Select Page
It’s time to paraphrase and rework the term, ‘mug punter’ into the term ‘mug voter’ because that’s really all any of us actually are. We’re seeing this movie a lot in recent times. First the outrage (ongoing) by the elites over the Brexit vote and then the outrage, indignation, high dudgeon and harrumphing by the elites of the Washington swamp (also ongoing)  over the Trump election.
If you ever had any doubts about the agenda of the globalist elites —people like Malcolm Turnbull — this piece by Chris Kenny about the U.N. and their, up until now, fairly secret agenda for the average citizen, this should set you straight.
Below is a cut and paste that demonstrates and underscores just how irrelevant your vote and your opinion actually is.
As Chris Kenny writes today in The Weekend Australian:
“…If voters knew this sort of stuff was happening in their name, on their behalf, with bipartisan support and despite never being put to them, they might be expected to riot. It certainly would confirm to them that their political leaders live in an entirely different universe…”
“…If not for environment editor Graham Lloyd’s report in this newspaper last week, who of us would be aware of the UN’s “green new deal” and its plans to redistribute $3.7 trillion around the globe in pursuit of its sustainable development goals? The UN and its member nations want increased government interventions to shift funds from prospective private propositions to what the UN deems as socially desirable investments.
Meanwhile, investment funds worth $52 trillion are warning they will hold Australia’s largest companies to account over climate action. The Climate Action 100+ group includes some of our large industry/union superannuation funds and wields enormous shareholder power.
While the ceaseless vanities and rivalries of domestic political ambition play out in sovereign states, the forces of globalisation power on unabated. Clearly this was the case in Australia in September 2015.
Just 10 days after Tony Abbott’s legislatively frustrated and internally dysfunctional prime ministership was torn down by Malcolm Turnbull, Australia joined 192 other countries at the UN General Assembly in adopting the SDGs.
UN’s proposed “green new deal” involves overhauling the world’s financial order to ­tackle global warming. The proposals include new controls on moving money between nations, raising more funds from developed nations, harnessing the power of sovereign wealth funds, increasing taxes on multi­nationals and, importantly, using public banks to support politically preferred projects.
Adopting the terminology of hard-left US Democrats, who in turn adapted Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, the report by the UN’s trade and development secre­tar­iat is entitled Financing a Global Green New Deal — and it makes disturbing reading. It shuns free enterprise and markets in favour of government interventions in a way that is redolent of Kevin Rudd’s global financial essay of February 2009.
“The way to deliver the public goods we need to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 is to create a healthy, democratic and inclusive public realm at the global as well as the national level,” says the UN report, pushing government responses over the private sector. It talks about “investment in energy efficiency and renewable energy supply” and “new configurations of housing, work and public services, connected by more extensive mass transit” while promoting “full-scale transition to electric vehicles” with “more extensive infrastructure of charging stations, and continued progress in reducing vehicle costs” and “the decarbonisation of the global economy” all paid for by governments using “all policy instruments at their disposal, including fiscal policies, industrial policies, credit provision, financial regulation and welfare policies, as well as international trade and investment policies”.
Not much to worry about there, is there? And nobody voted for it, except the diplomats at the UN, including ours, on your behalf, back in 2015.
There are many factors at play in the polarisation and mistrust in public affairs across modern liberal democracies, such as digital media, global communications and post-material posturing. But underlying much of it is the contest between sovereignty and globalism, and voters, shareholders and consumers are right to believe much of the globalist agenda is being inflicted on them by stealth rather than referred to them for endorsement….”