposes of each person as a human being: the cultivation of virtues, the worker’s dignity, and the fulfillment of our social roles as colleagues, friends, family members, and citizens‘

That’s not actually describing a job, per se. What it describes is you being a good, little North Korean slave to the system, being enforced to carry out absurd rituals to show everyone how ‘virtuous’ you are.

Do you want to know what comes next?

That’s right - what Jeffrey Sachs and Owen Flanagan promote is a system, reflected by the current in North Korea, even down to ‘a commitment to the collective good‘, ‘reporting on others‘ (as seen during Covid-19), ‘moral and social codes promoted by the state‘ (ultimately becoming ‘Global Ethics’ seeing how this is global), and should you refuse ‘social ostracism to more severe consequences like re-education or imprisonment in labor camps‘. We could also add losing your job for speaking out (which absolutely took place during Covid). Jordan Peterson, of course, had to take a ‘re-education course’ recently, and social ostracism absolutely took place during Covid-19, where sovereign leaders took turns, drumming up hate against the unvaccinated.

As for those labor camps, we didn’t quite reach that stage… yet.

We then find the demand to -

‘SDG 5, on gender equality, calls on society to honor, respect, and indirectly compensate the household work of women‘

Having kids is a choice. I have kids. That was a choice. I wouldn’t change a thing, but sure, kids are expensive, and take a lot of your time - most of which, in my circumstance, is put in by my wife, for which I am eternally grateful (though certainly reminded of often).

But it’s not a paid occupation. You’re supposed to do it out of love, and not because Jeff Sachs or some other dialectical materialist offers you a bribe. Besides, if paid to take care of kids, it will absolutely disincentivise actual, productive work.

And whose income will the state then tax?

Finally, a few action items outline -

‘… recognize and respect the moral meaning of decent work for all.‘

Which, again, is completely meaningless, and entirely subjective. But ultimately leave it to Sachs’ Marxist pal to judge, right?

‘The use of artificial intelligence and related technologies to promote solutions for decent work, including … environmental monitoring,‘

This is a really, really odd inclusion. But yes, that’s exactly what they plan to do. Run global surveillance on literally everything, extract ‘indicator’ values, and feed said palette of ‘indicators’ to AI, which will then through ‘adaptive management’ rule us via machines. But this realy is… bit of an odd inclusion here.

‘Stepped-up efforts to reform the enterprise sector through increased union membership, reforming company law, promoting multistakeholder governance, …‘

But of course. The ‘stakeholder approach’ ultimately is their specific governance mechanism, which is so easily corrupted. That’s why they chose it.

The Stakeholder Selection Process

‘The development of an ethical framework for the deployment of artificial intelligence so that its use supports the common good‘

That has already - to an extent - been rolled out. Try to get ChatGPT to accept that ‘stakeholder approach’ is so ripe for abuse that it can easily lead to arbitrary rule, and that is thus is not democratic. Because the mere suggestion that the ‘stakeholder approach’ is not democratic sends it into playing full defense, where it endlessly parrots the same lies, over and over and over again. And that’s how said ‘ethical framework’ is set to work in the context of AI.

But lying to you about inconvenient facts.

‘A call on all economic decision-makers to adopt values focused less on the pursuit of profit and power and… should also encourage and support moral and virtue education…‘

We’ll be like North Korea in no time. You’ll love it. Or - at least - you will definitely decide to keep quiet about it.

Finally, let me assure you that the old propaganda technique is alive and well.

• Tell a lie

• Make it big

• Repeat if often

• Eventually, people will… grow to recognise it and call it out.

1. https://globalenergymonitor.org/press-release/chinas-coal-power-spree-could-see-over-300-coal-plants-added-before-emissions-peak/

2. https://web.archive.org/web/20191109004545/https://www.unv.org/news/first-un-refugee-volunteer-east-and-southern-africa-urges-world-davos-empower-refugees-agents

3. https://www.newsweek.com/immigrants-citizenship-trump-biden-election-1923953

4. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/mar/20/trump-campaign-analysis-biden-democracy-threats

5. https://fabians.org.uk/publication/new-arrivals/

6. https://fabians.org.uk/congratulations-keir-starmer/

7. https://fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/FABJ5403_Sustainability_goals_240417_WEB.pdf

8. https://www.jstor.org/site/london-school-of-economics/fabian-tracts/?so=item_title_str_asc&searchkey=1720781262451

9. https://jme.bmj.com/content/50/4/268

10. https://www.academia.edu/44411509/Marx_engels_collected_works_volume_6_ma_karl_marx

11. https://www.diligent.com/en-gb/resources/blog/what-constitutes-good-governance

12. https://www.politico.eu/article/new-york-times-sue-european-union-ursula-von-der-leyen-pfizer-texts/

13. https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/paramount-importance-judge-orders-fda-hasten-release-pfizer-vaccine-docs-2022-01-07/