Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the Telegraph:
There is a high likelihood that 40,000 delegates from 200 countries will agree to legally-binding rules at the COP 21 climate talks in Paris in December. As a matter of pure economics, it makes no difference whether or not you accept the hypothesis of man-made global warming. The political argument has been settled by the world’s dominant powers.
That’s December. But there’s more of the same due this September. I came across the UN 2030 Agenda on Zerohedge today. I’d never heard of it before, but
later this month, nearly every nation on the entire planet is going to be signing up for this new agenda.
The preamble reads (my added emphases):
This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan.
We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet. We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path.
As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets which we are announcing today demonstrate the scale and ambition of this new universal Agenda.
Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere
There have come to be a number of words whose use regularly signifies that some sort of baloney is being talked about. “Challenge” is one of these words. “Sustainable” is another. “Urgent” another. Action is always ‘urgently’ needed. These are words which serve as signals to indicate the political orientation of the speaker. When I read these words, my baloney meter starts flashing red.
And then we have Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere. It’s simply mind-boggling in its utopian ambition. And anyway what do they mean by ‘poverty’? Well, it doesn’t really matter, does it? Because for every different definition of poverty that’s supplied, they can say that’s another form of poverty to be ended.
They may as well have called for the end of ‘suffering’ or ‘unhappiness’ in all its forms everywhere.
Anyway, ‘climate change’ is in there too:
Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
I haven’t looked, but I wouldn’t be surprised if making the world ‘smoke-free’ is another item on the list of actions ‘urgently’ needed.
I always wonder what is meant by ‘sustainable development’. The explanation
the focus of sustainable development is far broader than just the environment. It’s also about ensuring a strong, healthy and just society. This means meeting the diverse needs of all people in existing and future communities, promoting personal wellbeing, social cohesion and inclusion, and creating equal opportunity.
is just another jumble of vague words: ‘Strong’, ‘healthy’, ‘just’, ‘diverse’, ‘cohesive’, ‘inclusive’, ‘equal’.
But of course you know that these are the very same people who are – in the name of ‘health’ – exiling smokers to the outdoors, and ensuring that ‘diversity’ becomes uniformity, ‘cohesion’ becomes division, and ‘inclusion’ becomes exclusion.
Because all these words mean whatever they want them to mean, and almost always the exact opposite of what they’re supposed to mean.