The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework

Two things are outstanding. What are they going to do, and how are they going to do it. This addresses the former. On the latter, an article on Blended Finance will follow.

I will make this fairly brief. Here’s the source document. It’s the December 2022 document, ‘Kunming-Montreal Global biodiversity framework‘.

-

I posted this article earlier, which might be informative should you wish to look for information in regards to the global surveillance state and its implementation. You can skip it, but accept this - global surveillance is real, and has been gathering since the mid-1970s.

However, this article I would recommend you read, because it’s highly relevant to the document covered here.

-

In case you haven’t yet realised - the Convention Biological Diversity is where the body is buried, or specifically, their 12 principles which in short detail a neo-feudalistic society in which the cattle class possess absolutely no genuine power, and ‘the science’ is your new religion. The CBD, in turn, was primarily pushed by UNEP, and it was also they, who in 1975 launched GEMS - Global Environmental Monitoring System - which is a fancy name for global surveillance.

GEMS became GEOSS, included satellite monitoring, and in 2019 considered ‘new opportunities’, one being Public Health Surveillance.

Under the umbrella of One Health, global surveillance was driven by the tripartite since 2010, but in 2022 UNEP joined, forming the quadripartite and in hence effect creating the direct connection between surveillance (GEMS) and neo-feudalism (CBD) - although this was technically already announced in 2018.

But the framework alone is not enough. It needs to be pushed through to policy.

-

This is the draft decision submitted to the president of the Convention on Biological Diversity, relating to the ‘Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework‘. Naturally, it will pass, because real power does not reside with governance in these matters, but the science panels. And the enforcement mechanisms will ensure that governance does not get any funny ideas and/or start thinking for themselves.

Early on we have a note on digital sequence information on generic resources, which likely refers to next-gen genomic sequencing of… well, probably anything and everything, as they’re busy, working on next-gen DNA storage capable of storing these vast, vast quantities of data. Good thing we all supplied those swabs, eh?

But in short, it’s about protecting biodiversity, it drags in the stakeholders, who need to implement all three provisions in a balanced and enhanced way, it features monitoring, more monitoring, resource mobilisation, and it urges governments to implement the Cartagena Protocol, likely because that’s where enforcement and framework is hiding - with no binding targets whatsoever, it’s generally an easy pass. It’s designed that way.

And naturally, this is about the SDGs, and so forth.

The paper properly starts on page 4, where the ‘Global Assessment Report of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services‘ is identified as - well - justification for these onerous policies. Importantly, the biosphere is being altered across all spatial scales - should ring a bell, if you read the Ecosystem Approach above, but we’ll return to this in a bit.

Direct drivers are identified to be… well… human activity in general… and indirect drivers are… social values and behaviour… which obviously is total nonsense, but it’s an attempt to legitimise their Marxist surveillance, forcing equality upon you the way any budding communist dictator is so fond of.

We further need to radically transform society by 2030, and this requires a whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach.

Page 6 is where you need to pay attention.

‘This framework is to be implemented based on the ecosystem approach of the Convention.’

The Ecosystem Approach is neo-feudalism. It really is.

‘The implementation of the framework should be guided by the principle of intergenerational equity which aims to meet the needs of the present...‘

Intergenerational equity means using your forefathers success against you. Or even claims of success. It enables explicit discrimination, and is completely untolerable for a huge number of reasons starting with - who get to judge. Because it for sure won’t be you.

‘The framework acknowledges the interlinkages between biodiversity and health and the three objectives of the Convention. The framework is to be implemented with consideration of the One Health Approach, among other holistic approaches that are based on science, mobilize multiple sectors, disciplines and communities to work together and aim to sustainably balance and optimize, the health of people, animals, plants and ecosystems, recognizing the need for equitable access to tools and technologies including medicines, vaccines and other health products related to biodiversity, while highlighting the urgent need to reduce pressures on biodiversity and decrease environmental degradation to reduce risks to health, and, as appropriate, develop practical access and benefit-sharing arrangements.‘

So, yeah - One Health. Of course. One Health is about surveillance, vaccines, and the occasional dash of culling, justified by ‘the science’ which is likely cooked up by the likes of ‘SCOPE’, on which, you have absolutely no impact. And for the record, the current chief of SCOPE works to shut down nuclear power. Golly, right?

We also have phrasing quite similar to that of the Pandemic Treaty, relating to sustainable balancing of nature (in which humans takes up too much space). Further, we need vaccines (of course), probably to perform the culling act itself.

I will skip the rest of this section, because the important parts are covered. Well, Goal D includes a ludicrous demand for $700bn/year, but hey.

The part of important comes next - the targets.

‘1. Ensure that all areas are under participatory integrated biodiversity inclusive spatial planning…‘

I will address this in a bit.

‘3. Ensure and enable that by 2030 at least 30 per cent of terrestrial, inland water, and of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, are effectively conserved and managed through ecologically representative, well-connected and equitably governed systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, recognizing indigenous and traditional territories, where applicable, and integrated into wider landscapes, seascapes and the ocean,‘

This ties into the spatial planning above. I will address later on.

‘4. …and effectively manage human-wildlife interactions to minimize human-wildlife conflict for coexistence.‘

Humans won’t be present across most of this planned, future world. And those who will still be around, will live in accomodation vastly different to that of today. Think Soviet commie blocks.

‘7. … reducing the overall risk from pesticides and highly hazardous chemicals by at least half including through integrated pest management, based on science, taking into account food security and livelihoods; and also preventing, reducing, and working towards eliminating plastic pollution.‘

This will become a gradual elimination of chemical fertiliser. Count on it. And once that goes, food production will collapse. Look towards Sri Lanka, which probably was a training run.

‘11. Restore, maintain and enhance nature’s contributions to people, including ecosystem functions and services, such as regulation of air, water, and climate, soil health, pollination and reduction of disease risk, as well as protection from natural hazards and disasters, through nature-based solutions and/or ecosystem-based approaches...‘

Everything will become illegal, in short. Well, for the proles, anyway. The two-track justice system is already clearly in effect.

‘14. Ensure the full integration of biodiversity and its multiple values into policies, regulations, planning…‘

We’ve seen this repeatedly. They will integrate these policies into every part of legislation.

‘15. …large and transnational companies and financial institutions (a) Regularly monitor, assess, and transparently disclose their risks, dependencies and impacts on biodiversity,‘

There’s that ESG compliance.

‘19c - Leveraging private finance, promoting blended finance, implementing strategies for raising new and additional resources, and encouraging the private sector to invest in biodiversity, including through impact funds and other instruments;‘

How do you think that asset ownership shift will be carried out? Perhaps that’s a hint.

‘22. …access to justice and information related to biodiversity…‘

And there’s the confirmation that they won’t push this through via corrupt politicians. No, instead they will force through tightening standards, and then have some nobody trade the liberty of his his fellow countrymens in return for a bit of cash… which will be confiscated down the road anyway, once CBDCs have been implemented in full.

And in the section on responsiblity and transparency, we find this -

‘National biodiversity strategies and action plans, revised or updated in alignment with the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework and its goals and targets as the main vehicle for implementation of the framework, including national targets communicated in a standardized format,‘

There are those targets again, which will be communicated along with some hints that you should probably become a traitor in return for a handful of change.

And finally, we have typical verbiage about behavioural change, because Marxists think they’re above nature, and -

‘Raising awareness among all sectors and actors of the need for urgent action to implement the framework, while enabling their active engagement in the implementation and monitoring of progress towards the achievement of its goals and targets‘

Yeah, they want you to sue. That takes responsibility away from the politicians in power, who instead can point fingers at some obscure 30 year old paragraph in a legislative document, which they - correctly - had absolutely nothing to do with, and consequently - incorrectly - claim they can do nothing about.

-

And the final thing to address here is the ‘Landscape Approach’ and ‘spatial scales’, which both refer to scale of operation, and implicitly, tools of even further circumvention of democracy. Again, this is covered in the Ecosystem Approach.

Should you wish to know more, here’s the CBD’s webpage on the topic, detailing exactly how they gradually seek to introduce neo-feudalism upon the proles.

And - although it’s kind of tired by now, I just can’t help myself -

It’s to protect you.

Blended Finance coming up next.