TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

I first stumbled across agenda 21 in about 2008, and my first reaction was to dismiss what I was reading because I didn't believe that any government in Australia would take us down this road. Then I began to see a legislative pattern emerging in parliament which concerned me greatly, and I also started to see the tenor of legislation that we were passing. I did air those concerns in parliament, and it was dismissed and ignored. The words agenda 21, ladies and gentlemen, were never meant to be spoken. And if they were, then, of course, it would be dismissed as a conspiracy theory. Because if people knew agenda 21 and what it stood for, there's plenty of information out there where they could actually learn what the end game was, and governments didn't want that to be known. My dad always said to me that people only lie for two reasons. One reason is because you're ashamed of what you're doing, and the second reason is that you don't want people to be warned just before you screw them. And I honestly believe that these secrets have been kept for both of those reasons. Ladies and gentlemen, the origins of the environmental movement as we see it began back in 1968 when the Club of Rome was formed. The Club of Rome has been described as a crisis think tank which specializes in crisis creation. The main purpose of this think tank was to formulate a crisis that would unite the world and condition us to the idea of global solutions to local problems. In a document called the first global revolution authored by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider on pages 104 and 105, it stated, 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, of course, will be caused by human intervention that will require a global response. That's the origin of global warming, ladies and gentlemen. In 1975, Australia agreed to bring in a new economic order via the Lima Declaration on the second conference of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization. The outcome of this was, as I said, the Lima declaration which was a blueprint for the redeployment of tools, jobs, and manufacturing to the developing nations, leaving countries like Australia short of technology, a manufacturing base, and jobs. Blind Freddy can now see what the outcome of that has been for our country with their unworkable trade and tariffs agreements hand in hand with this that have followed as a matter of course. This has now become a reality with around 90% of our agriculture and manufacturing just gone. Australia signed the Lima declaration in 1975 and hundreds of others with the support of all major political players, Whitlam, Fraser, Hawke, Keating, Houston, Howard, Rudd, the democrats, the greens, and even the Nationals. It has been put to me that all of these treaties were the foundation for the rollout of agenda 21. And it seems that Australia has been moved around the global chessboard, and our so called leaders were either complicit or naive to the long term consequences. And now we're almost at checkmate. Sorry. In 1992, former president of The United States George Bush senior said, effective execution of agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of human society unlike anything the world has ever experienced. A major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action will be integrated into individual and collective decision making at every level. Cutting through the code, I want everyone here tonight not familiar with agenda 21 to consider what the words profound reorientation of all human society and unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources actually means. For everyone here tonight not familiar with agenda 21, I would suggest that this is the beginning of your learning curve, not the end. In 1992, Morris Strong, secretary general of the UN Earth Summit and member of the Club of Rome said, it is clear the current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class involving high meat intake, consumption of large amounts of frozen and convenience foods, use of fossil fuels, ownership of motor vehicles, small electrical appliances, home and workplace air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable. Put those statements together with the previous one, and it must become clear that agenda 21 is about controlling every aspect of our lives, how we eat, what we eat, how much we eat, how we move around, food production, the amount of food, and where we even live. Dixie Ray, former Washington state governor and assistant secretary for oceans and international environmental and scientific affairs stated, agenda 21 seeks to establish a mechanism for transferring the wealth from citizens to the third world. Fear of environmental crisis would be used to create a world government and UN central direction. From a report in the September Habitat One Conference, land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument

Over 50 years ago, the Club of Rome and MIT researchers released the Limits of Growth report. It examined the relationship between population growth, the economy, and the environment. The report warned that if we didn't halt economic and population growth, our planet would suffer.

We are currently consuming and populating the planet at unsustainable levels. I believe that this will eventually lead to a decline, and I hope it can happen peacefully. Peace doesn't mean everyone will be happy, but conflicts should be resolved without violence. The planet can support around 1 to 2 billion people, depending on the level of liberty and material consumption. If we want more freedom and consumption, we need fewer people. However, smart dictatorships with low living standards could support even more people. Ideally, we should aim for a slow and equal decline in population, avoiding a few wealthy individuals imposing solutions on others. These hopes may seem pessimistic.

Globally, our population and consumption levels are unsustainable for the planet. I anticipate a decline, but I hope it happens peacefully. Peace doesn't mean everyone will be happy, but conflicts should be resolved without violence. The planet can support around 1 to 2 billion people, depending on the level of liberty and material consumption. If we want more freedom and consumption, we need fewer people. Ideally, we should aim for a slow and equal decline to around 1 billion people. This way, everyone shares the experience and avoids a few wealthy individuals imposing their will on others. These hopes may seem pessimistic, but that's what lies ahead.

In 1972, the Club of Rome released the "Limits to Growth" report, predicting societal collapse by 2030 due to resource scarcity and population growth. The World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Club of Rome share the same views on humanity and have been working towards their 2030 plan since the 1970s. The WEF originated from the Council on Foreign Relations and Henry Kissinger, with the 3rd meeting in 1973 setting everything in motion. The WEF's sustainable development goals, along with the UN's Agenda 2030, have led to global chaos, economic destabilization, and the rise of authoritarian governments. The WEF and the Club of Rome manipulate public sentiment through environmental issues, using it to control people. They believe in a centralized global authority and view human sacrifice as necessary for their utopian vision. Elon Musk spoke against world government at the World Government Summit, emphasizing the importance of civilizational diversity to prevent collapse.

Our darkest days are ahead of us, and now is the time for a new world order. We need to clap for this shift and embrace a financial world order. This alternative vision suggests that ordinary people are too small-minded to govern themselves. Progress can only happen when individuals surrender their rights to a powerful sovereign. We are here to develop the great narrative that shapes the future. To do this, we must imagine, design, and execute the future.

The speaker argues that policy has become global for the first time, with communications happening instantly and challenges that are not confined to any one nation. Issues such as the environment, nuclear proliferation, and simulations illustrate problems that are genuinely global. In this context, a new world and a new world order will emerge. The critical question is whether this impending order will arise from intellectual and moral insight and deliberate design, or whether it will be imposed on humanity by a sequence of catastrophes. This framing is described as the challenge of the period, making it one of the most exciting times to live.

We are experiencing accelerating change unlike any other time in history. Predicting the future was always difficult, but now it's impossible. In the past, basic skills like farming or hunting were always relevant, but now we don't know what to teach young people for the future.

Human productivity creates a sense of abundance and safety in the world. However, this is not natural, as it relies heavily on fossil fuel machines. If these machines were to stop working or decrease in efficiency, our entire way of life would collapse. With a global population of 8 billion people, the world cannot naturally sustain such numbers. The current push to transition to renewable energy sources without viable replacements is reckless and dangerous. We are already witnessing the consequences in Europe and agriculture. Instead of eliminating all fossil fuels by 2050 without proper alternatives, we should focus on finding sustainable solutions now.

Climate change is a symptom of promoting growth on a finite planet. If we solve it, other pressures like water scarcity will emerge. The book "Limits to Growth" predicted this in 1972, showing that global growth is unsustainable. Despite focusing on energy and fossil fuels, population and consumption are ignored. Politically, addressing these issues is challenging. Lowering living standards and discussing birth rates are taboo. However, creating circumstances where women can choose the number of children they want can help address population growth.

We are living in a dying civilization with crises in education, health, and transportation systems. These are signs of the old societal structure breaking down due to the Industrial Revolution. We can expect conflicts in genetic engineering and its impact on racial tensions. The future is uncertain, and the United States' integrity is not guaranteed. If we don't handle these forces properly, many countries could experience political fractures. Social change theories without conflict are not worth considering. The fourth wave will involve grappling with genetics and exploring space. While the future is unknown, we must strive for progress. Ultimately, our children will determine whether the new society is good or bad.

In this video, the speaker discusses the origins of the World Economic Forum and the Club of Rome, focusing on their predictions and plans for society. They mention the 1972 "Limits to Growth" report by the Club of Rome, which predicted societal collapse by 2030 due to resource scarcity and population growth. The speaker questions the accuracy of this prediction and suggests it may have been engineered to fit their agenda. They also highlight the psychological manipulation employed by these organizations and their belief in the need for a myth to sustain civilization. The speaker connects the World Economic Forum and the Club of Rome, emphasizing their shared views on humanity and their influence on global events. They mention Agenda 21 and its transformation into Agenda 2030, which they claim is the basis for current chaos and the rise of authoritarianism. The speaker also discusses the manipulation of environmental concerns to control people and criticizes the idea of global government. They conclude by mentioning Elon Musk's criticism of world government and the importance of maintaining civilizational diversity to prevent collapse.

Globally, our population and consumption levels are unsustainable for the planet. I anticipate a decline, but I hope it happens peacefully. Peace doesn't mean everyone is happy, but rather that conflicts are resolved without violence. The planet can support around 1-2 billion people, depending on the level of liberty and material consumption. If we want more freedom and consumption, we need fewer people. With a smart dictatorship and low living standards, we could have 8-9 billion people, but that's not what we desire. Currently, we have 7 billion people, so we need to decrease. I hope this decline is gradual and equitable, with shared experiences rather than a few wealthy individuals imposing their will. These hopes may seem pessimistic.

"For the first time in history, foreign policy has become global." "Communications are instantaneous and there exist problems which are genuinely not national like environment, nuclear proliferation and simulations." "So in this sense, we are living in a new world and a new world order will emerge." "The only question is whether it will arise out of intellectual and moral insight and by design or whether it will be forced on mankind by a series of catastrophes." "That's the challenge of our period and it makes it, to my mind, one of the most exciting periods in which anybody can live."

The second industrial revolution is different from the first. Instead of producing physical goods, we are now learning to produce bodies and minds. This will create a divide between those who can produce bodies and minds and those who cannot. If you're not part of this revolution, you may become extinct. The challenge will be what to do with all the people who are no longer needed. Food will likely not be a problem, but finding meaning in life will be. One possible solution could be a combination of drugs and computer games.

In the 19th century Industrial Revolution, countries produced goods like textiles and weapons. Now, a new revolution focuses on creating humans themselves. The ability to manufacture bodies and minds will be crucial. Those who can't keep up risk extinction. The challenge ahead is what to do with surplus people. Food may not be an issue, but finding purpose will be. One solution could involve drugs and computer games.

The video discusses the concept of growth and its impact on the world. It highlights the finite nature of resources and the need for balance between human activities and nature. The study conducted by the Club of Rome concludes that continued growth will lead to crises such as pollution, resource depletion, and food shortages. The video explores different scenarios and the potential consequences of growth, including collapse and instability. It suggests that a shift away from the emphasis on material goods and economic growth is necessary to create a more sustainable and equitable world. The video emphasizes the importance of informed decision-making, political action, and individual responsibility in shaping a better future.

Despite the wide range of opinions among experts, scientists, and analysts, there is a consensus that continuing the trends of the 20th century is impossible in the 21st century. This is because there are physical limits to all types of resources on our planet. The scenario of continued growth is excluded, and the only scenario that awaits us is one close to catastrophic. The world population, currently at 7 billion, is projected to decrease to 25.2 or even 15 billion by the end of the century. Our country is capable of making a real contribution to addressing these unprecedented challenges. Thank you for your attention.

The lust to control other human beings is a story as old as time. There's a very strong drift in the direction of globalization, of the ultimate centralization of control in the hands of unelected officials at supernational organizations. They want all of the resources of the world in their pocket. The bigger picture is that an attempt is underway now to collapse liberal democracy and replace it with global technocracy. This is a coup. They're saying we can control with rules. We don't need currency anymore. It's like an inverted prison. You are supposedly free to roam about, but everything you want to access is behind lock and key. The potential for social control is gigantic and potentially irreversible. All three strategies are built on the premise of a climate crisis caused by carbon dioxide.

For the first time in history, policy has become global. Communications are instantaneous, and there exist problems which are genuinely not national like environment, nuclear proliferation, and simulations. So in this sense, we are living in a new world and a new world order will emerge. The only question is whether it will arise out of intellectual and moral insight and by design or whether it will be forced on mankind by a series of catastrophes. That's the challenge of our period and it makes it, to my mind, one of the most exciting periods in which anybody can live.

We are currently consuming and populating the planet at unsustainable levels. I believe that this will eventually lead to a decline, and I hope it can happen peacefully. Peace doesn't mean everyone will be happy, but conflicts should be resolved without violence. The planet can support a billion or two billion people, depending on the level of liberty and material consumption. If we want more freedom and consumption, we need fewer people. However, smart dictatorships with low living standards could support even more people. Ideally, we should aim for a slow and equal decline in population, where everyone shares the experience rather than a few wealthy individuals forcing others to deal with it. These hopes may seem pessimistic.

Our past generations have created an immoral and destructive society, and we are all responsible for it. We are trapped by this society, but can we deeply transform our condition and understand our consciousness? Civilization emerged with a new mindset, leading to organized rule and social development. Technology's danger depends on the wielder's mindset. If we assess those in power based on their track record, transhumanism seems to offer a bleak future for most people.

For the first time, policy is global due to instantaneous communication and non-national problems like the environment and nuclear proliferation. A new world order will emerge, either through intellectual and moral insight and design, or forced upon mankind by catastrophes. This challenge makes our period an exciting one to live in.

Globally, we are consuming more than the planet can sustain, and it will eventually come crashing down. The speaker hopes for a peaceful decline in population and consumption, where conflicts are resolved without violence. They believe the planet can support around 1-2 billion people, depending on the level of liberty and material consumption. However, having a smart dictatorship with a low standard of living could accommodate even more people. Ideally, the decline should be slow and equal, ensuring that everyone shares the experience rather than a few wealthy individuals imposing their will. These hopes may seem pessimistic, but that's what the future holds.