Green Agenda Means Famine; Stop It with Science and National Sovereignty

by Marcia Merry Baker

[Print version of this article]

Dec. 14—As of the close of 2021, the coming year’s world food crops are projected to be seriously down. The 2022 wheat harvest alone is predicted to drop 10 million metric tons from last year, and other grains and staples likewise. At the same time, a record 45 million people are at the brink of starvation, and 800 million lack reliable daily food.

Clearly, an agriculture mobilization is in order, with major nations collaborating on what to do. Instead, farmers in the world’s leading food belts—India, Europe, America and elsewhere, are forced to protest just for the right to be able to produce food. For the third year in a row, there are tractors in the streets in Germany.

This crisis is the result of the Green agenda coming in on top of the breakdown of the decades-long casino monetarist system that has depended on balloons of debt and bail-outs for favored mega-financial entities, all the while blocking productive investment, especially in water, power, and other infrastructure essential to agriculture. The financial and “green” networks perpetrating the world food crisis are one and the same. They have built up mega food-control cartels.

The brand names of these cartels in the food chain are now infamous, as are names ranging from Cargill to Walmart, Danone, McDonald’s, and the like. The green networks also include Goldman Sachs, various hedge funds, the billionaire and royalist class, and their long-standing front groups—World Wildlife Fund, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), and others, whose provenance dates back to the eugenics movement between the two world wars. They have put forward “nature-based agriculture,” “carbon farming,” “climate resilient non-meat diets” and other Malthus-memorial campaigns, as part of their maneuvers to shunt any remaining money flows into their own green finance swindles, while farmers and ranchers are ruined, and people die en masse.

We have the power to stop this. We can act through the sovereignty of national governments to restore nation-serving banking and credit, and independent farming and food supplies along with industry, for the good of nations, not these Wall Street/City of London green Malthusian globalists. That means restoring science, independent production, and ending fraud and fear.

Green Fraud, Cartel Control

The 1992 Rio Earth Summit is a marker event for institutional green fraud. It was part of the globalization push from the City of London/Wall Street, with the competitor Soviet Union gone, to override national sovereignty. In 1994 came the North American Free Trade Alliance; in 1995, the World Trade Organization; in 1999, the United States repealed the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, furthering worldwide financial and commodity cartels.

At Rio De Janeiro in June 1992, the first Earth Summit (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development) launched two ongoing “conventions” of nations: the “global warming” track—later called “climate change”; and the “biological diversity” track. The focus of both is that humanity is too numerous and too destructive. A new world eco-order allegedly must restrict human activity from emitting too much greenhouse gas, or the Earth will melt down; and the area occupied by humans must be restricted, or wild species will go extinct. Nations joined what was termed a “Conference of the Parties” (COP) for each track, which held summits over the years since, so that by 2021, the 26th climate summit took place, COP26 in Scotland (November); and the 15th biodiversity summit, COP15, in Kunming, China (October, and mostly virtual).

In spite of the premises for both tracks being completely bogus, in 2015, dozens of nations took the unprecedented step at Paris COP21 of agreeing to provide NDC (Nationally Determined Contributions) plans for how to reduce their output of greenhouse gas emissions, determined erroneously to be CO₂, and accelerate their own nations’ self-destruction for the Chicken-Little goal of holding down the Earth’s temperature rise.

The predictable results are now witnessed in the foreseen worsening electricity and fuel crisis in the trans-Atlantic, after the takedown of coal and nuclear power generating stations, the build-up of reliably unreliable wind and solar, and the deregulation of energy prices. These measures have automatically brought on an emergency in the availability of food. Another Texas Freeze (February 2021) is expected at any time this Winter. Two of our leading grain states—Iowa for corn, and Kansas for wheat—today depend on unreliable wind and solar for half their electricity.

European agriculture is also being hit hard. Farmers can’t afford fuel for planting and harvesting machinery, for drying harvested crops, and for other functions. The big concentrations of greenhouses in the Netherlands are in trouble because owners can no longer afford electricity. The crisis of nitrogen fertilizer is a world-scale disaster. Its feedstock is natural gas, whose price has soared, and whose supply is uncertain, so the cartel fertilizer manufacturers have cut back. Farmers cannot afford or obtain the fertilizer they need for good yields of corn and wheat, assuming they can afford the fuel to apply it.

Even more directly than the energy crisis impact, the green agenda for farming is an attack on modern technology, and a move to ruin farmers and ranchers outright. In September 2021, the U.N. hosted the World Food Systems Summit, instigated by the World Economic Forum, to “achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030,” and promote alignment with “nature.” Neither this confab, nor COP15, nor COP26 even addressed today’s starvation and the ruination of farmers and ranchers. The sustainability of humans on this planet is not one of the goals.

Food Scarcity Laws

In May 2020, the EU “Farm to Fork” Green Deal was enacted. It calls for drastic reductions in farm inputs. Land in agriculture must be cut by 10%; fertilizer use, cut by 20%; pesticide use, cut by 50%; antimicrobials for livestock, cut by 50%. These cuts guarantee less food, and more hunger. The U.S. Department of Agriculture cranked through these numbers, and conservatively estimated that food would be eliminated for 185 million people over and above the number now in hunger, if these EU policies were implemented in Europe and internationally.

In September 2020, the UK enacted its new “Agriculture Law,” which has the unprecedented green orientation that farmers’ main function now will be enhancing the environment. Producing food will be secondary. The government will reward or penalize them accordingly.

In January 2021, the newly-inaugurated President Joe Biden issued his Executive Order 14008, with green orders including the now-infamous Section 216, stating that by 2030, 30% of U.S. land and waters must be removed from any human economic use. Given the estimate that about 13% of the land and water are currently under some form of government park or other special use, Section 216—called “30 by 30”—demands new set-asides, threatening agriculture and other productive activity. Some sixty nations have 30 by 30 plans.

In line with this, prior initiatives have been cranked up, to cut back on U.S. farming and ranching, to “save” biodiversity and non-human ecosystems. In Montana, there is a billionaire attempt to create the “American Serengeti.” The project, named the American Prairie Reserve, would bring back bison, and ban cattle and sheep grazing, in an area the size of Lebanon.

Cartel, Green Schemes for Famine

Though not one of the big three 2021 green summits—neither the September UN World Food Systems, the October COP15, nor the November COP26—was a success for their backers, the green financial and depopulation networks are in high gear with new operations against farmers. They charge that agriculture accounts for 12% of all greenhouse gases, so farming must be curbed. The U.S. and European governments are in collusion, refusing to use anti-trust actions against the globalist cartels that are now the green mafia-like enforcers.

For example, in the U.S. meat sector, the government condones a situation in which only a few transnationals account for 85% of all meatpacking—Cargill, Tysons, Smithfield, Marfrig, and JBS. These companies’ net profits have soared 300% during the pandemic so far. Livestock producers have no alternative to get their meat animals processed for consumers. In the northern plains states, Cargill, McDonald’s and the Walmart Foundation have a pilot program to dictate how cattlemen should operate to reduce carbon emissions, called Ranch Systems and Viability Planning (RSVP). Meantime, the same monopoly processors, and green networks are in the lead for green, plant-based “meat” which is not meat. Bill Gates said in February 2021, “I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef.” He said that would cut back on methane emissions, and “You can sort of change the [behavior of] people, or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”

Carbon “credit” trading, underway for years in the EU with the ETS (Emissions Trading System) is now under expansion in more economic sectors in Europe, and is now being pushed on U.S. farmers, including through the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the cartel firms. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack wants carbon trading to start soon and has even proposed diverting money from the CCC—FDR’s Commodity Credit Corporation of the 1930s whose founding purpose was to stabilize prices and availability of food—to fund the new carbon exchange. Cargill has its “Regenerative Agriculture” program in six start-up states, to “quantify carbon outcomes” of how farmers operate to capture carbon in their soils, then pay them a pittance for carbon certificates. Cargill will market this through its RegenConnect program. Farmers are surveilled for compliance through Regrow, a remote-sensing partner firm of Cargill. This is one of many cartel green initiatives.

Biofuels is a longstanding swindle, under the “sustainable” and “green” banners, against the public and farmers alike. First pushed by ADM, Cargill, et al. in the United States under the G.W. Bush Presidency, biofuels have been promoted by every president since. Farmers, most of whom know better, saw no alternative for their corn and soybeans; many started their own biofuel companies. Now, 40% of the U.S. corn crop—which accounts for a third of the world’s harvest—goes for ethanol. Even counting the distilling by-product going into the animal feed chain, it is still a diversion of capacity. So much U.S. soy oil is going for biodiesel, that bakers and food processors are appealing for government intervention because of the shortage of vegetable oils and soaring prices. Internationally, edible oils prices are up over 60% in one year.

The British Crown think tank, the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIAA), puts it bluntly: Depopulation is the goal to save the planet. On Feb. 3, 2021, Her Majesty’s Chatham House (RIIA) issued a paper titled, “Food System Impacts on Biodiversity Loss: Three Levers for Food System Transformation in Support of Nature.” In it they assert that the production of food is harmful, “degrading or destroying natural habitat and contributing to species extinction.” Their three levers to change today’s paradigm are: 1) “change dietary patterns to reduce demand,” for example, cut out meat (if the U.S. switched from beef to beans, they say, this would free up “42% of U.S. cropland for other uses such as ecosystem restoration”); 2) take land out of farming and turn it over to wildlife; and 3) reduce inputs to farming, such as fertilizers.

The Real Metric—Double World Grains

The world food supply needs to be near double what it is now. The world is approaching eight billion people, and by the metric of how much food should be produced, total global production of grains, or cereals of all kinds, should be in the range of 4 billion metric tons. However, for 2021, as in recent years, the total world grains harvest is below 3 billion. Without intervention, global harvests are headed down.

The reasoning for the goal of 4 billion metric tons or more, is the conventional policy-planning assumption that for a well-fed population, half to 60% of a ton of grain should be produced per person. This has been the standard rough metric, for a number of basic reasons. First, the dietary preferences of most cultures in the world relate to one or another of the top grains: e.g., corn in the form of tortillas; wheat in the form of bread, or pasta; rice in the bowl, or noodles, and so on. Scotland still favors oats. The majority of people’s daily calories come from grains. Secondarily, people consume grains in the form of meat, milk, and eggs, from the animal feed chain.

However, instead of a per capita of 0.5 ton or more, today’s level of annual grains output per capita is 0.39 at best. Add to this the well-known fact that outside China, India, and Russia, there is next to no attempt to guarantee adequate food for all peoples, but instead, the “market”—meaning the transnational food cartels—decides who can afford to eat. The entire continent of Africa has been forced to depend on imports for 40% of its grain consumption. In 2022, will it be available at any price?

There are no physical constraints to providing an abundance of food for all. There is, however, a huge backlog of infrastructure to construct, skills to teach, and science and culture to develop. There is also a big need to immediately get emergency food to places of need. But these tasks can be solved. The crisis exists because the cartel control system and the green fraud have been allowed to continue.