A Globalism of Ideas – Inside the UN’s “Pact for the Future”
Kit Knightly
The United Nation’s Summit of the Future is over. The “great and good” of global leadership got together for four days in New York for what their website called…
a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reimagine the multilateral system and steer humanity on a new course
…which sounds just lovely and not at all creepy and hubristic.
The four day event was split into two “action days” and two days of “the Summit.”
Both of which are just different names for “people in suits sitting around big tables using bureaucratic jargon while making big time serious important-person faces”.
The result of which is the passing of a document they’re calling the “Pact for the Future” – 81 pages of self-important waffle so crammed with meaningless political language it becomes near-unintelligible (what James Corbett calls “Globalese”).
Here’s a paragraph chosen at random:
Enhancing cooperation with stakeholders, including civil society, academia, the scientific and technological community and the private sector, and encouraging intergenerational partnerships, by promoting a whole-of society approach, to share best practices and develop innovative, long-term and forward-thinking ideas in order to safeguard the needs and interests of future generations.
…it’s all like that. And I read it all. 81 pages.
You’re welcome.
In terms of real content, there are no new ideas here. We have seen this globalist shopping list of alleged “issues” before.
Climate change, conflict, food insecurity, poverty, misinformation, hate speech. The usual “problems” that collectively form what the document refers to as “complex global shocks”.
These “shocks” – the document tells us – can be addressed with a series of “solutions” that are again no surprise:
“respect for international law”,
“expanded cooperation”,
“increased role for the UN” and the post-covid buzzword of choice –
“interoperability”.
All of which can be broadly defined as our old friend “global government”.
As you’d expect, there’s a lot of talk about money and finance (massive transfers of public money into private hands is how you win over corporations and hedge funds to your authoritarian cause, after all). For example Action 9(28)(f) promises…
…a new collective quantified goal from a floor of 100 billion United States dollars per year, taking into account the needs and priorities of developing countries [to combat climate change];
$100 billion per year. You can buy a lot of ScienceTM with that.
The most blatantly authoritarian language is reserved for control of the internet (it almost always is), and Objectives 3 & 4 of the “Global Digital Compact Annex” are two of the few that require little to no translation at all, pledging to:
Foster an inclusive, open, safe and secure digital space that respects, protects and promotes human rights [and] Advance responsible, equitable and interoperable data governance approaches
The annex goes on to underline the importance of “Information Integrity” [emphasis added]:
33. Access to relevant, reliable and accurate information and knowledge is essential for an inclusive, open, safe and secure digital space. [T]echnolog[y] can facilitate the manipulation of and interference with information in ways that are harmful to societies and individuals, and negatively affect the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals.
34.We will work together to promote information integrity, tolerance and respect in the digital space, as well as to protect the integrity of democratic processes. We will strengthen international cooperation to address the challenge of misinformation and disinformation and hate speech
And charges digital technology companies to hand over private information to government researchers so they can “address misinformation”:
We urgently call on digital technology companies and social media platforms to enhance the transparency and accountability of their systems [and] provide researchers access to data […] to build an evidence base on how to address misinformation and disinformation and hate speech that can inform government and industry policies, standards and best practices…
That means censorship and surveillance. Just in case that wasn’t clear.
Oh and this?
We commit, by 2030 to: Design and roll out digital media and information literacy curricula to ensure that all users have the skills and knowledge to safely and critically interact with content and with information providers and to enhance resilience against the harmful impacts of misinformation and disinformation
This means brainwashing.
Highly predictable, and very unpleasant, but as I said, none of this is new.
New ideas are not the role of Summits and Pacts, their role is to reinforce the old ideas. The hard-coded assumptions upon which the political class operate.
To shape consensus.
And that’s just what the Pact of the Future did – the pact itself was passed without a vote. Why was it passed without a vote? Because two years ago UN Resolution A/RES/76/307 agreed in advance…
that the Summit will adopt a concise, action-oriented outcome document entitled “A Pact for the Future”, agreed in advance by consensus through intergovernmental negotiations
Rendering Russia’s last minute objections – backed by Sudan, Syria, Iran, Belarus and Nicaragua – entirely pointless, if not entirely performative.
Nevertheless, they warrant examination.
In his statement to the UN on September 22nd, Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Vershinin claimed:
From the very outset, those who coordinated the work on the draft included in it only what was dictated to them mainly by Western countries. The points of contention piled up and were never resolved. None of our requests to sit down at the negotiating table and discuss them were met. This is not what is considered and called multilateralism, which many like to speechify about.
In his trademark eloquent style, Sergei Lavrov remarked:
The future of our peoples cannot be invented in a test tube with the participation of the UN Secretariat and Western lobbyists. It is important to shape a decision on this matter in the conditions of negotiations and achieve a balance of interests,”
Any kind of dissent on the matter of multilateralism – especially re: climate change the social media – represents an uncharacteristic break in the trend of total global harmony on these issues.
Does this represent a genuine split in the global support for “the great reset”?
Well, it’s possible, and we can all hope so, but let’s not oversell it. We know Russia endorses virtually every aspect of the Great Reset – the notion of anthropogenic climate change, Agenda 2030, censorship, CBDCs, digital identity and…well, all of what can be called the globalist agenda.
Their objections here don’t seem to represent any change in that. They don’t appear to be objecting to any of these specific policies. They are raising issues of consultation and national sovereignty, procedure and influence, rather than rejection of the founding myths of the pact.
These are valid of course. Let’s not minimise them.
But do they amount to a rejection of globalist values?
Is this Russia saying no to the Great Reset, or saying it wants to implement the GR on its own terms?
Would the latter represent any kind of victory or benefit for ordinary Russian people?
Is this standing for a point of principal? Or is it jockeying for position in the multipolar world order? In that context, China’s silence would be noteworthy, wouldn’t it.
Or, more cynically, should these objections be read with the same scepticism as the extravagant promises made by opposition leaders who know they will never get in to power and therefore never have to stand by their own words?
After all, the Russians know their objections don’t carry much practical weight because they already signed up to the deal before the fact, making any demurrals purely token at this point. At best this has to be seen as an act of insane naiveté on Russia’s part. Another self-defeating act in a recent history of self-defeating acts.
A note for Russia going forward has to be that agreeing to support a document that hasn’t been written yet no matter what it says is maybe not the brightest idea.
But, however you parse these last minute objections, they are dust in the wind, because the pact is now official.
Every country in the world (yes even the ones that raised objections) now formally agrees that hate speech and misinformation are the problem.
Every country in the world (even the ones that raised objections) endorses an end to privacy and increased censorship as a solution.
Every country in the world (all of them) agrees to spend at least $100 billion per year to pursue “sustainable development goals” in developing nations.
And even those who objected were not dissenting on these policies. Indeed they have endorsed these policies many times.
Just to be absolutely clear here –
There is not one voice in the room actually standing up for reality.
We may not have a formal global government yet, but we already have a globalism of ideas, even if there is some disagreement over implementation.
That’s how world government is being shaped, and how it will get finally born – through a creeping consensus of fictitious problems & needless and often insane “solutions” quietly endorsed by every nation of the world.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
It doesn’t sound great. But who should guide the direction of humanity? Should it be left to “democracy” ie 51% of the uninformed idiot/citizens? While obviously the ruling class will look out for themselves (like everyone else) should international issues just be left to evolve organically? Would everyone be better off if the current international regime was brought down and replaced with something which allegedly represents the interests of the average pleb?
It seems to me, like it did during the covid era, that oppositional forces are asking the wrong question. The question is not how to change the system, but how to navigate it.
I just thought I would newsflash y’all of this little fact. It seems to contradict a few current sacred cows:
First Panamax Containership Sprints Across Arctic Reaching China In Just Three Weeks (gcaptain.com)
An interesting article for those agnostics in the catechism of they are all in it together !
https://www.voltairenet.org/article221288.html
I have to stifle a laugh, all of this is the GMO flowering of hideous seeds mine own father was (trying) to plant in me with regularity back in the day,1950s and ’60s, in his role as fixture in U N. Los Angeles. And in his latter years as president of the L.A. Assoc., some tales of which I have logged here, before, in passing.
He even wrote some opeds about all of this in L A. Times which are easy to find in archives.
Back then, in the living room and at the dinner table, or out and about, he would frequently try to indoctrinate us about the coming ‘utopia’ of global rule, except his buzzword for all of that then was “International Law” and he would cart us off to an SF international conference on “General Semantics” as developed by one of his core avatars Alfred Korzybski, in ’65, while the Watts Riots were in full deployment back in L.A. that summer, I was told to be mum at the front of the bus before disembarking at SFSU while S.I. Hayakawa, later a senator or something, regaled us convivially in his trademark tam o’shanter.
JWE, père ,dragged me to an International Law Convention in Spring of ’69, at a big auditorium inside Tony Roma’s in Beverly Hills, with my only provisos that I wear my haut couturier Lennon-esque red velvet Nehru jacket, despised by the whole entourage, and be seated next to Laura Huxley, which was the only draw to that sorry affair of important lawyers in their priciest suits.
What an absurd scenario, but it was exactly at those kinds of symposiums that the first blueprints for all this,West Coast versions, were first being unfurled.
I knew it was bunk, and he & I parted paths for good, only weeks later: he had opened the first branch of the U N. in the L.A. area in the mid-1940s, which is reported in his L A. Times obit after his disguised slaughter, by Burt Folkart on 4.26.82, and it was only last year that I read in “Master of the Mysteries” [a scary read, if you know a bit about it, a bio of the most deceptive “Brujo” in U.S. history ~ arguably, interviews with a ‘vampire’ and key 33° FM] that he was longtime attorney to Col. Stafford L..Warren, who founded UCLA College of Medicine, later employing “Dr ” Louis J. West, dean of Psychiatry there, 1969~89, and apparently the driving force behind West Coast MKUltra and the Manson murders.
Surely I jest!
I wish.
All this BH 90210 crowd is lampooned unto virtual Dressen-esque devastation in Polanski’s recent release, last October’s “The Palace” with John Cleese.
Needless to say, it got a 0% fresh ratting at rotten tomatoes.com, though is now peaking since then at 6% or even 10% last I checked. What a surprise.
It got RP “internationally banned” for his efforts & sarcasm.
£4£&$4$+my2¢™~~~~
Gore Vidal: “…since Polanski did not subscribe to American values in the least.”
Atlantic Monthly [interviewer, 2009]: “And what are American Values “?
“Vidal: “Lying and cheating. There’s nothing better.”
Daddio would régale us on Sundays in the living room reading “Law” by W. H. Auden, an admirable poem which rang in my inner ear. It gives insight in how all these truths can be “freely” and masonically twisted to fit the global needs, I still remember lines, tattooed:
“Law, says the gardener, is the Sun. Law is the one all gardeners obey, yesterday, tomorrow, today…”
Immutability of globalism. Theirs.
And dont you forget it!!!!!
“Both of which are just different names for “people in suits sitting around big tables using bureaucratic jargon while making big time serious important-person faces”.”
Which could be seen as neutered and innocuous except that they represent ARMED governments.
Big government is the real evil.
Please dissolve the bloody UN, nobody cares what they say but they (and the subservient agencies) demand more money
You should care. The UN is at the center of the globalist Great Reset. The legislation being enacted will deeply affect all of us. We need to be made aware so we can resist.
As usual, an excellent piece by Kit. Some movement in Northern Ireland from the Health Minister who tried to keep the new Forced Vaccination Health Bill consultation very quiet. The deadline has now been extended to 14th October 2024 due to the significant public opposition: https://www.sundayworld.com/news/irish-news/health-minister-to-meet-group-campaigning-for-people-bereaved-by-covid-vaccinations/a1694460252.html
The mainstay of our permanent “Parent” class is hypocrisy. To keep the “Children” believing in a parental authority class, false narratives, like democracy and consensus actually being used, are obvious lies any Adult can see. Understanding the agendas exposed and discussed by Off-Guardian writers is assuming one’s adulthood role in life. Thank Universe for sites like Off-Guardian that keep our public mind’s eyes on the prize. Next is action to implement the future WE THE PEOPLE of Earth want and need to free ourselves of the egomaniacal parent class so we can live lives of peaceful and prosperous adult cooperation.
Excellent article.
Nations have been fraudulently converted into Corporations so that they can be controlled within the jurisdiction of the Unidroit international legal system, based in Rome.
These Corporations, masquerading as Nations, then sign legally binding member(ship) contracts with other Corporations such as the United Nations and the Bank for International Settlements.
Some call this the Justinian Deception.
Mr. Knightly: God love you. The world needs more brave souls like you who actually make the UN seem like something other than toilet tissue for the US and Israel to wipe their ass on (after all, they are joined at the hip, so I assume they need only one ass to wipe).
Keep up the good work!
I don’t understand your point. You write as if Kit is defending the UN, but he’s not defending the UN, quite the reverse.
Mr. Howard, not sure why you got downvotes to this comment
One of fat pig Churchill’s foot soldiers escaped the evil Nazis only to fulfill his historic mission of finally establishing the mixed-race rule of the Dildocracy. His memoirs are worth their weight in gold today. True heroism belongs only to true heroes! A legacy that we all have to nurture! https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ceqnlynqpr7o
Been about a while and recall the real alt media truthers visiting where ever Bilderberg group was happening etc
I am from the UFO discloser era which never really happened (similar to trust the plan and Q) and recall the authors back then telling us about this new 1000 page document the government released and what it meant. …………………..
What did it all mean.?? 27 years being wasted for things to happen and like agenda 21 in 1996 or the meltdown off 1999 going into 2000 or the 2012 thing or the Q and Trump Populism thing.
Lot of time spent worrying back then with pre dates or Armageddon like 2030 new lick of paint..which is now 2048 reset which ARCHAIX is flogging
The real censorship I have founded have been on truther forums or new Armageddon alt-media forums yet I have been able to speak freely in how I wanted elsewhere in the real world.
So go speak freely in the ‘real’ world and leave us alone.
much as I despise all this, if off-guardian climate sceptic?
Yes. They have been for some years now.
Bravo!
Corporate bullshit.
A global talking shop isn’t a global government and what Russia says isn’t the point: Russia has no intention whatsoever of going along with Net-Zero
To put that figure into some context, over 120 countries in the world have an annual GDP less than $100 billion.
https://www.worldometers.info/gdp/gdp-by-country/
It seems that plandemics are not the top weapon of choice and control mechanism for the human livestock, these are merely short, sharp, shock treatments.
The climate scam still appears to be the default position with greater planning and longevity. Two generations of young people have been indoctrinated to fear a trace gas and some older people too, so the groundwork has been well established. The older generations simply need to die off, aided or unaided, to leave a well indoctrinated populace ready to be guilt tripped to accept the SDGs, restrictions and rationing.
Every aspect of life, be it travel by all modes of transport, home design, heating, lighting, refuse (waste), consumer products, industry and agriculture is subject to climate change and sustainability considerations. The controllers are so heavily invested through time, energy and money in this pet project.
The United Nations (UN) was born in a brothel:
http://sallystanford.com/2016/11/03/the-worlds-finest-brothel-and-its-hostess-sally-stanford/
“How did the world die Mother?”
“Testosterone Adam, testosterone”.
The whole concept of “misinformation” has been normalised merely by constant repetition.
When, and on what grounds, did anyone but the listener get to define what’s true or not?
Worked for Coca Cola.
And we all the damage that does to millions of people.
‘know’
😖
I’m aghast that academia has failed to mount any organized defense of the libertarian principles of the enlightenment
Since you graduated some decades ago, academia started up with this whole new thing called post-modernism, which is very pointedly anti-Enlightenment. After all, logic and evidence are the tools of ‘White Supremacy,‘ dontcha know!
Thanks for this important piece Kit.
As I see it, this “pact” was brought about by tacit agreement, i.e. unless a member country voted out, they voted in by default.
The good news is that this seems to be a reaction to the failure of the WHOs pandemic treaty to gain traction.
This is another load of hot air, albeit potentially dangerous, that has to be adopted to have any teeth.
The pandemic treaty failed. Why shouldn’t this ?
I believe that the pandemic treaty is stiil on and btw, in the UN General Assembly every vote is equal ( Eswatini = China for example) but the resolutions are optional (never enforced) so that is not the way to go
I believe the last gov in UK rejected the PT because they wouldn’t commit to vax sharing. A diplomatic easy out with an optional re-entry if needed.
You Folks at Off G are doing a sterling job.
As far as I know, there’s no one out there quite like you.
An eclectic, but relevant group of writers with their hearts on their sleeves.
Power to your pens.
Thank you, on behalf of all the writers who contribute here. It’s appreciated I’m sure.
Are we not wasting our time even looking at what goes on in these talking shops that are organised to allow jobsworths to justify their salary? It’s all meaningless, with the exception of the transfer of wealth to the usual suspects.
We saw with the ‘pandemic’ that their grand plans don’t quite work out (Schwab had said we were never going back to the world before, remember? And he wasn’t just talking about making people sillier and more frightened, he actually predicted we would never again sniff a melon in a market, the moron).
What matters is how much of it can/will actually be implemented.
So the Cabal has already fallen has it? I guess we’ll hear about it any day now.
“steer humanity on a new course…”
It’s just the whole cattle/herd imagery leaks constantly from them
I mean vacca, from cow leading to vaccination…….the sacred cow God help us!
Given that Jenner’s crucial argument was that genuine cowpox was caused by milking with hands dirty with horsegrease it could just as easily have been term equination.
When a herd of cows in London that couldn’t possibly have been infected with horsegrease developed cowpox that claim by Jenner was quietly dropped down the memory-hole. Jenner got his money and fame anyway.
It’s not of course the biggest problem with the whole Jenner narrative. What exactly is the evidence cowpox was a milder form of smallpox? That both have “pox” in their names? Why do only milch cows get cowpox and only on their udders? Cows not used for milk and bulls never get it. Do only lactating women “catch” smallpox? No – it was mostly a disease of childhood. Why would cowpox “protect” against smallpox but smallpox not “protect” against cowpox? Surely immunity should work the other way round? Yet it didn’t – as was freely admitted from the start because there was clear testimony from rural doctors of milkmaids with both cowpox and smallpox.
The whole witch’s brew falls apart on close and sceptical inspection. The main cover, the notion of “spurious” smallpox backed the claim vaccination must have ben performed incompetently (they said vaccination was both so easy anyone could do it and so tricky it needed a skiller practitioner at the same time), is such nonsense it’s a wonder anyone fell for it – and many didn’t.
You have to admire the entrpreneurial kerr-ching !! moment when a proto-pharma realised there was a quid in it, though.
It’s reassuring to know that the Turds at the top are gonna look after the Shitkickers at the bottom: Well into the future.
Now we can all sleep soundly tonight,
The present UN is an ugly globalist creature from a San Francisco Conference in October 1945 between Taiwan, France, the Soviet Union, the UK and the US. These represented 18% of globe but took the 5 permanent member seats. The barely war damaged US was the architect of this legalized coup under globalist Truman. His SoS James Byrnes had dropped two A-bombs on on Imperial Japan two months before to scare all others in submission for a permanent New York UN circus. Bretton Wood$ was already in the pocket.
Present UN director Portugese Guterres is a gutless WEF tool: time to for a total rebuild from foundation level up.
This new pact might well be the last drop, the straw that breaks this creature’s back.
Argentina – President Addresses United Nations General Debate, 79th Session
Javier Milei speaking similar: NOT what they wanted to hear….
Justin Trudeau @ the UN: we are at a global inf(l)ection point…..
https://sputnikglobe.com/20230924/lavrovs-full-speech-at-78th-session-of-un-general-assembly-1113617957.html
Lavrov’s Speech. ‘ Mr President, Ladies and gentlemen, Many previous speakers have expressed the idea that our shared planet is experiencing irreversible change. Right in front of our eyes, there is a new world order being born. Our future is being shaped by a struggle, one between the Global Majority in favour of a fairer distribution of global benefits and civilisational diversity, and the few who wield neocolonial methods of subjugation to maintain their elusive dominance. Rejections of the principle of equality and a total inability to reach agreement has long been the signature of the collective West. Being accustomed to looking down on the rest of the world, Americans and Europeans often make promises, take on commitments, including written and legally binding ones, and then they just do not fulfil them. As President Vladimir Putin pointed out, it is the West that is truly an empire of lies. Russia, like many other countries, knows this firsthand. In 1945, when we, together with Washington and London, were vanquishing our enemy on the front lines of World War II, our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition were already making plans for Operation Unthinkable, a military operation against the Soviet Union. Four years later, in 1949, the Americans drafted Operation Dropshot to deliver massive nuclear strikes on the USSR. These ghastly senseless ideas did remain on paper. The USSR created its own weapon of retaliation. However, it took the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, with the world balancing on the brink of a nuclear war, for the idea of unleashing it and the illusion of winning with it to cease being the underlying basis of US military planning. At the end of the Cold War, the Soviet Union played a decisive role in reuniting Germany and agreeing on the parameters of a new security architecture in Europe. At the same time, the Soviet, and then the Russian leadership, was given specific political assurances regarding the non-expansion of the NATO military bloc to the east. The relevant records of the negotiations are in our and in Western archives and they are openly accessible. But these assurances of Western leaders turned out to be a hoax as they had no intention whatsoever of upholding them. At the same time, they were never bothered by the fact that by bringing NATO closer to Russia’s borders they would be grossly violating their official OSCE commitments made at the highest level not to strengthen their own security to the detriment of the security of others, and not to allow the military or political domination of any country, group of countries, or organisations in Europe. In 2021, our proposals to conclude agreements on mutual security guarantees in Europe without changing Ukraine’s non-aligned status were rudely rejected. The West continued its ongoing militarisation of the Russophobic Kiev regime, which had been brought to power as a result of a bloody coup, and to use it to wage a hybrid war against our country. A series of recent joint exercises by the United States and its European NATO allies was something unprecedented following the end of the Cold War, along with the development of scenarios for the use of nuclear weapons on the territory of the Russian Federation. They stated their aim of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia. This obsession has finally blurred the vision of irresponsible politicians who have grown accustomed to impunity and bereft of the basic sense of self-preservation. Washington-led NATO countries are not only building up and modernising their offensive capabilities, but are also shifting the armed confrontation into outer space and the information sphere. An… Read more »
Behold! The great wall of text!
Twas a speech.
Not a particularly long one.
Warning!
Don’t go near Moby Dick or War and Peace.
This isn’t a BBC Bitesize site !
Yeah, but reader comments are not supposed be articles.
Best to see the speech in its entirety rather selective parts !
Best to read the speech in its entirety rather than selective parts !
No sh*t!
It’s a garden alright.
A garden of evil, avarice and psychopathic old men coming to the end of their slimy, bloodsucking lives.
They wouldn’t even make good compost.
Pig or poultry feed would be a better use of the bodies. Turning rubbish into
1 eggs or pork
and
2 manure
is more productive than turning it into (inedible) compost.Pigs and poultry are both omnivores and as anybody knows (except the UK government, which banned pig swill) they can safely eat animal and vegetable wastes.
Also livestock produce manure in about 1% of the time needed for a compost heap to mature.
This is from 2023 you plonker
‘ Your Future has been decided.
Any resistance will be punished.’… (anon( …
‘WE decide and act only your interests.’