Why Rockefellers Aim at Destroying Farmers Worldwide?


For the bet­ter part of the past cen­tury West­ern pop cul­ture has sys­tem­at­i­cally den­i­grated and deval­ued what should be the most hon­ored pro­fes­sion of all. Those who labor with the land, day-in and day-out, to deliver the food that we eat have assumed a social sta­tus too often sim­i­lar to the dirt of the soil they till. No one stops to ask a sim­ple ques­tion: What do we do when we have killed off all our farmers?

Some of the more naïve city-dwellers would retort with lit­tle reflec­tion, “But we have indus­tri­al­ized food pro­duc­tion; we don’t need man­ual farm labor today.”

Indeed, the num­bers are impressive.

Let’s take my home­land, the United States of Amer­ica. In 1950, a time of gen­eral pros­per­ity and strong eco­nomic growth, the total US pop­u­la­tion was 151,132,000 and the farm pop­u­la­tion was 25,058,000 mak­ing farm­ers just over 12% of the total labor force. There were 5,388,000 farms with an aver­age size of about 87 hectares. Forty years later, in 1990, the year the Soviet Union col­lapsed and the Cold War ended, the USA had a total pop­u­la­tion of 261,423,000 of which the farm pop­u­la­tion num­bered just under three mil­lion, 2,987,552, mak­ing farm­ers a mere 2.6% of the total labor force. The num­ber of farms had shrunk to only 2,143,150, a loss of 60%, but because of indus­trial con­cen­tra­tion, aver­age size was 187 hectares.

Rockefeller’s Agribusi­ness Revolution

What we are told, those of us whose rela­tion to meat, dairy, fruits and veg­eta­bles ends at the super­mar­ket, is that this is a great progress, the lib­er­a­tion of almost 23 mil­lion farm work­ers to get city jobs and live a bet­ter life.

It isn’t that simple.

We are not told the true effects on food qual­ity that has been cre­ated by the mech­a­niza­tion and indus­tri­al­iza­tion of food pro­duc­tion in Amer­ica since the Har­vard Busi­ness School, on a grant from the Rock­e­feller Foun­da­tion, began what they termed “agribusi­ness,” the con­ver­sion of our food sup­ply into a pure for-profit ver­ti­cally inte­grated busi­ness mod­elled on the Rock­e­feller oil cartel.

The rais­ing of hogs, dairy cows, beef cat­tle, chicken all became indus­tri­al­ized grad­u­ally after the 1950’s in the USA. The baby chicks were con­fined to spaces so tiny they could barely stand. To make them get fat faster, the own­ers would pump them full of antibi­otics and feed them a diet of GMO corn and soya meal. Accord­ing to the Nat­ural Resources Defense Coun­cil, 80 per­cent of all antibi­otics sold in the United States are for use on live­stock and poul­try, not humans. The major­ity are given to ani­mals mixed in their food or water to speed growth. After all, time is money.

The tra­di­tional fam­ily farmer, of the sort my late grand­fa­ther was in North Dakota prior to the First World War, was dri­ven largely from the land by USDA Gov­ern­ment pol­icy, pol­icy that favored indus­tri­al­iza­tion regard­less of the qual­ity of food nutri­ent that resulted. Trac­tors became com­put­er­ized, mam­moth machines dri­ven by GPS. One such trac­tor could work remotely and do the work of many farm­ers of old.

The result was finan­cially fabulous….for the indus­try owners—ADM, Cargill, Mon­santo, for the pack­agers like Kraft Foods, Kel­loggs, Nes­tle, Unilever, Toepfer, Maggi. The Amer­i­can Rockefeller-Harvard “agribusi­ness” busi­ness model was glob­al­ized, begin­ning with the GATT nego­ti­a­tions of the Uruguay Round of trade lib­er­al­iza­tion in the late 1980s where the EU dropped much of its tra­di­tional pro­tec­tion of domes­tic farm­ers in favor of free trade in agri­cul­ture products.

Dur­ing the late 1980’s as the Uruguay Round of GATT trade nego­ti­a­tions was about to give US agribusi­ness giants what they wanted—freedom to rape the EU and other pro­tected agri­cul­ture mar­kets with their highly effi­cient prod­ucts, to destroy mil­lions of EU farm­ers who had farmed with a pas­sion for gen­er­a­tions, I went to Brus­sels to make a back­ground inter­view as a jour­nal­ist with a high-level EU Com­mis­sion bureau­crat respon­si­ble for agri­cul­ture. He was an appar­ently well-educated, multi-lingual bureau­crat, Danish-born as he noted. He argued in defense of free trade by declar­ing, “Why should I pay taxes from Den­mark so that Bavar­ian farm­ers on their tiny plots of land can remain in business?”

The answer, which I kept to myself then, was sim­ply because the tra­di­tional fam­ily farmer is uniquely suited to medi­ate with nature and us to pro­duce food that is healthy for humans and ani­mals to eat. No machine can replace the per­sonal ded­i­ca­tion or pas­sion that I have seen again and again in every farmer I have met who truly cares about his live­stock or crops.

Now the very same very rich and very love­less peo­ple, I call them the Amer­i­can Oli­garchs, are sys­tem­at­i­cally doing every­thing to destroy the human food qual­ity. Clearly in my view, they are doing so with a goal of mass pop­u­la­tion reduc­tion. There is no other rea­son the Rock­e­feller Foun­da­tion would spend hun­dreds of mil­lions of (tax exempt) dol­lars to cre­ate GMO tech­niques, to sup­port Mon­santo and other chem­i­cal giants like DuPont, clearly know­ing they are slowly poi­son­ing the pop­u­la­tion to an early death.

Depress­ing pesticides

This has been demon­strated in inde­pen­dent tests regard­ing the toxic effects on ani­mals and even human cells in an embryo. Now, inde­pen­dent even of GMO crops, new tests show that ordi­nary pes­ti­cide chem­i­cals sprayed by farm work­ers or farm­ers on crops cause neu­ro­log­i­cal damage—depression, Parkin­sons’ and even suicide—to the farm­ers or farm work­ers using the deadly chemicals.

The US National Insti­tute of Envi­ron­men­tal Health Sci­ences in their land­mark Agri­cul­tural Health Study stud­ied a group of 89,000 farm­ers and other pes­ti­cide appli­ca­tors in Iowa and North Car­olina. The mam­moth study con­cluded that, “use of two pes­ti­cide classes, fumi­gants and organochlo­rine insec­ti­cides, and seven indi­vid­ual pesticides—the fumi­gants alu­minum phos­phide and eth­yl­ene dibro­mide; the phe­noxy her­bi­cide (2,4,5-trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid (2,4,5-T); the organochlo­rine insec­ti­cide dield­rin; and the organophos­phate insec­ti­cides diazi­non, malathion, and parathion—were all pos­i­tively asso­ci­ated with depres­sion in each case group.”

The study showed that farm­ers with the high­est num­ber of life­time expo­sure days to pes­ti­cides were 50 per­cent more likely to later have a depres­sion diag­no­sis.
The research linked long-term use of pes­ti­cides to higher rates of depres­sion and sui­cide. Evi­dence also sug­gests that pes­ti­cide poi­son­ing – a heavy dose in a short amount of time – dou­bles the risk of depression.

After sup­press­ing the effects among farm fam­i­lies for years about the result­ing depres­sion and related neu­ro­log­i­cal symp­toms, farm­ers and their fam­i­lies have begun speak­ing out. Lorann Stal­lones, an epi­demi­ol­o­gist and psy­chol­ogy pro­fes­sor at Col­orado State Uni­ver­sity says, “There’s been a shift – partly because there’s more peo­ple talk­ing about being men­tally inca­pac­i­tated.”

Epi­demi­ol­o­gist Freya Kamel and her col­leagues reported that among 19,000 stud­ied, “those who used two classes of pes­ti­cides and seven indi­vid­ual pes­ti­cides were more likely to have been diag­nosed with depres­sion. Those who used organochlo­rine insec­ti­cides were up to 90 per­cent more likely to have been diag­nosed with depres­sion than those who hadn’t used them. For fumi­gants, the increased risk was up to 80 per­cent.
In France, farm­ers who used her­bi­cides were nearly twice as likely to have been treated for depres­sion as those who didn’t use her­bi­cides, accord­ing to a study pub­lished in 2013. The study of 567 French farm­ers found that the risk was even greater when the her­bi­cide appli­ca­tors had been doing it for more than 19 years.

In short, we are destroy­ing the nutri­tional value of the food we eat and slowly destroy­ing the remain­ing farm­ers respon­si­ble for cul­ti­vat­ing that. It is a recipe for the ulti­mate extinc­tion of life on the planet as we know it. No, that is not an exaggeration.

I firmly believe that hon­est, nature-conscious organic farm­ers ought to receive sig­nif­i­cant tax breaks to encour­age other farm­ers to leave the grotesque agribusi­ness model behind and return to grow­ing or rais­ing hon­est food again as they did only a few short decades ago. And severely high tax­a­tion ought to be imposed on farm­ers who use proven toxic chem­i­cals like Roundup by Mon­santo or the neon­i­coti­noids like Bayer AG’s Con­fi­dor, Gau­cho or Advo­cate, or Pon­cho, or Syngenta’s Actara, Plat­inum or Cruiser to name just the most sold.

Right now our reg­u­la­tors in the EU and USA do every­thing to dis­cour­age that, some­thing actu­ally quite stu­pid, unless, of course, some love­less, power-addicted oli­garchs sit­ting atop their moun­tain, look­ing con­temp­tu­ously down on us nor­mal folk, have decided that’s just what they desire. If so, it’s up to us to stop look­ing up to those on the moun­tain and look at what we our­selves have accepted as nor­mal, that is slowly killing us and the farm­ers who feed us. Maybe the time has come to change that unhealthy situation.

My Response to Congresswoman Anna Eshoo on Earthday Energy Policies

This is a letter I received from Anna Eshoo, my Congressional “representative”.  I think she has good intentions, just a little misguided on the facts.

April 22, 2015

Dear Friends,

A variety of statistics have been used to analyze California’s drought, but perhaps the most jaw dropping number reported in recent weeks comes from the non-partisan Public Policy Institute of California. According to their estimates, more water was used to grow almonds in 2013 than was used by all homes and businesses in San Francisco and Los Angeles combined. That’s one gallon of water for every almond grown in California, and the majority of them are exported overseas.

Now this is a very real perspective.  So why are residents expected to take the brunt of water reduction? What about frackers? Not only are they using our water to pump natural gas and oil (low EROEI) but they are injecting poisonous, hazardous, toxic waste into our water supply.

It’s easy to point fingers at agriculture producers in the Central Valley for being the culprits of our water shortage with these statistics. They certainly play a role, but the severity of our unprecedented drought stems from a much broader problem: climate change. Warming temperatures, primarily due to carbon emissions, have led to less snowpack and more water evaporation in reservoirs, worsening our drought conditions and painting a stark picture for future droughts.

Any chance the SUN has something to do with this? We are sun spots suddenly conspiracy theory? Pollution is bad and clean energy is good.  I’m all for a transition to cleaner, renewable energy, so long as we’re not blaming human population growth and taxing the air we breathe, or blaming cows for methane, and forcing everyone to become a vegetarian.

So as we approach the summer months and face the worse water shortage in our state’s history, we should be asking ourselves as a nation if we have fully recognized that carbon emissions, not just water consumption, are harming the planet…and what actions are we taking to stall or reverse the warming trends?

Why aren’t California farmers being enticed to grow crops that require less water, such as industrial hemp? We can eat it, make textiles, plastics, medicine, etc, and best of all, it requires HALF the water of most agricultural crops.

I’ve been working hard to do my part in Congress, advocating for national policies that curtail our carbon emissions and encourage the use of energy efficient technologies and renewable energy resources across the board. And while these efforts are not exhaustive, they represent substantial steps in the right direction:

This summer, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to finalize rules to limit greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing power plants for the first time in history. Power plants account for one third of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, and the EPA’s rules are estimated to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions 30 percent below 2005 levels by the year 2030. This is a key component of the President’s Climate Action Plan, and a measure I testified in support of before the EPA. California is already a leader in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and Governor Jerry Brown has said the state is well-positioned to meet and exceed the requirements of EPA’s rules.

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 30% below 2005 levels, with a higher population? How will we do that? Demand destruction, that’s how.  Obama is executing a set of policies that will destroy the American economy – the Trans Pacific Partnership is one of them.

I’ve vigorously opposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline because I believe the risks to our environment outweigh the benefits to the American people. The tar sands oil that would travel through the pipeline generates more carbon emissions and is harder to clean up in the event of a spill than conventional crude oil. And although it will create approximately 40,000 short-term jobs, the builder of the pipeline admits that in the long-run Keystone XL will create only 35 permanent jobs. The House has voted to bypass the ongoing review process and provide a special exception for this project 10 times. I’ve voted against every attempt to do so.

This is exactly correct.  Plus the refined oil products (gasoline, diesel, etc) will be exported to China, so the US will simply become a conduit.

A comprehensive plan to address climate change should also include investment in alternative energy and energy efficiency technologies. One policy I’ve spearheaded this Congress aims to save taxpayer money and energy by increasing energy efficiency in federal data centers.

The climate change hoopla is Anglo American, Rockefeller, Rothschild, UN nonsense.  The IPCC has been exposed as a hoax.  This is a cover for UN Agenda 21 and a scheme to make money and control populations.  We should be moving to alternative energy sources to reduce pollution and decentralize energy generation.  The concepts of reducing pollution, conserving resources, and being efficient should be reason enough. We dont need a climate change fearmongering hoax to scare people into it.

The Energy Efficient Government Technology Act will save the federal government energy and money by requiring the use of energy efficient and energy saving technologies, specifically in federal data centers. Today the world generates more data in 12 hours than was generated in all of human history prior to 2003. When this bill passed the House by a nearly unanimous vote last year, that statistic was for every two days. Ten exabytes of data per day travel our global networks and this rate is growing rapidly. This data must be stored and processed at vast data centers which can be highly energy inefficient, wasting money and precious energy resources. As the nation’s largest landowner, employer, and energy user, my legislation would make the federal government a leader in improving the energy efficiency of its data centers.

As we celebrate Earth Day 2015 on April 22nd, the forward-thinking ideas of its founders—activists John McConnell and Denis Hayes, along with former Senator Gaylord Nelson (D-Wis.) and Congressman Pete McCloskey (R-Calif.)—live on. The words of John McConnell remain especially prescient. “The world of tomorrow is not foreordained to be either good or bad…rather it will be what we make it,” he said. On this Earth Day, let’s renew our commitments of shared responsibility and collective action to make the changes that will indeed create a world of tomorrow that honors the earth by safeguarding it.

She should be fighting chemtrails, fluoride in the water, GMOs, tainted vaccines, pollution, promoting the use of industrial hemp, and eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, not trying to tax the air we breathe.


Anna G. Eshoo
Member of Congress
241 Cannon Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-8104
Fax: (202) 225-8890
698 Emerson Street
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Phone: (650) 323-2984
Phone: (408) 245-2339
Phone: (831) 335-2020
Fax: (650) 323-3498

Who’s Promoting Global Governance and UN Agenda 21 at Davos?

Below you will find a video explaining what the United Nations Agenda 21 plan really is.  You will also find documents from Zurich Insurance presented to the World Economic Forum at Davos in 2014 on the risks that we should all fear.  (For more information on Agenda 21, see this play list on YouTube.)

Note in the image below, from the Zurich report, that a failure of global governance would be a bad thing..  Note all the other nodes on the network ring that are connected to global governance.

The Green Agenda – Subversion, Global Warming, and the Oligarchs


The common enemy of humanity is man.
In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up
with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming,
water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these
dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through
changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.
The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”

– Club of Rome

The First Global Revolution
The environmental movement has been described as the largest and most influential social phenomenon in modern history. From relative obscurity just a few decades ago it has spawned thousands of organisations and claims millions of committed activists. Reading the newspaper today it is hard to imagine a time when global warming, resource depletion, environmental catastrophes and ‘saving the planet’ were barely mentioned. They now rank among the top priorities on the social, political and economic global agenda.

Environmental awareness is considered to be the mark of any good honest decent citizen. Multi-national companies compete fiercely to promote their environmental credentials and ‘out-green’ each other. The threat of impending ecological disasters is uniting the world through a plethora of international treaties and conventions. But where did this phenomenon come from, how did it rise to such prominence, and more importantly, where is it going?

While researching for these articles, and during my academic studies, I have come across many references to the The Club of Rome (CoR), and reports produced by them. Initially I assumed that they were just another high-level environmental think-tank and dismissed the conspiracy theories found on many websites claiming that the CoR is a group of global elitists attempting to impose some kind of one world government.

I am not a conspiratorial person by nature and was faced with a dilemma when I first read their reports. But it’s all there – in black and white. The CoR claims that “we are facing an imminent catastrophic ecological collapse” and “our only hope is to transform humanity into a global interdependent sustainable society, based on respect and reverence for the Earth.” In the end I came to the conclusion that there are two possibilities – either the CoR wrote all these reports and setup a vast network of supporting organisations just for fun or they actually believe what they have written and are working hard to fulfill their role as the self-appointed saviours of Gaia.

Based on my close observation of their actions, and watching the recommendations made by the CoR many years ago now being adopted as official UN and government policy – well, I have become personally convinced that they are deadly serious. On this website I try to use quotes and excerpts as much as possible and let the reader reach their own conclusions.

So, what exactly is the Club of Rome and who are its members? Founded in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy, the CoR describes itself as “a group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity.” It consists of current and former Heads of State, UN beaureacrats, high-level politicians and government officials, diplomats, scientists, economists, and business leaders from around the globe.

The Club of Rome subsequently foundedtwo sibling organizations, theClub of Budapestand the Club of Madrid. The former is focused on social and cultural aspects of their agenda, while the latter concentrates on the political aspects. All three of these ‘Clubs’ share many common members and hold joint meetings and conferences. As explained in other articles on this website it is abundantly clear that these are three heads of the same beast. The CoR has also established a network of 33 National Associations. Membership of the ‘main Club’ is limited to 100 individuals at any one time. Some members, like Al Gore and Maurice Strong, are affiliated through their respective National Associations (e.g. USACOR, CACOR etc).

I would like to start this analysis of the Club of Rome by listing some prominent members of the CoR and its two sub-groups, the Clubs of Budapest and Madrid. Personally it isn’t what the CoR is that I find so astonishing; it is WHO the CoR is! This isn’t some quirky little group of green activists or obscure politicians. They are the most senior officials in the United Nations, current and ex-world leaders, and the founders of some of the most influential environmental organisations. When you read their reports in the context of who they are – its gives an entirely new, and frightening, context to their extreme claims.

Some current members of the Club of Rome or its two siblings:
Al Goreformer VP of the USA, leading climate change campaigner, Nobel Peace Prize winner, Academy Award winner, Emmy winner. Gore lead the US delegations to the Rio Earth Summit and Kyoto Climate Change conference. He chaired a meeting of the full Club of Rome held in Washington DC in 1997.
Javier SolanaSecretary General of the Council of the European Union, High Representative for EU Foreign Policy.
Maurice Strongformer Head of the UN Environment Programme, Chief Policy Advisor to Kofi Annan, Secretary General of the Rio Earth Summit, co-author (with Gorbachev) of the Earth Charter, co-author of the Kyoto Protocol, founder of the Earth Council, devout Baha’i.
Mikhail GorbachevCoR executive member, former President of the Soviet Union, founder of Green Cross International and the Gorbachev Foundation, Nobel Peace Prize winner, co-founder (with Hidalgo) of the Club of Madrid, co-author (with Strong) of the Earth Charter.
Diego HidalgoCoR executive member, co-founder (with Gorbachev) of the Club of Madrid, founder and President of the European Council on Foreign Relations in association with George Soros.
Ervin Laszlofounding member of the CoR, founder and President of the Club of Budapest, founder and Chairman of the World Wisdom Council.
Anne EhrlichPopulation Biologist. Married to Paul Ehrlich with whom she has authored many books on human overpopulation. Also a former director of Friends of the Earth and the Sierra Club, and a member of the UN’s Global Roll of Honor.
Hassan bin TalalPresident of the CoR, President of the Arab Thought Forum, founder of the World Future Council, recently named as the United Nations ‘Champion of the Earth‘.
Sir Crispin Tickellformer British Permanent Representative to the United Nations and Permanent Representative on the Security Council, Chairman of the ‘Gaia Society’, Chairman of the Board of the Climate Institute, leading British climate change campaigner.
Kofi Annanformer Secretary General of the United Nations. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Javier Perez de Cuellarformer Secretary General of the United Nations.
Gro Harlem Bruntland United Nations Special Envoy for Climate Change, former President of Norway

Robert Muller former Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations, founder and Chancellor of the UN University of Peace.

The Dalai LamaThe ‘Spiritual Leader’ of Tibet. Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Father Berry Thomas Catholic Priest who is one of the leading proponents of deep ecology, ecospirituality and global consciousness.
David RockefellerCoR executive member, former Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, founder of the Trilateral Commission, executive member of the World Economic Forum, donated land on which the United Nations stands.
Stephen SchneiderStanford Professor of Biology and Global Change. Professor Schneider was among the earliest and most vocal proponents of man-made global warming and a lead author of many IPCC reports.
Bill Clintonformer President of the United States, founder of the Clinton Global Iniative.
Jimmy Carterformer President of the United States, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate.
Bill Gatesfounder of Microsoft, philanthropist

Garret Hardin Professor of Human Ecology. Originator of the ‘Global Commons‘ concept. Has authored many controversial papers on human overpopulation and eugenics.
Other current influential members:(these can be found on the membership lists of the COR (
here, here, and here), Club of Budapest,Club of Madrid and/or CoR National Association membership pages)

Ted Turner – media mogul, philanthropist, founder of CNN
George Soros – multibillionare, major donor to the UN
Tony Blair – former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
Deepak Chopra – New Age Guru
Desmond Tutu – South African Bishop and activist, Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Timothy Wirth – President of the
United Nations Foundation
Henry Kissinger – former US Secretary of State
George Matthews
Chairman of the Gorbachev Foundation
Harlan Clevelandformer Assistant US Secretary of State and NATO Ambassador
Barbara Marx Hubbard – President of the
Foundation for Conscious Evolution
Betty Williams – Nobel Peace Prize Laureate
Marianne Williamson – New Age ‘Spiritual Activist’
Robert Thurman – assistant to the Dalai Lama
Jane Goodall– Primatologist and Evolutionary Biologist
Juan Carlos I – King of Spain
Prince Philippe of Belgium
Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands
Dona Sophia– Queen of Spain
José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero current Prime Minister of Spain
Karan Singh – Former Prime Minister of India, Chairman of the
Temple of Understanding
Daisaku Ikeda – founder of the
Soka Gakkai cult
Martin LeesCoR Secretary General, Rector of the UN University of Peace
Ernesto Zedillo – Director of
The Yale Center for the Study of Globalization
Frithjof Finkbeiner – Coordinator of the
Global Marshall Plan
Franz Josef Radermacher Founder of the
Global Marshall Plan
Eduard Shevardnadze – former Soviet foreign minister and President of Georgia
Richard von Weizsacker – former President of Germany
Carl Bildt – former President of Sweden
Kim Campbell former Prime Minister of Canada and
Senior Fellow of the Gorbachev Foundation
Vincente Fox former President of Mexico
Helmut Kohl – former Chancellor of Germany

Romano Prodi former Prime Minister of Italy and President of the European Commission
Vaclav Havel – former President of the Czech Republic
Hans Kung – Founder of the
Global Ethic Foundation
Ruud Lubbers United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
Mary RobinsonUnited Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Jerome Binde – Director of Foresight, UNESCO
Koïchiro MatsuuraCurrent Director General of UNESCO
Federico Mayor – Former Director General of UNESCO
Tapio KanninenDirector of Policy and Planning, United NationsKonrad Osterwalder – Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations
Peter Johnston – Director General of European Commission
Jacques Delors
Former President of the European Commission
Domingo Jimenez-Beltran – Executive Director of the European Environment Agency
Thomas Homer-Dixon – Director of Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Toronto
Hazel HendersonFuturist and ‘evoluntionary economist’
Emeka Anyaoku – former Commonwealth Secretary General, current President of the
World Wildlife Fund
Wangari Maathai – Nobel Peace Prize Laureate, founder of the
Green Belt Movement
and many more….

The concept of ‘environmental sustainability’ was first brought to widespread public attention in 1972 by the Club of Rome in their book entitled The Limits to Growth. The official summary can be read here. The report basically concluded that the growth of the human population, and an increase in prosperity, would cause an ecological collapse within the next hundred years:

If the present growth trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next one hundred years. The most probable result will be a rather sudden and uncontrollable decline in both population and industrial capacity.”

It is possible to alter these growth trendsand to establish a condition of ecological and economic stability that is sustainable far into the future. The state of global equilibrium could be designed so that the basic material needs of each person on earth are satisfied and each person has an equal opportunity to realize his individual human potential.”

The overwhelming growth in world population caused by the positive birth-rate loop is a recent phenomenon, a result of mankind’s very successful reduction of worldwide mortality. The controlling negative feedback loop has been weakened, allowing the positive loop to operate virtually without constraint. There are only two ways to restore the resulting imbalance. Either the birth rate must be brought down to equal the new, lower death rate, or the death rate must rise again.”

The result of stopping population growth in 1975 and industrial capital growth in 1985 with no other changes is that population and capital reach constant values at a relatively high level of food, industrial output and services per person. Eventually, however, resource shortages reduce industrial output and the temporarily stable state degenerates.”

Man possesses, for a small moment in his history, the most powerful combination of knowledge, tools, and resources the world has ever known. He has all that is physically necessary to create a totally new form of human society – one that would be built to last for generations. The two missing ingredients are a realistic, long-term goal that can guide mankind to the equilibrium society and the Human Will to achieve that goal.”

Without such a goal and a commitment to it, short-term concerns will generate the exponential growth that drives the world system toward the limits of the earth and ultimate collapse. With that goal and that commitment, mankind would be ready now to begin a controlled, orderly transition from growth to global equilibrium.”

So as you can see the even back in 1972 the Club considered modern industrial society to be completely unsustainable. They state that even if population was frozen at 1975 levels, and industrial activity at 1985 levels, then the earth’s ecosystems would still ultimately collapse. The CoR has not changed these views in the slightest, in fact, in the last three decades their warnings have become increasingly more urgent and alarmist. They call this imminent collapse the ‘World Problematiqueand their proposed solution the ‘World Resolutique.’

The Limits to Growth is considered to be the most successful environmental publication ever produced and propelled the Club of Rome to its current position of an environmental thought-leader and a major consultant to the United Nations. It has been translated into more than forty languages and sold more than 30 million copies. Throughout the 1970s and 80s the concept that humanity was irreparably damaging the earth gained popularity and facilitated the formation of mainstream and activist environmental groups.

All meetings of the CoR are held ‘behind closed doors’ and no public records are kept. However the Club does produce many discussion reportsthat can be found on its website. The United Nations contractsthe Club of Rome to prepare ‘Policy Guidance Documents’ which it uses in formulating its policies and programmes. A quick search for Club of Rome on the UNESCO publicationssite reveals 250 such documents. There are many other documents there authored by CoR members acting in other capacities. As many high ranking UN officials are actually CoR members, this is like a man asking himself for advice, and then agreeing with that advice. Not very objective! Various UN organisations also hold joint conferences with the CoR.

While checking the Club of Rome website this morning the first item in their ‘current news’ section refers to a briefing delivered by the CoR to G8 officials in preparation for the upcoming G8 meeting. The second item is a summary report from the Club of Romes ’strategy planning retreatwith 150 senior UNESCO officials. The joint CoR/UNESCO communique states:

We are at the end of an era – a turning point in history. We are approaching the threshold of runaway climate change. We underline the urgency of radical action to reduce emissions, by both immediate action and longer-term measures; to stress to political leaders the non-linear nature of the processes at work which will generate sudden change; and to assert that the overriding priority must be to avert the impending risk of catastrophic climate change.” – CoR/UNESCO communique

Twenty years after the Limits to Growth the CoR published another major report that became an instant best-seller. In The First Global Revolution the Club of Rome claimed that the time to act had run out. It was now or never. Delay in beginning corrective measures will increase the damage to the world ecological system and ultimately reduce the human population that will eventually be supportable. They also stated that democratic governments are far too short-sighted to deal with the ‘problematique’ and new forms of governance are urgently required.

In order not too violate any copyright protection I will not reproduce the text of the book on this site. However, it is permissible for me to quote a brief excerpt in the context of this wider discussion. The complete text(third ed.) can be read and searched online at Google Books. As you read the following quote (from page 75, first ed.), please remember the names of the leaders listed above. This is not some quirky little cult. This is the stated agenda of the leaders of the environmental movement:

This is the way we are setting the scene for mankind’s encounter with the planet. The opposition between the two ideologies that have dominated the 20th century has collapsed, forming their own vacuum and leaving nothing but crass materialism.

It is a law of Nature that any vacuum will be filled and therefore eliminated unless this is physically prevented. “Nature,” as the saying goes, “abhors a vacuum.” And people, as children of Nature, can only feel uncomfortable, even though they may not recognize that they are living in a vacuum. How then is the vacuum to be eliminated?

It would seem that humans need a common motivation, namely a common adversary, to organize and act together in the vacuum; such a motivation must be found to bring the divided nations together to face an outside enemy, either a real one or else one invented for the purpose.

New enemies therefore have to be identified.
New strategies imagined, new weapons devised.

The common enemy of humanity is man.

In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.

The old democracies have functioned reasonably well over the last 200 years, but they appear now to be in a phase of complacent stagnation with little evidence of real leadership and innovation

Democracy is not a panacea. It cannot organize everything and it is unaware of its own limits. These facts must be faced squarely. Sacrilegious though this may sound, democracy is no longer well suited for the tasks ahead. The complexity and the technical nature of many of today’s problems do not always allow elected representatives to make competent decisions at the right time.
So, long before Global Warming became a well known issue Al Gore and his Club of Rome colleagues stated that they would use the threat of global warming to unite humanity and “set the scene for mankind’s encounter with the planet.” In the same way that shamans and sooth-sayers in medieval times used their advance knowledge of when eclipses would occur to control and terrify their followers, they would use a natural phenomenon as their ‘enemy’ to achieve their objectives. But then they state that although Global Warming would be presented as the initial enemy, the real enemy of humanity would be portrayed as man himself. I am already noticing how frequently the terms climate change and overpopulation are being uttered in the same breath.

Having discovered that all these influential environmental leaders were associated with the Club of Rome I set about reading all the reports, lectures and speeches on their website as well as the reports commissioned by the UN. I was amazed to find that they lay out their entire agenda for anyone who has eyes to see. Exactly the same themes, concepts and phrases are repeated continuously throughout their publications. They are full of references to ‘imminent collapse‘, ‘dying planet‘, ‘our mother Gaia‘, ‘wrenching transformation‘, ‘united global society‘, ‘global consciousness‘, ‘new forms of governance‘ etc. They truly intend to bring about the world’s First Global Revolution.

The Kosmos Journal provides perhaps the best insight into their worldview. This Journal was founded by the Club of Rome in partnership with with several of its sibling organizations. As described in my article, The Green Web,the CoR has established a network of supporting organizations, each focusing on a different aspect of their agenda. The Kosmos Journal contains many articles written by CoR members. The basic premise of their worldview is:

“Modern industrial civilisation is fast outstripping the Earth’s natural regenerative and life-supporting capacity…”

“At current rates of resource depletion and environmental degradation a near complete collapse of ecological integrity will occur within the next 100 years…”

“Gaia, our Mother, who nutured humanity for countless millenia within her womb of evolution, is dying…”

“A small window of opportunity now exists to transform humanity into a sustainable global interdepedant society based on respect and reverence for Earth…”

“A radical change from the current trajectory is required, a complete reordering of global society…”

“Humans only truly unite when faced with a powerful external enemy…”

“At this time a new enemy must be found, one either real or invented for the purpose…”

“Democracy has failed us, a new system of global governance, based on environmental imperatives, must be implemented quickly…”

Now that Obama is firmly ensconced in the White House the Club of Rome and its affiliates are swinging into high gear. The CoR recently unveiled a new 3-year programme entitled A New Path for World Development. The Club of Madrid has launched the Road to Copenhagen, a joint programme with the UN Environment Programme intended to facilitate a binding global climate change treaty in 2009. Perhaps most interesting is the State of Global Emergency declared by the Club of Budapest in October 2008. The declaration states that we only have four or five years to prevent a total collapse of the Earth’s ecosystems. To quote from the document:

If we continue on our present unsustainable path, by mid-century the Earth may become largely uninhabitable for human and most other forms of life. Such a total systems collapse could occur much sooner, however, due to runaway global warming or other ecocatastrophes, and/or by nuclear wars triggered by religious, ethnic or geopolitical conflicts or access to diminishing natural resources. The macro-trends driving these global threats and challenges have been apparent for decades and are now building toward a threshold of irreversibility. The scientific modeling of complex systems shows that when systems reach a state of critical instability, they either break down to their components or break through to a higher order of integral functioning. At these “points of no return” maintaining the status quo, or returning to a previous mode of organization and functioning, are not a feasible option.

The acceleration of critical trends and cross-impacts among them indicates that the ‘window of opportunity’ for pulling out of the present global crisis and breaking through to a more peaceful and sustainable world is likely to be no more than four to five years from the end of 2008. This is close in time to the Mayan 2012 prophecy for the end of the current world. The period around the end of 2012 is likely to be a turbulent one for this and other reasons. Predictions coming from the physical sciences foresee disturbances in the geomagnetic, electromagnetic and related fields that embed the planet causing significant damage to telecommunications and impacting many aspects of human activity and health. For the esoteric traditions the end of 2012 will be the end of the known world, although the more optimistic intepretations speak of a new world taking the place of the old.”

This may seem very strange – a group of prominent world leaders talking about ancient Mayan prophecies, but as I describe in my article, Gaia’s Gurus,many leading global warming activists openly advocate earth-reverence and other New Age philosophies. Gaia, Global Warming, and Global Governance are intricately entwined, if one truly believes in Gaia, and that she is being fatally harmed by the current system, then a new system of global governance and control would appear to be the only answer. Global Warming provides the ideal ‘enemy’ to bring about this objective. It is easy for these global elitists to talk about sacrifice, wrenching transformation, population reduction and eliminating the use of fossil fuels but the implications are truely horrendous.

Even if you think this is all nonsense I would ask you to at least read these quotes and excerpts, and think about the implications of their agenda. Everyday I am amazed at how quickly things are changing. It is coming hard and fast. It’s almost like reading a book and then watching the television adaptation, except that this adaptation is not a movie – it’s on the evening news. As Al Gore said in the closing sentence of his statement after he won the Nobel Peace Prize … “This is just the beginning.”