The Declaration of Alma-Ata
In 1978, the international community came together in Alma-Ata in the Soviet Union, from which a declaration was issued.
A declaration which now rings louder then ever.
-
Let’s get one of the more troublesome wordings out of the way, sooner rather than later. The New International Economic Order. That document can be found here.
This relates to a UN resolution, which you can find here. In short, it relates to the end of colonialism, the few nations still under British rule should be granted their independence, and these nations should be welcome to their full set of rights, including that of natural resources.
Except, that’s not quite the full story.
There are a few issues here - the first is a claim that the existing (capitalist) model is not fit for purpose and needs replacing, that the new model should be based on equity, interdependence, and should seek justice.
And in the final point, the aim is ‘the creation of better conditions for all peoples to reach a life worthy of human dignity‘.
Where to start.
The underlying current here, is that those words are completely meaningless. They are left entirely up for interpretation. Whose equity? Which justice - how is it measured? What’s the correct resolution? Who should pay? When and where is this settled, and who’s entitles to compensation, and how is said measured?
And what does ‘human dignity’ entail? Is it Canada’s interpretation that goes?
‘Justice’, of course, leans heavily up against social justice, which is nothing short of unbridled marxism when you dig deep.
‘Equity’ is another ultimately meaningless word, because who’s to say that someone lazy should be compensated the same as someone active, and if not - how do you measure the difference? We already have a system - however imperfect - which measures and rewards, why the need for replacing said? And this goes, regardless of which type of ‘equity’ you speak, because if I’m active, I will almost certainly ultimately have better health, relative to someone inactive.
What I say is that personal life choices enter the equation, and yield consequences — and how on earth are you realistically going to measure that? Is it fair that I have a great immune system, or that my cousin was more popular with the ladies back in the day?
Oh wait, that’s exactly what the Determinants of Health propose a ‘solution’, which looks rather a lot like that of One Health - real-time global surveillance.
Finally, we have 'interdependence’, one of my least favourite words. Why? Because that also leads to unmitigated communism.
The universal point here is that meaningless words really only undermine the legal framework — and that’s the entire point.
-
The Alma-Ata was revolutionary in some regards, with the key objective being ‘health for all’.
And this is where the meaningless words enter the equation once again -
‘Health For All implies the removal of the obstacles to health – that is to say, the elimination of malnutrition, ignorance, contaminated drinking water and unhygienic housing‘.
… exactly how isn’t that completely impossible? How can you possibly eliminate ignorance in those of low intelligence, malnutrition in those who eat burgers at every meal, and clean the house of the workshy?
They are absurd objectives. But we’re not done. Because it also drags in agriculture, industry, education, housing, and communication. In short - this isn’t about health at all.
This is about the Determinants of Health, without announcing so.
It finishes off ‘Health For All could be attained by the year 2000’ - naturally, this wasn’t achieved, just as none of their other promises ever will be. Because they’re not designed to succeed, besides, they’ll just move the goalposts.
The common denominator here is control. Someone will need to be placed in a position to manage and/or oversee all of this. A good, loyal party comrade. I covered that in the Determinants of Health, linked above.
-
Declaration V further requests ‘social justice’, VII section 3 includes nutrition, immunisation, and provision of essential drugs. Immunisation - oh really? Section 4 once again drags in all the Determinants of Health. And declaration IX calls for global cooperation, leaving just one --
Declaration X.
Which can be summed up in a single word.
Peace.
In other words - disarm yourself.
But all of this is crazy talk, no? You’re just paranoid man, you see communists everywhere. Crazy talk, right?
Oh wait, I forgot to mention a minor detail. The New International Economic Order outlined above, yes? Penned by Ervin Laszlo, who in 1993 founded the Club of Budapest, a former partner of the World Governance-seeking Collegium International. He may not admit it, but he’s on the very hard left of political ideology.
… but that initiative died long time ago, no?
Well, actually… no.
And in December 2021, the United Nations founded a new initiative - ‘Global Health for Peace Initiative‘, chock full of meaningless words, much like the Alma-Ata — but on steroids. As it transpires -
