top of page

Future Prophesies - the Stage is Set (Can Happen Any Day)
ONE WORLD (BABYLON) - GOVERNMENT

Does the Bible prophesy a one-world government and currency in the end times?

Antichrist Kingdom Rising​

The Rise of a One World Government

COVID Plandemic was Created to Reset the Current Governments and Move Us to a One-World Government (Step 1 of the Great Reset)

Collapse of the World's Governments

How Governments Collapse (and How Close We May Be)

The Collapse of Government – The Rise of Resistance and Awareness

ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) Scores

ESG Reports and Ratings: What They Are, Why They Matter

What Is ESG? It's A Leveraging Tool For The Woke Communist Takeover

The ESG Narrative Is A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing

World Government at the Door

World Health Organization (WHO)

We Can Kiss Our National Sovereignty Goodbye

Rep. Chris Smith warns WHO pandemic treaty is the greatest threat to freedom in human history

Time running out to stop Biden’s plot to secretly undermine U.S. national sovereignty

‘An impeachable offense’: Dr. Robert Malone slams Biden admin-proposed WHO amendments

Don't Get Too Comfortable

WHO Proposals Could Strip Nations of Their Sovereignty, Create Worldwide Totalitarian State, Expert Warns

United Nations (UN)

Agenda 2030

17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)

The Truth about the UN's Agenda 2030 — What You Need to Know

 

Agenda 21 - Climate change and the environment

 

United Nations 2.0

Conceptual Advances for United Nations 2.0

Our Common Agenda

What Are These UN Agendas Really Doing?

UN Trojan Horse

Agenda 21 / United Nations / New World Order - NWO: Blueprint Of Madmen

The True Objectives Behind Their 17 ‘New Sustainable Development Goals’ 

UN, World Economic Forum Behind Global ‘War on Farmers’: Experts

Fraudulent Labeling - The Way the UN is Dragging the World Into The Abyss

The Greater Reset

Babylon-a-Go-Go: The UN, the Pope & World Government

UN 17 Sustainable Development Goals and What They Really Mean

For details and documented proof, see UN Trojan Horse

Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere.

Translation: Centralized banks, IMF, World Bank, Fed to control all finances, digital one world currency in a cashless society.

 

Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture.

Translation: GMO's.

 

Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.

Translation: Mass vaccination, Codex Alimentarius.

 

Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.

Translation: UN propaganda, brainwashing through compulsory education from cradle to grave.

 

Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.

Translation: Population control through forced “Family Planning”.

Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.

Translation: Privatize all water sources, don’t forget to add fluoride.

Goal 7: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all.

Translation: Smart grid with smart meters on everything, peak pricing.

Goal 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all.

Translation: TPP, free trade zones that favor megacorporate interests.

Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation.

Translation: Toll roads, push public transit, remove free travel, environmental restrictions.

Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries.

Translation: Even more regional government bureaucracy like a mutant octopus.

Goal 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

Translation: Big brother big data surveillance state.

Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.

Translation: Forced austerity.

Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts.

Translation: Cap and Trade, carbon taxes/credits, footprint taxes (aka Al Gore’s wet dream).

Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.

Translation: Environmental restrictions, control all oceans including mineral rights from ocean floors.

Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss.

Translation: More environmental restrictions, more controlling resources and mineral rights.

Goal 16: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.

Translation: UN “peacekeeping” missions (ex 1, ex 2), the International Court of (blind) Justice, force people together via fake refugee crises and then mediate with more “UN peacekeeping” when tension breaks out to gain more control over a region, remove 2nd Amendment in USA.

 

Goal 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.

Translation: Remove national sovereignty worldwide, promote globalism under the “authority” and bloated, Orwellian bureaucracy of the UN

Does the Bible prophesy a one-world government and a one-world currency in the end times?

https://www.gotquestions.org/one-world-government.html

The Bible does not use the phrase “one-world government” or “one-world currency” in referring to the end times. It does, however, provide ample evidence to enable us to draw the conclusion that both will exist under the rule of the Antichrist in the last days.

In his apocalyptic vision in the Book of Revelation, the Apostle John sees the “beast,” also called the Antichrist, rising out of the sea having seven heads and ten horns (Revelation 13:1). Combining this vision with Daniel’s similar one (Daniel 7:16-24), we can conclude that some sort of world system will be inaugurated by the beast, the most powerful “horn,” who will defeat the other nine and will begin to wage war against Christians. The ten-nation confederacy is also seen in Daniel’s image of the statue in Daniel 2:41-42, where he pictures the final world government consisting of ten entities represented by the ten toes of the statue. Whoever the ten are and however they come to power, Scripture is clear that the beast will either destroy them or reduce their power to nothing more than figureheads. In the end, they will do his bidding.

John goes on to describe the ruler of this vast empire as having power and great authority, given to him by Satan himself (Revelation 13:2), being followed by and receiving worship from “all the world” (13:3-4), and having authority over “every tribe, people, language and nation” (13:7). From this description, it is logical to assume that this person is the leader of a one-world government which is recognized as sovereign over all other governments. It’s hard to imagine how such diverse systems of government as are in power today would willingly subjugate themselves to a single ruler, and there are many theories on the subject. A logical conclusion is that the disasters and plagues described in Revelation as the seal and trumpet judgments (chapters 6-11) will be so devastating and create such a monumental global crisis that people will embrace anything and anyone who promises to give them relief.

Once entrenched in power, the beast (Antichrist) and the power behind him (Satan) will move to establish absolute control over all peoples of the earth to accomplish their true end, the worship Satan has been seeking ever since being thrown out of heaven (Isaiah 14:12-14). One way they will accomplish this is by controlling all commerce, and this is where the idea of a one-world currency comes in. Revelation 13:16-17 describes some sort of satanic mark which will be required in order to buy and sell. This means anyone who refuses the mark will be unable to buy food, clothing or other necessities of life. No doubt the vast majority of people in the world will succumb to the mark simply to survive. Again, verse 16 makes it clear that this will be a universal system of control where everyone, rich and poor, great and small, will bear the mark on their hand or forehead. There is a great deal of speculation as to how exactly this mark will be affixed, but the technologies that are available right now could accomplish it very easily.

Those who are left behind after the Rapture of the Church will be faced with an excruciating choice—accept the mark of the beast in order to survive or face starvation and horrific persecution by the Antichrist and his followers. But those who come to Christ during this time, those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life (Revelation 13:8), will choose to endure, even to martyrdom.

Does the Bible Prophesy a One-World Government and a One-World Currency in the End Times?

www.GotQuestions.org

Does the Bible prophesy a one-world government and a one-world currency in the end times?

Antichrist Kingdom Rising (Part 1)

Jan Markell with Brandon Holthaus and Billy Crone

Antichrist Kingdom Rising (Part 2)

Jan Markell with Brandon Holthaus and Billy Crone

Endgame: The New World Order (Part 1)

Understanding the Times - Jan Markell with Curtis Bowers

Endgame: The New World Order (Part 2)

Understanding the Times - Jan Markell with Curtis Bowers

The One-World Government is Coming - James Kaddis

Government Reset - Don Perkins (Lamb & Lion Conference)

Antichrist Kingdom Rising

THE RISE OF A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT

https://vimeo.com/getalifemedia

The ultimate sign that you're headed for the worst day of your life would have to be this...You wake up one morning only to realize that your family has suddenly disappeared. So you run to turn on your TV to see what's happening and there you watch a special worldwide news report declaring that millions of people all over the planet have simply vanished. As you spy the Bible on the coffee table, it suddenly dawns on you that your family was right after all when they kept telling you about the rapture of the Church. Then to your horror, you realize that you've been left behind and have been catapulted into mankind's darkest hour, the 7-year Tribulation that really is coming upon the whole world. But thankfully, God is not only a God of wrath; He's a God of love as well. And because He loves you and I, He has given us many warning signs to show us that the Tribulation is near and that His 2nd Coming is rapidly approaching. Therefore, The Final Countdown takes a look at 10 signs given by God to lovingly wake us up so we'd give our lives to Him before it's too late. These signs are the Jewish People, Modern Technology, Worldwide Upheaval, The Rise of Falsehood, The Rise of Wickedness, The Rise of Apostasy, One World Religion, One World Government, One World Economy, and The Mark of the Beast. Like it or not folks, we are headed for The Final Countdown. Please, if you haven't already done so, give your life to Jesus today, because tomorrow may be too late!

The Rise of a One World Government - Part 1

The Rise of a One World Government - Part 2

The Rise of a One World Government - Part 3

The Rise of a One World Government - Part 4

The Rise of a One World Government - Part 5

The Rise of a One World Government - Part 6

THE RISE OF A ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT

COVID Plandemic was Created to Reset the Current Governments and Move Us to a One-World Government

MUST WATCH!!

Day 5 - Economical & Financial Destruction

Grand Jury | Crimes Against Humanity

Patrick Wood explained the Agenda 2030 as a plan to destroy capitalism and establish a new international economic order and declare them for sustainable development.

This is sustainable development – sponsored by the World Economic Forum and the United Nations – advocates for:

  • scientific management of resources consumption;

  • fintech underlying financial system using blockchain digital currencies and total surveillance;

  • no private property, resources to be held by a global trust;

  • no privacy allowed; also,

  • stressed, that sustainable development, also called technocracy, is absolutely incompatible with free markets.

 

Since free market can die naturally things are not so easy for the globalists as the ways they found to destroy capitalism like:

  • withdrawal of energy;

  • withdrawal of resources;

  • corrupt the supply chain;

  • withdrawal labor;

  • withdrawal financing;

  • limit consumption;

  • limit innovation;

  • create cataclysmic events; and,

  • create disinvesting.

 

Slogans for the new economic order that we have been seeing more often lately: “you will own nothing and will be happy,” to start from zero and “build back better.”

MUST WATCH!!

Day 5 - Economical & Financial Destruction

Grand Jury | Crimes Against Humanity

Then Leslie Manookian explained how that is going on and controlled demolition of both our political and economic systems through:

  • retention of power;

  • centralized control of businesses, assets, natural resources and elected and accountable leaders;

  • super richer elites and a surf class;

  • zero resources for citizens, the result of political and finance system; and,

  • why that is happening now in the US – because summarising the 2008/2009 financial crisis – explosion of US debt, US unfunded pension liability, 2019 [Repo] crisis and developing countries borrowed in dollars.

And in Europe it is kind of the same:

  • 2008/2009 financial crisis;

  • did not write off bank debt;

  • European debt not consolidated;

  • European Central Bank owns more than 40% of European debt;

  • negative interest rates since 2014; and,

  • unfunded public pensions.

 

Well, debt cannot be kicked downhill [down the road] for longer. If you want to control people, you have to get rid of small employers. That’s why the small businesses are being destroyed and the Covid crisis was an excuse for that. At the same time, Pharma buys influence in medicine, politics and media.

How are they doing this? Through:

  • central bank digital currency, that is in the plans;

  • [ ] transitions;

  • universal basic income;

  • elimination of small and medium employers;

  • banking and big tech;

  • end of cash; and,

  • surveillance.

 

One of the reasons is to cover up the mismanagement.

Covid Plandemic to Moe Us to a One World Government

How Governments Collapse (and How Close We May Be)

https://redstate.com/joesquire/2022/02/17/how-governments-collapse-and-how-close-we-may-be-n523503

 

One of the most notable dynasties in Chinese history, the Han is considered the foundation of China as we know it today. Its government existed for about 400 years (202 BC – 220 AD), and at its height, it was a center of progress and advancement in the ancient world.

The collapse of this empire actually spans just over 30 years. Historically, it began in 189 AD, when Emperor Ling died without naming an heir. But long before that, the emperors began growing their harems, and they needed their women protected from outside interlopers and each other. Thus, eunuchs were established as the protectors of the concubines. As time progressed, the eunuchs, having been given so much trust and having seen so much of what happened behind the scenes, started requesting more of the emperors, and the emperors started giving more and more trust and power to the eunuchs.

It came to the point that the eunuchs were essentially running the government and giving prime political positions to friends, family, and allies. It was not long before the bureaucracies of the Han became totally corrupt, demanding bribes and recognition from local governors and citizens. It infuriated the people.

Emperor Ling, meanwhile, withdrew more and more from governance and let the eunuchs completely run the show. The Emperor spent all his time with his concubines and attending military parades. He was someone who seemed to exist only for show while the eunuchs did everything in his name but for their own benefit.

A series of rebellions that started before Emperor Ling’s death saw the rise of several warlords, each of whom saw how corrupt and weak the Han Dynasty had become and how easy it might be to take charge. The biggest rebellion, the Yellow Turban Rebellion, lasted a year and spanned nearly the entire empire. Religious leaders inspired farmers and citizens long-abused by the government to rise up and fight. There was a call from the empire to all warlords to step up and fight.

Those warlords saw the eunuchs as responsible for the rebellions and the weakness of the Han. Eventually, they were wiped out, but the damage was done. China would, after decades of conflict, be divided into three kingdoms and eventually reunified under the Jin.

In the United States today, you have a politicized CDC that insists everyone should mask up to fight COVID-19, despite there being no evidence that masking ever truly worked. School boards are fighting parents seemingly at every turn, insisting that parents have no right to get involved with how education is run. The Biden administration has failed on everything from the withdrawal from Afghanistan to the economy to COVID-19. Our criminal justice system has had several high-profile unjust killings of black men (and in Louisiana, for example, a cover-up that extended into the highest levels of command).

All this and so much more. Is it any wonder that the idea of systemic failures of the system can resonate so loudly with both sides of the political aisle?

Like the Han, one of the biggest drivers of civil unrest is a lack of faith and trust in the system, our government, and our leaders. There is no reason to believe that simply voting for someone else will help. People are sent to Washington D.C. all the time on the promise of change and rarely do they do much more than become part of the system. Nothing changes. Bureaucracies become more entrenched and untouchable. Political favors are exchanged and cashed in.

No government can truly function like this. No government can exist without the support of its people, and yet it is really and truly trying. There has to be change, but it has to be something radical. Not a violent overthrow, and not purely partisan. It has to be across all parties. It has to be everyone deciding that, more than politics, our government has to function by listening to its people, not ruling over them. There are autocratic tendencies on all sides, and we have to eliminate that.

When you look at the history of our founding, it is a story of compromises that give the power of the government first and foremost to the people. But, over time, that power was taken away. Legislative power was given to bureaucratic institutions unaccountable to the legislative branch and uncontrollable by the executive. The executive wields more power than it should and is checked only by the judicial. The system is entirely out of balance.

The Han Dynasty collapsed because it did not have the trust of its people and they rebelled. The United States may not collapse, but it will continue to de-evolve and stop functioning entirely if it cannot regain the trust of its people. The problem is that no one seems willing to do that. They just want power for themselves to manage the decline.

How Governments Collapse (and How Close We May Be)
The Collapse of Government – The Rise of Resistance and Awareness

The Collapse of Government – The Rise of Resistance and Awareness

https://www.globalresearch.ca/collapse-government-rise-resistance/5788482

 

Wherever you look in the world today, governance is failing and governments are falling. And even where governments hold-on, premiers, prime ministers, presidents and parliamentarians tumble around them; disgraced and exposed for one seedy scandal after another.

Be it money, sex, fraud, despotism, embezzlement or quite simply a pandemic of lies. It barely matters, over and over again the inimitable lust for power takes precedence over the responsibility to earn the trust of the nation.

So widespread has this ‘failure to govern’ epidemic become that one is justified in asking whether the electoral system – which supposedly underlies ‘democracy’ – has any merit left in it at all?

Well, you might say “It’s not the system it’s the quality of the candidates that’s the problem.” And clearly that is a big problem, as evidenced by the pandemic of failure to deliver.

But isn’t there something wrong with expecting unaware, uninvolved and unsuspecting members of the general public to choose who should lead their countries? Isn’t this a receipt for chaos and corruption?

Yes, quite obviously it is. By and large, whoever is chosen to take on this leadership role turns out to be a mirror of the mentality which put them there.

This seems to come as a shock to most. The electorate appears to want someone on the platform who miraculously rises above their own moral, intellectual and visionary shortcomings. They want a bold, brave and bright Moses figure to lead them out of the desert of their daily afflictions, which, they believe, must have been caused by the previous ‘useless leaders’ they had such unreasonable hopes for.

So the merry-go-round continues. Each time getting more surreal and more systemic in its inability to address the real needs of the country, its people, or any fundamental sense of direction and purpose.

Here we are.

But the laws of the universe strongly suggest that anything which becomes fundamentally incapable of evolving into something better, but lingers on in a state of abject sterility, lands up in – or as – a black hole. An inwardly collapsing gravitational graveyard.

The only way such an outcome can be circumvented, here on earth, is by many people becoming individually aware enough to take back control of their destinies; while recognising that – together – they can run their lives according to another formula.

We are all faced with this choice, never more starkly than today.  Either get sucked into the black hole which awaits all those who do nothing/take no action – or – form aware, decentralised, autonomous groups with the determination to act as a responsible governing body at the neighbourhood and community level.

The key words are ‘aware’ and ‘responsible’. Without awareness no action can serve the cause of breaking free. Without accepting a level of responsibility, no action can become reality.

What exactly is this ‘awareness’ I refer to?

Quite simply, it is a condition in which recognition of the endemic levels of falsity and deception in society – and particularly in the political sphere – lead to the realisation that one must stop mindlessly obeying authoritarian voices of destruction and take action to establish a better and more just way of life.

You see, this is where so many submit to the coward within. Instead of following their heart led instincts to rebel, they submit to their ‘false intellect’ whose judgement is always “that’s not possible because we can never be more powerful than ‘them’.”

So Mr and Mrs X, who have moaned almost ceaselessly about the corruption and inept performance of those they elected (or didn’t) into office, take the standard position that in spite of witnessing their elected representatives being incapable of dispensing justice and common sense, the only thing to do is wait for the next election and once again try to get their candidate/party into office. This is, let us not mince our words, a direct route to the black hole.

Unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, there will not be another ‘election’. This sham is over. The entire tragic-comedy has already imploded. If you think in terms of ‘democracy’ and ‘governance according to the will of the people’, the unaware can’t, or won’t, believe that this ship has sunk to the bottom and cannot be salvaged.

But for the aware, it’s no longer about choices. We must take the tiller and face the music.

It’s not a lullaby or a sonata, but a hand to hand grappling with those who want to destroy us. Which, in some cases, includes those indoctrinated ones who live amongst us and follow orders. Orders that emanate from such devious old hands as Klaus Schwab, head of the World Economic Forum and his fellow henchmen. Orders that are passed-on and repeated by the brain frozen bureaucrats and technocrats whose jobs depend upon being proper robots.

There are no more bona fide ‘governments’ in existence in this world. Just a facade of fake interest directed towards those who put the elected members on their pedestals.

While these members, enjoying their apotheosis of parliamentary power, have their minds only on the next election, defection or rejection. That’s called ‘government’.

While that stuff will no doubt continue to be played-out on the world stage for a while longer, it is simply a facade for our distraction.

 

This planet is the territory of ‘The Great Reset’ now. An instrument for enforcing what is euphemistically called ‘net zero’. 

What kind of gibberish is ‘net zero’? Does it mean anything?

No, actually it doesn’t. It is simply the reductionist algorithm (Al-Gore-rythm) and digital way of getting around having to say ‘zero carbon’. Because ‘zero carbon’ has been exposed as meaning ‘zero CO2’. And ‘zero CO2’ means zero life on Earth. The black hole.

 

Yes, under Herr Klaus Schwab’s Fourth Reich, we will be disposable.

Since, in some circles, it has been known for years that depopulation and the reprogramming of those that remain, is the true meaning of the two words ‘Great Reset’. And ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution’ is nothing less than the techno-binary control mechanism for the digitalisation and robotisation of human kind.

The ‘Transhuman’.

For the aware, the time for debate about the nature of what lies ahead, is passed.

The aware are ‘The Resistance’.

‘The Resistance’ is a four dimensional energetic force, operating on physical, mental, psychic and spiritual planes. It encompasses a rising consciousness and capacity for universal vision and action.

The enemy of mankind operates on just two/three dimensional planes. It lacks any warmth or empathy. It is devoid of spirituality. It is coldly wedded to the material world and deeply fears the manifestation of spirit and human courage. It knows not love at all. But does know ‘how to smile’.

‘The Resistance’ is the new government. It will not need to be elected, it will simply come to be.

It is already apparent – and is growing. It is you and I, God and the future of Life on Earth.

Can a collapse of global civilization be avoided?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3574335/

 

Abstract

Environmental problems have contributed to numerous collapses of civilizations in the past. Now, for the first time, a global collapse appears likely. Overpopulation, overconsumption by the rich and poor choices of technologies are major drivers; dramatic cultural change provides the main hope of averting calamity.  (Note the source of this article)

Keywords: population, consumption, environment, agriculture, climate, culture

1. Introduction

Virtually every past civilization has eventually undergone collapse, a loss of socio-political-economic complexity usually accompanied by a dramatic decline in population size [1]. Some, such as those of Egypt and China, have recovered from collapses at various stages; others, such as that of Easter Island or the Classic Maya, were apparently permanent [1,2]. All those previous collapses were local or regional; elsewhere, other societies and civilizations persisted unaffected. Sometimes, as in the Tigris and Euphrates valleys, new civilizations rose in succession. In many, if not most, cases, overexploitation of the environment was one proximate or an ultimate cause [3].

But today, for the first time, humanity's global civilization—the worldwide, increasingly interconnected, highly technological society in which we all are to one degree or another, embedded—is threatened with collapse by an array of environmental problems. Humankind finds itself engaged in what Prince Charles described as ‘an act of suicide on a grand scale’ [4], facing what the UK's Chief Scientific Advisor John Beddington called a ‘perfect storm’ of environmental problems [5]. The most serious of these problems show signs of rapidly escalating severity, especially climate disruption. But other elements could potentially also contribute to a collapse: an accelerating extinction of animal and plant populations and species, which could lead to a loss of ecosystem services essential for human survival; land degradation and land-use change; a pole-to-pole spread of toxic compounds; ocean acidification and eutrophication (dead zones); worsening of some aspects of the epidemiological environment (factors that make human populations susceptible to infectious diseases); depletion of increasingly scarce resources [6,7], including especially groundwater, which is being overexploited in many key agricultural areas [8]; and resource wars [9]. These are not separate problems; rather they interact in two gigantic complex adaptive systems: the biosphere system and the human socio-economic system. The negative manifestations of these interactions are often referred to as ‘the human predicament’ [10], and determining how to prevent it from generating a global collapse is perhaps the foremost challenge confronting humanity.

The human predicament is driven by overpopulation, overconsumption of natural resources and the use of unnecessarily environmentally damaging technologies and socio-economic-political arrangements to service Homo sapiens’ aggregate consumption [1117]. How far the human population size now is above the planet's long-term carrying capacity is suggested (conservatively) by ecological footprint analysis [1820]. It shows that to support today's population of seven billion sustainably (i.e. with business as usual, including current technologies and standards of living) would require roughly half an additional planet; to do so, if all citizens of Earth consumed resources at the US level would take four to five more Earths. Adding the projected 2.5 billion more people by 2050 would make the human assault on civilization's life-support systems disproportionately worse, because almost everywhere people face systems with nonlinear responses [11,2123], in which environmental damage increases at a rate that becomes faster with each additional person. Of course, the claim is often made that humanity will expand Earth's carrying capacity dramatically with technological innovation [24], but it is widely recognized that technologies can both add and subtract from carrying capacity. The plough evidently first expanded it and now appears to be reducing it [3]. Overall, careful analysis of the prospects does not provide much confidence that technology will save us [25] or that gross domestic product can be disengaged from resource use [26].

2. Do current trends portend a collapse?

What is the likelihood of this set of interconnected predicaments [27] leading to a global collapse in this century? There have been many definitions and much discussion of past ‘collapses’ [1,3,2831], but a future global collapse does not require a careful definition. It could be triggered by anything from a ‘small’ nuclear war, whose ecological effects could quickly end civilization [32], to a more gradual breakdown because famines, epidemics and resource shortages cause a disintegration of central control within nations, in concert with disruptions of trade and conflicts over increasingly scarce necessities. In either case, regardless of survivors or replacement societies, the world familiar to anyone reading this study and the well-being of the vast majority of people would disappear.

How likely is such a collapse to occur? No civilization can avoid collapse if it fails to feed its population. The world's success so far, and the prospective ability to feed future generations at least as well, has been under relatively intensive discussion for half a century [3340]. Agriculture made civilization possible, and over the last 80 years or so, an industrial agricultural revolution has created a technology-dependent global food system. That system, humanity's single biggest industry, has generated miracles of food production. But it has also created serious long-run vulnerabilities, especially in its dependence on stable climates, crop monocultures, industrially produced fertilizers and pesticides, petroleum, antibiotic feed supplements and rapid, efficient transportation.

Despite those food production miracles, today at least two billion people are hungry or poorly nourished. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that increasing food production by some 70 per cent would be required to feed a 35 per cent bigger and still growing human population adequately by 2050 [41]. What are the prospects that H. sapiens can produce and distribute sufficient food? To do so, it probably will be necessary to accomplish many or all of the following tasks: severely limit climate disruption; restrict expansion of land area for agriculture (to preserve ecosystem services); raise yields where possible; put much more effort into soil conservation [3]; increase efficiency in the use of fertilizers, water and energy; become more vegetarian; grow more food for people (not fuel for vehicles); reduce food wastage; stop degradation of the oceans and better regulate aquaculture; significantly increase investment in sustainable agricultural and aquacultural research; and move increasing equity and feeding everyone to the very top of the policy agenda.

Most of these long-recommended tasks require changes in human behaviour thus far elusive. The problem of food wastage and the need for more and better agricultural research have been discussed for decades. So have ‘technology will save us’ schemes such as building ‘nuclear agro-industrial complexes’ [42], where energy would be so cheap that it could support a new kind of desert agriculture in ‘food factories’, where crops would be grown on desalinated water and precisely machine fertilized. Unhappily, sufficiently cheap energy has never been produced by nuclear power to enable large-scale agriculture to move in that direction. Nor has agriculture moved towards feeding people protein extracted from leaves or bacteria grown on petroleum [43, pp. 95–112]. None of these schemes has even resulted in a coordinated development effort. Meanwhile, growing numbers of newly well-off people have increased demand for meat [44], thereby raising global demand for feedgrains.

Perhaps even more critical, climate disruption may pose insurmountable biophysical barriers to increasing crop yields. Indeed, if humanity is very unlucky with the climate, there may be reductions in yields of major crops [45], although near-term this may be unlikely to affect harvests globally [46]. Nonetheless, rising temperatures already seem to be slowing previous trends of increasing yields of basic grains [45,47], and unless greenhouse gas emissions are dramatically reduced, dangerous anthropogenic climate change [48] could ravage agriculture. Also, in addition to falling yields from many oceanic fish stocks because of widespread overfishing [49], warming and acidification of the oceans threaten the protein supply of some of the most nutritionally vulnerable people [50], especially those who cannot afford to purchase farmed fish.

Unfortunately, the agricultural system has complex connections with all the chief drivers of environmental deterioration. Agriculture itself is a major emitter of greenhouse gases and thus is an important cause of climate disruption as well as being exceptionally vulnerable to its consequences. More than a millennium of change in temperature and precipitation patterns is apparently now entrained [51], with the prospect of increasingly severe storms, droughts, heat waves and floods, all of which seem already evident and all of which threaten agricultural production.

Land is an essential resource for farming, and one facing multiple threats. In addition to the serious and widespread problems of soil degradation, sea-level rise (the most certain consequence of global warming) will take important areas out of production either by inundating them (a 1 m rise would flood 17.5% of Bangladesh [52]), exposing them to more frequent storm surges, or salinizing coastal aquifers essential for irrigation water. Another important problem for the food system is the loss of prime farmland to urbanization, a trend that seems certain to accelerate [53] as population growth steadily erodes the per capita supply of farmland.

The critical importance of substantially boosting the inadequate current action on the demographic problem can be seen in the time required to change the trajectory of population growth humanely and sensibly. We know from such things as the World War II mobilizations that many consumption patterns can be altered dramatically within a year, given appropriate incentives [54]. If food shortages became acute, then a rapid reaction would ensue as hunger became much more widespread. Food prices would rise, and diets would temporarily change (e.g. the number of meals consumed per day or amount of meat consumed) to compensate the shortage. Over the long term, however, expanding the global food supply and distributing it more equitably would be a slow and difficult process. Even though a major famine might well provoke investment in long-needed improvements in food production and distribution, they would take time to plan, test and implement.

Furthermore, agriculture is a leading cause of losses of biodiversity and thus of the critical ecosystem services supplied to agriculture itself (e.g. pollination, pest control, soil fertility, climate stability) and other human enterprises. Farming is also a principal source of global toxification, as has been clear since the days of Carson [55], exposing the human population to myriad subtle poisons. These pose further potential risks to food production.

3. What needs to be done to avoid a collapse?

The threat from climate disruption to food production alone means that humanity's entire system for mobilizing energy needs to be rapidly transformed. Warming must be held well below a potential 5°C rise in global average temperature, a level that could well bring down civilization [56]. The best estimate today may be that, failing rapid concerted action, the world is already committed to a 2.4°C increase in global average temperature [57]. This is significantly above the 2°C estimated a decade ago by climate scientists to be a ‘safe’ limit, but now considered by some analysts to be too dangerous [58,59], a credible assessment, given the effects seen already before reaching a one degree rise. There is evidence, moreover, that present models underestimate future temperature increase by overestimating the extent that growth of vegetation can serve as a carbon sink [60] and underestimating positive feedbacks [61].

Many complexities plague the estimation of the precise threats of anthropogenic climate disruption, ranging from heat deaths and spread of tropical diseases to sea-level rise, crop failures and violent storms. One key to avoiding a global collapse, and thus an area requiring great effort and caution is avoiding climate-related mass famines. Our agricultural system evolved in a geological period of relatively constant and benign climate and was well attuned to twentieth-century conditions. That alone is cause for substantial concern as the planet's climates rapidly shift to new, less predictable regimes. It is essential to slow that process. That means dramatically transforming much of the existing energy mobilization infrastructure [62] and changing human behaviour to make the energy system much more efficient. This is possible; indeed, sensible plans for doing it have been put forward [63,64], and some progress has been made. The central challenge, of course, is to phase out more than half of the global use of fossil fuels by 2050 in order to forestall the worst impacts of climate disruption, a challenge the latest International Energy Agency edition of World Energy Outlook makes look more severe [65]. This highlights another dilemma. Fossil fuels are now essential to agriculture for fertilizer and pesticide manufacture, operation of farm machinery, irrigation (often wasteful), livestock husbandry, crop drying, food storage, transportation and distribution. Thus, the phase-out will need to include at least partial substitution of non-fossil fuels in these functions, and do so without greatly increasing food prices.

Unfortunately, essential steps such as curbing global emissions to peak by 2020 and reducing them to half of present levels by 2050 [66] are extremely problematic economically and politically. Fossil fuel companies would have to leave most of their proven reserves in the ground, thus destroying much of the industry's economic value [67]. Because the ethics of some businesses include knowingly continuing lethal but profitable activities [68], it is hardly surprising that interests with large financial stakes in fossil fuel burning have launched a gigantic and largely successful disinformation campaign in the USA to confuse people about climate disruption [69,70] and block attempts to deal with it [71].

One recurrent theme in analyses of the food problem is the need for closing ‘yield gaps’ [7274]. That means raising yields in less productive systems to those typical of industrial agriculture. But climatic conditions may change sufficiently that those industrial high yields can themselves no longer be sustained [45]. Thus, reducing the chances of a collapse calls for placing much more effort into genetic and ecological research related to agriculture [75] and adopting already known environmental-friendly techniques, even though that may require trading off immediate corporate profits for social benefits or long-term sustainability [3].

Rationalizing energy mobilization alone may not be enough to be enough to maintain agricultural production, let alone allow its great expansion. Human water-handling infrastructure will have to be re-engineered for flexibility to bring water to crops in an environment of constantly changing precipitation patterns [51]. This is critical, for although today only about 15 per cent of agricultural land is irrigated, it provides some 40 per cent of the grain crop yield. It seems likely that farming areas now rain-fed may someday need to be irrigated, whereas irrigation could become superfluous elsewhere, and both could change more or less continually. For this and many other reasons, the global food system will need to quickly evolve an unprecedented flexibility, never before even contemplated.

One factor making the challenges more severe is the major participation in the global system of giant nations whose populations have not previously enjoyed the fossil energy abundance that brought Western countries and Japan to positions of affluence. Now they are poised to repeat the West's energy ‘success’, and on an even greater scale. India alone, which recently suffered a gigantic blackout affecting 300 million people, is planning to bring 455 new coal plants on line. Worldwide more than 1200 plants with a total installed capacity of 1.4 million megawatts are planned [76], much of that in China, where electricity demand is expected to skyrocket. The resultant surge in greenhouse gases will interact with the increasing diversion of grain to livestock, stimulated by the desire for more meat in the diets of Indians, Chinese and others in a growing global middle class.

4. Dealing with problems beyond food supply

Another possible threat to the continuation of civilization is global toxification. Adverse symptoms of exposure to synthetic chemicals are making some scientists increasingly nervous about effects on the human population [7779]. Should a global threat materialize, however, no planned mitigating responses (analogous to the ecologically and politically risky ‘geoengineering’ projects often proposed to ameliorate climate disruption [80]) are waiting in the wings ready for deployment.

Much the same can be said about aspects of the epidemiological environment and the prospect of epidemics being enhanced by rapid population growth in immune-weakened societies, increased contact with animal reservoirs, high-speed transport and the misuse of antibiotics [81]. Nobel laureate Joshua Lederberg had great concern for the epidemic problem, famously stating, ‘The survival of the human species is not a preordained evolutionary program’ [82, p. 40]. Some precautionary steps that should be considered include forbidding the use of antibiotics as growth stimulators for livestock, building emergency stocks of key vaccines and drugs (such as Tamiflu), improving disease surveillance, expanding mothballed emergency medical facilities, preparing institutions for imposing quarantines and, of course, moving as rapidly as possible to humanely reduce the human population size. It has become increasingly clear that security has many dimensions beyond military security [83,84] and that breaches of environmental security could risk the end of global civilization.

But much uncertainty about the human ability to avoid a collapse still hinges on military security, especially whether some elements of the human predicament might trigger a nuclear war. Recent research indicates that even a regional-scale nuclear conflict, as is quite possible between India and Pakistan, could lead to a global collapse through widespread climatic consequences [32]. Triggers to conflict beyond political and religious strife easily could include cross-border epidemics, a need to gain access to food supplies and farmland, and competition over other resources, especially agricultural water and (if the world does not come to its energy senses) oil. Finding ways to eliminate nuclear weapons and other instruments of mass destruction must move even higher on civilization's agenda [85], because nuclear war would be the quickest and surest route to a collapse [86].

In thinking about the probability of collapse, one must obviously consider the social disruptions associated with elements of the predicament. Perhaps at the top of the list should be that of environmental refugees [87]. Recent predictions are that environmental refugees could number 50 million by 2020 [88]. Severe droughts, floods, famines and epidemics could greatly swell that number. If current ‘official’ predictions of sea-level rise are low (as many believe they are), coastal inundations alone could generate massive human movements; a 1 m rise would directly affect some 100 million people, whereas a 6 m rise would displace more than 400 million [89]. Developing a more comprehensive system of international governance with institutions planning to ameliorate the impacts of such catastrophes would be a major way to reduce the odds of collapse.

5. The role of science

The scientific community has repeatedly warned humanity in the past of its peril [90102], and the earlier warnings [93,103107] about the risks of population expansion and the ‘limits to growth’ have increasingly been shown to be on the right track [108111] (but see Hayes [17]). The warnings continue [109,112119]. Yet many scientists still tend to treat population growth as an exogenous variable, when it should be considered an endogenous one—indeed, a central factor [120]. Too many studies asking ‘how can we possibly feed 9.6 billion people by 2050?’ should also be asking ‘how can we humanely lower birth rates far enough to reduce that number to 8.6?’ To our minds, the fundamental cure, reducing the scale of the human enterprise (including the size of the population) to keep its aggregate consumption within the carrying capacity of Earth [121], is obvious but too much neglected or denied. There are great social and psychological barriers in growthmanic cultures to even considering it. This is especially true because of the ‘endarkenment’—a rapidly growing movement towards religious orthodoxies that reject enlightenment values such as freedom of thought, democracy, separation of church and state, and basing beliefs and actions on empirical evidence. They are manifest in dangerous trends such as climate denial, failure to act on the loss of biodiversity and opposition to condoms (for AIDS control) as well as other forms of contraception [122]. If ever there was a time for evidence-based (as opposed to faith-based) risk reduction strategies [123], it is now.

How can scientists do more to reduce the odds of a collapse? Both natural and social scientists should put more effort into finding the best ways of accomplishing the necessary re-modelling of energy and water infrastructure. They should develop better ways of evaluating and regulating the use of synthetic chemicals, a problem that might abate somewhat as availability of their fossil fuel sources fades (even though only about 5% of oil production flows into petrochemical production). The protection of Earth's remaining biodiversity (especially the crucial diversity of populations [124,125]) must take centre stage for both scientific specialists and, through appropriate education, the public [126,127]. Scientists must continually call attention to the need to improve the human epidemiological environment, and for control and eventual elimination of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Above all, they should expand efforts to understand the mechanisms through which cooperation evolves [128], because avoiding collapse will require unusual levels of international cooperation.

Is it too late for the global scientific community to collect itself and start to deal with the nexus of the two complex adaptive systems [129] and then help generate the necessary actions to move towards sustainability? There are certainly many small-scale science-based efforts, often local, that can provide hope if scaled up [121]. For example, environmental non-govenmental organizations and others are continually struggling to halt the destruction of elements of biodiversity (and thus, in some cases, of vital ecosystem services [7]), often with success. In the face of the building extinction crisis, they may be preserving nuclei from which Earth's biota and humanity's ecosystem services, might eventually be regenerated. And some positive efforts are scaling up. China now has some 25 per cent of its land in ecosystem function conservation areas [130] designed to protect both natural capital and human well-being. The Natural Capital Project [131] is helping improve the management of these areas. This is good news, but in our view, many too few scientists are involved in the efforts needed, especially in re-orienting at least part of their research towards mitigating the predicament and then bringing their results to the policy front.

6. The need for rapid social/political change

Until very recently, our ancestors had no reason to respond genetically or culturally to long-term issues. If the global climate were changing rapidly for Australopithecus or even ancient Romans, then they were not causing it and could do nothing about it. The forces of genetic and cultural selection were not creating brains or institutions capable of looking generations ahead; there would have been no selection pressures in that direction. Indeed, quite the opposite, selection probably favoured mechanisms to keep perception of the environmental background steady so that rapid changes (e.g. leopard approaching) would be obvious [132, pp. 135–136]. But now slow changes in that background are the most lethal threats. Societies have a long history of mobilizing efforts, making sacrifices and changes, to defeat an enemy at the gates, or even just to compete more successfully with a rival. But there is not much evidence of societies mobilizing and making sacrifices to meet gradually worsening conditions that threaten real disaster for future generations. Yet that is exactly the sort of mobilization that we believe is required to avoid a collapse.

Perhaps the biggest challenge in avoiding collapse is convincing people, especially politicians and economists, to break this ancient mould and alter their behaviour relative to the basic population-consumption drivers of environmental deterioration. We know that simply informing people of the scientific consensus on a serious problem does not ordinarily produce rapid changes in institutional or individual behaviour. That was amply demonstrated in the case of cigarettes [68], air pollution and other environmental problems [69] and is now being demonstrated in the obesity epidemic [133] as well as climate disruption.

Obvious parallels exist regarding reproduction and overconsumption, which are especially visible in what amounts to a cultural addiction to continued economic growth among the already well-off [134]. One might think that the mathematics of compound interest would have convinced everyone long ago that growth of an industrialized economy at 3.5 per cent annually cannot long continue.

Unfortunately, most ‘educated’ people are immersed in a culture that does not recognize that, in the real world, a short history (a few centuries) of exponential growth does not imply a long future of such growth.

Besides focusing their research on ways to avoid collapse, there is a need for natural scientists to collaborate with social scientists, especially those who study the dynamics of social movements. Such collaborations could develop ways to stimulate a significant increase in popular support for decisive and immediate action on the predicament. Unfortunately, awareness among scientists that humanity is in deep trouble has not been accompanied by popular awareness and pressure to counter the political and economic influences implicated in the current crisis. Without significant pressure from the public demanding action, we fear there is little chance of changing course fast enough to forestall disaster.

The needed pressure, however, might be generated by a popular movement based in academia and civil society to help guide humanity towards developing a new multiple intelligence [135], ‘foresight intelligence’ to provide the long-term analysis and planning that markets cannot supply. Foresight intelligence could not only systematically look ahead but also guide cultural changes towards desirable outcomes such as increased socio-economic resilience. Helping develop such a movement and foresight intelligence are major challenges facing scientists today, a cutting edge for research that must slice fast if the chances of averting a collapse are to be improved.

If foresight intelligence became established, many more scientists and policy planners (and society) might, for example, understand the demographic contributions to the predicament [136], stop treating population growth as a ‘given’ and consider the nutritional, health and social benefits of humanely ending growth well below nine billion and starting a slow decline. This would be a monumental task, considering the momentum of population growth. Monumental, but not impossible if the political will could be generated globally to give full rights, education and opportunities to women, and provide all sexually active human beings with modern contraception and backup abortion. The degree to which those steps would reduce fertility rates is controversial [137139], but they are a likely win-win for societies [140].

Obviously, especially with the growing endarkenment, there are huge cultural and institutional barriers to establishing such policies in some parts of the world. After all, there is not a single nation where women are truly treated as equal to men. Despite that, the population driver should not be ignored simply because limiting overconsumption can, at least in theory, be achieved more rapidly. The difficulties of changing demographic trajectories mean that the problem should have been addressed sooner, rather than later. That halting population growth inevitably leads to changes in age structure is no excuse for bemoaning drops in fertility rates, as is common in European government circles [141]. Reduction of population size in those over-consuming nations is a very positive trend, and sensible planning can deal with the problems of population aging [142].

While rapid policy change to head off collapse is essential, fundamental institutional change to keep things on track is necessary as well. This is especially true of educational systems, which today fail to inform most people of how the world works and thus perpetuate a vast culture gap [54]. The academic challenge is especially great for economists, who could help set the background for avoiding collapse by designing steady-state economic systems [107,134,143], and along the way destroying fables such as ‘growth can continue forever if it's in service industries’, or ‘technological innovation will save us’. Issues such as the importance of comparative advantage under current global circumstances [144], the development of new models that better reflect the irrational behaviour of individuals and groups [145], reduction of the worship of ‘free’ markets that infests the discipline, and tasks such as making information more symmetrical, moving towards sustainability and enhancing equity (including redistribution) all require re-examination. In that re-examination, they would be following the lead of distinguished economists [146148] in dealing with the real world of biophysical constraints and human well-being.

At the global level, the loose network of agreements that now tie countries together [149,150], developed in a relatively recent stage of cultural evolution since modern nation states appeared, is utterly inadequate to grapple with the human predicament. Strengthening global environmental governance [151] and addressing the related problem of avoiding failed statehood [152] are tasks humanity has so far refused to tackle comprehensively even as cultural evolution in technology has rendered the present international system (as it has educational systems) obsolete. Serious global environmental problems can only be solved and a collapse avoided with an unprecedented level of international cooperation [122]. Regardless of one's estimate of civilization's potential longevity, the time to start restructuring the international system is right now. If people do not do that, nature will restructure civilization for us.

Similarly, widely based cultural change is required to reduce humanely both population size and overconsumption by the rich. Both go against cultural norms, and, as long feared [153], the overconsumption norm has understandably been adopted by the increasingly rich subpopulations of developing nations, notably India and China. One can be thrilled by the numbers of people raised from poverty while being apprehensive about the enormous and possibly lethal environmental and social costs that may eventually result [154,155]. The industrial revolution set civilization on the road to collapse, spurring population growth, which contributed slightly more than overconsumption to environmental degradation [136]. Now population combined with affluence growth may finish the job.

Needless to say, dealing with economic and racial inequities will be critically important in getting large numbers of people from culturally diverse groups [156] to focus their minds on solving the human predicament, something globalization should help [157]. These tasks will be pursued, along with an emphasis on developing ‘foresight intelligence’, by the nascent Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (the MAHB; http://mahb.stanford.edu). One of its central goals is to try to accelerate change towards sustainability. Since simply giving the scientific facts to the public will not do it, among other things, this means finding frames and narratives to convince the public of the need to make changes.

We know that societies can evolve fundamentally and unexpectedly [158, p. 334], as was dramatically demonstrated by the collapse of communist regimes in Europe in 1989 [159]. Rather than tinkering around the edges and making feeble or empty gestures towards one or another of the interdependent problems we face, we need a powerful and comprehensive approach. In addressing climate change, for instance, developing nations need to be convinced that they (along with the rest of the world) cannot afford (and do not need) to delay action while they ‘catch up’ in development. Indeed, development on the old model is counterproductive; they have a great opportunity to pioneer new approaches and technologies. All nations need to stop waiting for others to act and be willing to do everything they can to mitigate emissions and hasten the energy transition, regardless of what others are doing.

With climate and many other global environmental problems, polycentric solutions may be more readily found than global ones. Complex, multi-level systems may be better able to cope with complex, multi-level problems [160], and institutional change is required at many levels in many polities. What scientists understand about cultural evolution suggests that, while improbable, it may be possible to move cultures in such directions [161,162]. Whether solutions will be global or polycentric, international negotiations will be needed, existing international agencies that deal with them will need strengthening, and new institutions will need to be formed.

7. Conclusions

Do we think global society can avoid a collapse in this century? The answer is yes, because modern society has shown some capacity to deal with long-term threats, at least if they are obvious or continuously brought to attention (think of the risks of nuclear conflict). Humanity has the assets to get the job done, but the odds of avoiding collapse seem small because the risks are clearly not obvious to most people and the classic signs of impending collapse, especially diminishing returns to complexity [28], are everywhere. One central psychological barrier to taking dramatic action is the distribution of costs and benefits through time: the costs up front, the benefits accruing largely to unknown people in the future. But whether we or more optimistic observers [17,163] are correct, our own ethical values compel us to think the benefits to those future generations are worth struggling for, to increase at least slightly the chances of avoiding a dissolution of today's global civilization as we know it.

Acknowledgements

We are especially grateful to Joan Diamond, Executive Director of the MAHB, for her ideas on foresight intelligence, and to the Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics for two decades of provocative discussions on topics related to this paper. This paper has benefited from comments from Ken Arrow, Scott Barrett, Andy Beattie, Dan Blumstein, Corey Bradshaw, Greg Bratman, Paul Brest, Jim Brown, Bob Brulle, Gretchen Daily, Lisa Daniel, Timothy Daniel, Partha Dasgupta, Nadia Diamond-Smith, Tom Dietz, Anantha Duraiappah, Riley Dunlap, Walter Falcon, Marc Feldman, Rachelle Gould, Larry Goulder, John Harte, Mel Harte, Ursula Heise, Tad Homer-Dixon, Bob Horn, Danny Karp, Don Kennedy, Michael Klare, Simon Levin, Jack Liu, David Lobell, Doug McAdam, Chase Mendenhall, Hal Mooney, Fathali Moghaddam, Dennis Pirages, Graham Pyke, Gene Rosa, Lee Ross, Jose Sarukhan, Kirk Smith, Sarah Soule, Chris Turnbull and Wren Wirth. Two of the best and most thorough anonymous reviewers we have ever encountered helped us improve the manuscript. The work was supported by Peter and Helen Bing and the Mertz Gilmore Foundation.

See article for references.

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND GOVERNANCE (ESG) SCORES - How WOKE are you???
The US Version of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Social Credit System - In America NOW

ESG-scores.jpg

Start at 20:16 - ESG Scores

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND GOVERNANCE (ESG) SCORES

https://www.refinitiv.com/en/sustainable-finance/esg-scores

Our ESG scores are designed to transparently and objectively measure a company's relative ESG performance, commitment and effectiveness across 10 main themes, based on publicly available and auditable data.

ESG scores from Refinitiv are designed to transparently and objectively measure a company's relative ESG performance, commitment and effectiveness across 10 main themes (emissions, environmental product innovation, human rights, shareholders, etc.) based on publicly-reported data.

Refinitiv ESG scores reflect the underlying ESG data framework and are a transparent, data-driven assessment of companies’ relative ESG performance and capacity, integrating and accounting for industry materiality and company size biases.

The Refinitiv ESG score measures the company’s ESG performance based on verifiable reported data in the public domain. It captures and calculates over 450 company-level ESG measures, of which a subset of 186 of the most comparable and material per industry power the overall company assessment and scoring process.

The underlying measures are based on considerations around comparability, impact, data availability and industry relevance that varies across each industry group.

These are grouped into 10 categories that form the three pillar scores and the final ESG score, which is a reflection of the company’s ESG performance, commitment and effectiveness based on publicly reported information.

The category scores are rolled up into three pillar scores – environmental, social and corporate governance. ESG pillar score is a relative sum of the category weights which vary per industry for the 'Environmental' and 'Social' categories. For 'Governance', the weights remain the same across all industries.

ESG Score.jpg
ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND GOVERNANCE (ESG) SCORES

ESG Reports and Ratings: What They Are, Why They Matter

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2017/07/27/esg-reports-and-ratings-what-they-are-why-they-matter/

Most international and domestic public (and many private) companies are being evaluated and rated on their environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance by various third party providers of reports and ratings. Institutional investors, asset managers, financial institutions and other stakeholders are increasingly relying on these reports and ratings to assess and measure company ESG performance over time and as compared to peers. This assessment and measurement often forms the basis of informal and shareholder proposal-related investor engagement with companies on ESG matters. Report and ratings methodology, scope and coverage, however, vary greatly among providers. Many providers encourage input and engagement with their subject companies to improve or sometimes correct data. There are currently numerous ESG data providers, a summary of each of which is beyond the scope of this post, but some well-known third party ESG report and ratings providers include: (i) Bloomberg ESG Data Service; (ii) Corporate Knights Global 100; (iii) DowJones Sustainability Index (DJSI); (iv) Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS); (v) MSCI ESG Research; (vi) RepRisk; (vii) Sustainalytics Company ESG Reports; and (viii) Thomson Reuters ESG Research Data. This post provides an overview and analysis of these providers.

ESG Reports and Ratings: What They Are, Why They Matter

What Is ESG? It's A Leveraging Tool For The Woke Communist Takeover

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/what-esg-its-leveraging-tool-woke-communist-takeover

 

The corporate dynamic when it comes to politics has been rather bizarre the past five years.  The general rule for decades in the US was that companies would avoid public sparring over political agendas whenever possible and if they did contribute to election campaigns they would spend money discreetly on candidates in both parties to hedge their bets.  Something changed around 2015-2016, however.  

Was it the surprise election of Donald Trump?  Trump was probably incidental.  It was more likely the dramatic shift among conservatives away from the controlled Neo-con paradigm and into a more liberty oriented standing.  Ron Paul's 2008 and 2012 campaigns had a lot to do with this change among Republican voters.  Conservatives and liberty minded independents were returning to their foundations of small government, constitutionalism, independent thought, meritocracy and decentralization.  This is when the corporate world decided (or was perhaps guided) to go full bore leftist.

That is to say, the leftist cult couldn't stifle the rise of conservative liberty advocates without consolidating their control in the open, and corporations are a big part of that strategy.   

Wall Street, Entertainment Media and Big Tech companies donated FAR more to Democrat candidates in recent years compared to Republican candidates.  In the 2020 presidential election, they spent 250% more on Joe Biden's campaign than Donald Trump's.  But beyond that, many companies have gone aggressively and openly woke.   Social Justice narratives of “equity, diversity and inclusion” are dominating corporate culture, and though leftist bias has always been a problem among Hollywood elitists and the entertainment media, things got a lot worse after 2016.

Part of this aggressive leftism could be attributed to the ESG movement (Environmental, Social and Corporate Governance), a clear appendage or tool for globalist foundations like the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation and the World Economic Forum.  It is also referred to as “stakeholder capitalism” and “mission related investing.”  Stakeholder capitalism is just another term for socialism/communism, and ESG is a related control methodology for dictating how businesses behave politically.  

The term “ESG” was originally coined by the United Nations Environment Program Initiative in 2005, but the methodology was not fully applied to the corporate world until the past six years when ESG investment skyrocketed. 

There are some people that will argue that ESG is not a true “communist” mechanism because communism technically involves the state taking control of the means of production.  These people are either ignorant or they are acting deliberately obtuse.  Communism is about controlling culture just as much as it is about controlling the economy.

   

Corporations are at bottom creations of government; they are chartered by governments, receive special legal advantages including corporate personhood, and they often receive special protections from governments including central bank stimulus and a shield from civil litigation.  They call it “too big to fail” because the government and the corporate world work hand in hand to keep certain institutions alive.  

One could call this an odd mix of communism and fascism; the point is, the lines have blurred beyond all recognition and the ideology of the people in power is specifically leftist/communist/globalist. Corporations already have government incentives to protect the corrupt status quo, but ESG is designed to lure them into supporting vocal political alignment even at the cost of normal profits.

 

ESG is about money; loans given out by top banks and foundations to companies that meet the guidelines of “stakeholder capitalism.”  Companies must show that they are actively pursuing a business environment that prioritizes woke virtues and climate change restrictions.  These loans are not an all prevailing income source, but ESG loans are highly targeted, they are growing in size (for now) and they are very easy to get as long as a company is willing to preach the social justice gospel as loudly as possible.

 

Deloitte's Insights studies show that ESG assets compounded at 16% p.a. between 2014 and 2018, now account for 25% of total market assets, and they believe that ESG could account for 50% of market share globally by 2024. 

These loans become a form of leverage over the business world – Once they get a taste of that easy money they keep coming back.  Many of the loan targets attached to ESG are rarely enforced and penalties are few and far between.  Primarily, an ESG funded company must propagandize, that is all.  They must propagandize their employees and they must propagandize their customers.  As long as they do this, that sweet loan capital keeps flowing.  

It's enough to keep corporations addicted, but not enough to keep them satiated.  Diversity hiring quotas based on skin color and sexual orientation rather than merit help make the overlords happy.  Pushing critical race theory smooths the way for more cash.  Carbon controls and climate change narratives really makes them happy.  And, promoting trans-trenders and gender fluidity makes them ecstatic.  Each participating company gets it's own ESG rating and the more woke they go, the higher their rating climbs and the more money they can get.

The list of companies heavily involved in ESG includes some of the largest in the world, with influence over thousands of smaller businesses.  The ESG rating system is much like the social credit scoring system used in communist China to oppress the citizenry.  The tactic is pretty straightforward – Banking elites are centralizing control of social narratives by incentivising businesses to embrace social justice and globalist ideals.  They control who gets the money and anyone who doesn't play ball will be at a distinct disadvantage compared to companies that do.  

They figure, if the corporate world can be pushed to go full woke, then this will trickle down to the general public and influence our behaviors and thinking.  Except, it hasn't exactly worked out that way.  Resistance to woke propaganda is growing exponentially and many of these companies are losing a huge portion of their customer base.  They cannot survive on ESG alone.               

 

The thing is, even ESG money has limits.

With central banks around the world now raising interest rates these kind of loans will become more expensive and will likely start to phase out.  This is why the most woke corporations out there are also some of the most desperate for revenues this year, and why many of these companies are edging closer and closer to mass layoffs.  The venture capital is gone and the ESG money is going to dry up also unless rates go back to zero and the bailout firehose is turned back on.  Getting woke was once a backdoor tactic of gaining easy wealth.  Now, getting woke really does mean going broke.

What Is ESG? It's A Leveraging Tool For The Woke Communist Takeover

The ESG Narrative Is A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing

https://www.zerohedge.com/crypto/esg-narrative-wolf-sheeps-clothing

ESG seems like a positive way to protect the environment on a surface level, but a deeper examination reveals a more sinister path to totalitarianism.

 

Environmental, social and governance (ESG) is an approach to evaluate companies or countries based on their alignment with these three factors. Growing in popularity in recent years, ESG has become a globally adopted framework and a focal point of capital allocation. The concept sounds harmless on paper since most people are good and want to advance environmental or social issues. Even better if we can do it through investments. However, introducing a monetary reward for ESG's disciples introduces a whole new set of incentives that have likely not been thoroughly examined by the investment community.

There is more than meets the eye. The ESG evaluation process is arbitrary, opaque and centralized, leaving significant room for corruption. It is also suspicious that one of the key proponents of ESG is the BlackRock CEO, Larry Fink. BlackRock is the world's largest asset manager managing more than $10 trillion, and Mr. Fink's lifestyle reflects that. He enjoys flying private to Davos, relaxing in his Aspen mansion and telling you to reduce your carbon footprint.

Digging deeper into ESG reveals a more sinister plan. While we want to be good stewards of the planet, we quickly learn that the globalists' proposal for doing so is quite ominous and also illegitimate. ESG is a vital component of the agenda to consolidate capital and centrally plan the allocation of resources, destroying the remains of the free market in the process. Let's dig a bit deeper.

 

ESG is more than an approach to evaluating investments; it is a social credit system similar to the one that exists under the Chinese Communist Party. Similar to a credit score that determines one's eligibility for loans based on their past ability to service debts, a social credit system is a more invasive analysis and determines access to not only financial services, but also public services, such as public transportation or grocery stores. For instance, China's social credit system seeks to compile digital records of citizens' social and financial behavior to calculate a personal rating that determines what services they are entitled. Per the Wall Street Journal, the official Chinese social credit system incorporates loan repayment, credit card bills, adherence to traffic rules, adherence to family-planning limits and “reliability” of information posted or reposted online, among other factors. In addition to the official inputs, social credit incorporates political dissidence, personal values and online speech into each person’s score. Someone's beliefs, political views and online behavior determine their ability to access services such as insurance and banking, school admissions, internet services, social services and job eligibility.

Social credit is a system that determines access to goods and services at an individual level, while ESG determines a corporation's ability to access capital. Ultimately, rather than a company delivering a product or service that the market demands, companies succeed based on their ability to compromise values and incorporate an ESG agenda. On an ESG standard, success is no longer based on delivering products and services to the market but on allegiance to the ruling class. ESG is a return to the monarchical model, allowing an elite few to allocate capital to causes that further enrich them in the name of “social good.”

Not only does the ESG system consolidate capital to the ruling class, but it is also effective at destroying wealth on a country-wide scale. For example, Sri Lanka's ESG score was 98.1 ahead of its collapse. World Economic’s research explains the score. A high Emissions Index (close to 100) indicates a low environmental impact for the country. The Emissions Index is based on the equal weighting of carbon and methane emissions.

Sri Lanka's collapse is due in some part to the government's decision to force farmers to switch from chemical fertilizers, which use natural gas as a key input, to organic fertilizer in April 2021. This mandate reduced crop yields and has led to less food, resulting in Sri Lanka depleting its foreign currency reserves in order to import food. In two years, Sri Lanka's foreign currency reserves were depleted from $7.6 billion in 2019 to $50 million by the end of 2020, a roughly 99% decrease. All the while, the country had $81 billion in debt and food prices have nearly doubled.

If anything, the ESG score teaches us that it can be a counter indicator to a country's economic health, indicating a lack of food and reliable energy. Another recent ESG development was the Netherlands government's recent announcement of their plans to cut emissions of nitrogen by 50% by 2030 and Canada’s proposal for cutting fertilizer emissions by 30%. In the Netherlands, the scapegoat is livestock and a reduction in herd size will render many farmers bankrupt, increasing food insecurity globally and making beef artificially scarce. By succumbing to the pressures of ESG, companies and countries do not prosper, they crumble. Rather than lifting all tides, they sink all ships.

At a corporate level, the ESG scheme is feasible because the stock market, namely passive investing, has been promoted as the best way to build wealth, especially in the U.S. Passive vehicles such as exchange-traded funds have been championed by BlackRock and other companies. for their simplicity and have seen a massive growth in demand in the past decade. However, the unspoken consequence of passive investing is that the shareholder voting rights are now concentrated with these behemoth asset managers, which use the votes to implement their ESG agenda. The ESG cronies are appointed to board positions and management roles, destroying the remains of capitalism. Rather than delivering shareholder value and increasing aggregate wealth, companies are forced to focus on “stakeholder capitalism,” translating to woke capitalism. Companies must succumb to Marxist ideologies to maintain a connection to the monetary window. ESG is a social credit system masquerading as a “social good.” A new form of crony capitalism, one based on allegiance to the globalists and masked as a virtuous cause.

The root cause of Marxism spreading throughout the capital allocation process is the debt-based fiat money. Because inflation is programmed into our money, savers are forced to invest in Wall Street products to preserve their purchasing power. The inflationary currency monopolized by central banks is a problem that Wall Street is eager to solve and their solution allows them to use the shareholder voting power to push the ESG agenda. The need for a savings technology independent from depreciating fiat currency and Wall Street’s financial products is obvious.

Enter Bitcoin, a savings technology that will free us from the globalists’ attack vectors, including ESG. By restoring the base layer of civilization with sound money technology, Bitcoin enables us to save for the long term. There is no need for Wall Street products on a bitcoin standard since there is no central authority, such as the Federal Reserve, diluting the supply. Bitcoin is programmatically scarce. There will only ever be 21 million bitcoin and the monetary policy is fully transparent and inelastic to changes in demand. Just as gold was selected by the free market as money due to its salability across space, so too is bitcoin being adopted as savings technology. There is a growing demand for sound money as fiat currencies trend toward zero. As demand grows over time and supply issuance decreases, the price will go up. Bitcoin is the savings technology that humanity needs to prosper.

Before people point out the obvious, it is worth addressing that bitcoin's price is volatile. Bitcoin's price does decrease in dollar terms because of the instability of the fiat financial system. However, bitcoin is only 13 years old and not yet a unit of account. As understood well in the bitcoin and Austrian economics space, money follows an adoption curve: first as a collectible, then as a store of value, next as a medium of exchange and finally as a unit of account. Bitcoin's predecessor, gold, went through this monetization process over thousands of years. Bitcoin's adoption is progressing much faster. As it advances in the monetization process, it will become more stable in dollar terms. Just remember that it is always stable in bitcoin terms; 1 bitcoin = 1 bitcoin.

To conclude, the restoration of sound money as the base layer of civilization removes theft from the monetary system. Unlike central bankers that devalue your savings and force you to speculate on Wall Street products to preserve purchasing power, bitcoin exists as an alternative to store value through space and time, defunding the Cantillonares and destroying ESG in the process.

The ESG Narrative Is A Wolf In Sheep's Clothing

World Government at the Door

https://www.hallindsey.com/ww-4-10-2022/

 

On March 29th and 30th of 2022, global elites gathered for the World Government Summit in Dubai. They talked about working with individual governments in a variety of areas. But make no mistake. Their goal is in their name. They want world government.

 

The Bible speaks of Antichrist and the False Prophet taking control of the planet by seizing the financial system. This year’s World Government Summit expressed the same idea. 

 

American economist Dr. Pippa Malmgren said, “What underpins a world order is always the financial system…. And what we’re seeing in the world today, I think, is we are on the brink of a dramatic change where we are about to—and I’ll say this boldly—we’re about to abandon the traditional system of money and accounting, and introduce a new one. And the new one, the new accounting is what we call blockchain. It means digital, it means having an almost perfect record of every single transaction that happens in the economy.”

 

The context proves that she’s talking about a “world order.” Therefore, she must be referring to every single transaction in the world economy. “What underpins a world order,” she said, “is always the financial system.” She says “boldly” that, “We’re about to abandon the traditional system of money and accounting, and introduce a new one.” 

 

If you want to remake a civilization, remake its financial system. And that’s what they’re trying to do—not for a single civilization, but for the whole world. It will ultimately lead to the “mark of the beast,” and the totalitarian world system necessary to enforce it.

 

She says that the new money will be based on the blockchain technology that now underpins digital currencies such as Bitcoin. She then makes an important distinction between present digital currencies and future ones. “This new money,” she says, “will be sovereign in nature. Most people think that digital money is crypto, and private. But I see our superpowers introducing digital currency. The Chinese were the first, the US is on the brink, I think, of moving in the same direction. The Europeans have committed to that as well.”

 

According to the Atlantic Council, at least 91 countries are already developing digital currencies. At first, this new kind of money will augment cash. But globalists admit that their real goal is to supplant cash entirely. Digital currencies will not stop terrorists, tax cheats, or other criminals until such currencies completely replace cash and fully interconnect. Unlike Bitcoin, government versions of digital currencies will not be private, and their users will not be anonymous.

 

Like all digital data, the new currencies will be made of zeroes and ones, and interpreted by machines. For that reason, “digital euros,” “digital dollars,” and the others can easily be made to work together as a single currency. With that, world elites will have achieved the goal Dr. Malmgren states so well. They will have “an almost perfect record of every single transaction that happens in the economy.” 

 

And when they implement their system globally, they will have a “record of every single transaction that happens in the economy” of the entire planet.

 

We find this high-tech scenario in a document written over 1,900 years ago. Revelation 13:17 (NKJV) describes it like this: “No one may buy or sell except one who has the mark or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.” A person will not be allowed to buy or sell unless he can access the global grid of digital money. And when the Antichrist reigns, only those who carry his mark will have that access.
 

The Hal Lindsey Report