How are the UN Sustainability Goals Going? Goal 2 of 17.
Tim O’Connor – Center for the Preservation of Humanity
3//2022
The seventeen United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are the goals of the Great Reset. The SDGs were adopted in 2015 by United Nations’ Department of Economic and Social Affairs. The cover for the SDGs were that they would provide relief for disabled peoples by 2030 according to Agenda 2030. To fully understand Agenda 2030, a review of Agenda 21 should be undertaken, which I will not do here. In this article I will focus on the 2nd SDG:
End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
Ending hunger, achieving food security, and improving nutrition for every one on earth is a laudable ambition. And that is where the idea stops being laudable. Since 2015 there are more hungry people in more places, food is less secure, and nutrition is completely absent for millions of people. ‘Sustainable agriculture’ is a huge reason for this.
The UN’s targets and indicators to end hunger, achieve food security, improve nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture are:
“2.1 By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round
“2.2 By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older persons
“2.3 By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment
“2.4 By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality
“2.5 By 2020, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and their related wild species, including through soundly managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the national, regional and international levels, and promote access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed
“2.a Increase investment, including through enhanced international cooperation, in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension services, technology development and plant and livestock gene banks in order to enhance agricultural productive capacity in developing countries, in particular least developed countries
“2.b Correct and prevent trade restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets, including through the parallel elimination of all forms of agricultural export subsidies and all export measures with equivalent effect, in accordance with the mandate of the Doha Development Round
“2.c Adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets and their derivatives and facilitate timely access to market information, including on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food price volatility”
I’m going to break these down one-by-one.
“2.1 By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round[.]”
In 2019, $4.82 billion dollars were given to feed people who cannot feed themselves in a program administered by The United Nations Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with the assistance of 24 countries called the Development Assistance Committee (DAC). In 2015 that figure stood at $3.28 billion. To try to give perspective on this, in 2015 a pound of rice cost $0.669 and in 2019 a pound of rice went for $0.801. That equates to 4.9 billion pounds of rice in 2015 and 6 billion pounds in 2019. That would be over half a pound of rice for every human on earth.
Of course, this doesn’t cover all 8 billion people on earth, only those who are in places without food. That is, DAC aid addresses about 690 million people or a little over 7.1 pounds of rice a year. Obviously that won’t feed a person for a year. It certainly wouldn’t be nutritious.
As for the percentage of those who are food insecure, meaning those people who are not sure where their next meal will come from, from 2015 to 2019 it grew from 22.766% to 26.576%. In 2020, the first year of the demonic mandates, that figure shot up to 30.382%. Likewise, the number of undernourished people in the world began ticking up between 2017 – 2019 and grew from 8.4% to 9.9% between 2019 and 2020. The money is going somewhere, but it is not ending up buying food to feed people who are starving to death.
Alleviating hunger seems to imply that starvation deaths will dramatically decrease around the globe as well. It’s estimated that about 9 million people, including millions of children, die from starvation each year. That has remained pretty constant throughout the duration of the SDGs being in place. In 2020, that number was projected to double (which is a conservative projection).
If people die of any cause, including starvation, they are no longer hungry. They are dead. The United Nations is designed to initiate a one-world government, and the entities that fund it have no use for any of us, especially those already half-starved to death. So their solution seems to be let them starve to death while making the rest of the world hungrier and hungrier. The UN will use COVID-19 to demand more money for aid to those who are destitute; however, if this first goal is any indicator, no amount of money will be able to put food in hungry bellies as someone is stealing the resources needed to procure it.
“2.2 By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition, including achieving, by 2025, the internationally agreed targets on stunting and wasting in children under 5 years of age, and address the nutritional needs of adolescent girls, pregnant and lactating women and older persons[.]”
Five million children under 5 years-old died in 2020. That is a tragically high number. Between 2015 and 2019 an average of about 73 million abortions a year occurred worldwide. That is an absolute abomination. Taken together, there are FAR too many children dying in this world. The only sliver of good news is that the rate of under 5 years-old children dying has shrunk by nearly one million between 2015 and 2019.
The SDG’s did not produce the decrease. It is clear from the above that the SDGs did nothing to stem hunger. Being as though “almost half” of of the deaths in children under 5 years-old are accredited to malnutrition, the UN cannot claim a victory here. “Diseases, including diarrhea, meningitis, pneumonia, malaria, and tetanus” were the culprit of under 5 years-of-age deaths in 2015. Immediate breast feeding, access to nutrition and micronutrients, parental recognition of problems, and clean water to drink are imperative to decrease child mortality. Hydroxycloroquine, in combination with adequate zinc intake is administered very cheaply and widely to prevent malaria. Ivermectin has been shown to help prevent certain pneumonias. The death rate of children under 5 can be further reduced. The United Nations and it’s friends refuse the very validity of any of this because they want us and our children mutilated, sterilized, and/or dead.
“2.3 By 2030, double the agricultural productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers, in particular women, indigenous peoples, family farmers, pastoralists and fishers, including through secure and equal access to land, other productive resources and inputs, knowledge, financial services, markets and opportunities for value addition and non-farm employment[.]”
According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), agricultural productivity on small-scale farms is significantly lass than on large-scale farms. Small-scale farmers also earn less than their large-scale competitors, and women-owned small-scale farms still earn less than male-owned small-scale farms according to the FAO.
This goal is not being met. And the United Nation’s even attempting to meet this goal only dictates one outcome – food prices must rise. The inputs required to produce twice as much food will dictate a rise in food prices to cover the costs of the inputs. The incomes of these farmers will rise, yet so will their costs, so unless small-scale farmers begin to charge double their prices, they will not double their incomes from farming. Having all farmers growing the same crop deciding to fix the price is one way to achieve this. Another way would be to intentionally produce less of the product which will drive prices higher. Either way – food prices rise, and more people will slowly slip into poverty.
Mao Zedong attempted to give access to land to his favorite ‘farmers’. The result was tens of millions starved to death. Nothing will change under the United Nations’ version of Mao’s Great Leap Forward except the number of those who starve to death. The final phrase of target 2.3 is very telling – stop farming and do something else. That was key in Mao’s Great Leap Forward. Millions of people were displaced from their farms and forced to work in labor intensive industrial capacities, while farmers had backgrounds in such fields as economics, political science, and affiliation with the Communist Party.
I am in no way suggesting that small-scale farmers shouldn’t expand. What I am suggesting is they do this based on their own ability to do so, not because the UN or their government is handing out ‘free’ money.
“2.4 By 2030, ensure sustainable food production systems and implement resilient agricultural practices that increase productivity and production, that help maintain ecosystems, that strengthen capacity for adaptation to climate change, extreme weather, drought, flooding and other disasters and that progressively improve land and soil quality[.]”
UNEP defines sustainable farming as “farming that meets the needs of existing and future generations, while also ensuring profitability, environmental health and social and economic equity. It favours techniques that emulate nature–to preserve soil fertility, prevent water pollution and protect biodiversity.” They continue on to explain that sustainable farming uses 56% less energy, creates 64% less greenhouse gases, and promote biological diversity. And then comes the truth of sustainable farming. “It may be more costly because it is more labour-intensive. It is often certified in a way that requires it to be separated from conventional foods during processing and transport. The costs associated with marketing and distribution of relatively small volumes of product are often comparatively high. And, sometimes, the supply of certain sustainably produced foods is limited.” The UNEP is telling all of us that higher-priced food and limited supplies are just fine with them.
If this target is achieved, people around the world will be hungry in numbers so great there will be massive food riots. Cannibalism will be even more rampant than it already is. Grocery stores and food markets will be robbed at gun point.
The UN isn’t the only organization supporting this outcome. Theresa Ghilarducci writing in Bloomberg News put it much more poignantly and repulsively. Give up meat and eat beans and lentils instead, let your pets die, and ride the bus. Oregon is currently trying to criminalize the slaughter of animals by classifying it as aggravated abuse and artificial insemination as sexual abuse on ballot initiative IP13. A radical nut-job, David Michelson, is behind this, and he really doesn’t care about whether we eat or not, nor whether Oregon ranchers can continue to operate.
In 2015, when the SDGs were implemented, the World Economic Forum (WEF) published and article titled Food: How Much Does the World Need by Tristan Stuart. “But dramatically increasing total global food production isn’t the answer. To sustainably feed a planet of 9 billion, we must waste less food and curb per capita consumption of meat and dairy in those countries that already consume too much.” Specifically, we shouldn’t eat meat anymore, in Tristan’s opinion, supported by the WEF. And the WEF doubled down on this by proclaiming the new diet under the Global Reset will feature insects. “‘Insect farming is set to play a growing role in our lives — especially in our diets,’ the WEF states.” The WEF continues, “‘They are rich in protein, healthy fats, and vitamins, and can be farmed at scale with minimal footprint.’”
And that is exactly what the world will get under SDG target 2.4.
“2.5 By 2020, maintain the genetic diversity of seeds, cultivated plants and farmed and domesticated animals and their related wild species, including through soundly managed and diversified seed and plant banks at the national, regional and international levels, and promote access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, as internationally agreed[.]”
In Svalbard, an island about midway between Norway and the North Pole, there is a seed bank. It holds 1,081,026 types of seeds. In the rest of the world there are over 1,700 seed banks. The Netherlands’ Certre for Genetic Resources houses sperm, embryos, oocytes, and DNA from multiple varieties of cattle, pig, horse, goat, sheep, dog, duck, goose, rabbit, and poultry. There were thousands of locations of genebanks which existed in even in 2000. What these places have and are accumulating is DNA.
Being as though the UN is entirely devoid of anything resembling Biblical truth, choosing to believe in Humanism, humans are merely an evolution of monkeys. The DNA collected is ours too. The NIH, for example, operates GenBank, which is a collection of annotated publicly available human DNA. GenBank is merely the US part of an international consortium called the International Nucleotide Sequence Database Collaboration which includes the DNA DataBank of Japan and the European Nucleotide Archive.
Did you take a COVID-a9 test? These people have your DNA. 23 And Me? These people have your DNA. It’s stored in a DNA bank. It is internationally shared. This type of stuff is a major part of current events. The illegal biological laboratories in Ukraine were working on race-specific and ethnic-specific weapons to target Russians. Collecting, storing, and researching on DNA can be used to create biological weapons tailored to individuals. Strokes and heart attacks are not generally viewed as homicides, but they should be. If a world leader is executed by a bullet, it’s obvious homicide, if they fall ill and have a stroke, it’s not so obvious.
More ominous than even the threat of execution by a biological weapon is the threat of replacement by a clone. These types of DNA-banks open up the potential to clone any living thing on earth. What will happen when the world-controllers decide to start cloning our leaders? All these monsters would need to do is clone about two dozen children at birth the who the monsters think will rise to prominence, psychologically program the clone from birth, kill the real person, insert the clone, and all of a sudden every single leader anywhere – business, industry, world councils, world leaders, are all of the same mind. All it would take is about 20 years of this. Dolly the sheep was cloned publicly in the middle of 1996…. I’m just saying the potential exists. It wouldn’t take all world leaders, only about 100.
The UN is proposing this as a goal in and of itself. They devoted a whole chapter to this issue in Agenda 21. Destiny Lab wrote a song called Robophobia and sums up the UN’s desires well, “We're seeing an exponential growth in all machines and innovations. As technology surpasses and exceeds our limitations. Implications could be serious….”
“2.a Increase investment, including through enhanced international cooperation, in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and extension services, technology development and plant and livestock gene banks in order to enhance agricultural productive capacity in developing countries, in particular least developed countries[.]”
More people are going hungry. The hungry are hungrier. The hungriest are dying of starvation. It seems like the UN is literally in a race for the hungriest to die so they can be replaced with the hungrier. Those trends are being exacerbated by the scams certain globalists are shoving down our throats. The UN is standing aside, pointing fingers at the numbers, not the culprits, allowing this evil to persist, in effect abetting the evil. All they want to do is spend money that isn’t theirs while giving any money they do get to enhance efforts to erase any middle class and to cull the poorest by not giving them what they need, food and clean water. And they want to include ALL of the nations of the world in this effort.
“2.b Correct and prevent trade restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets, including through the parallel elimination of all forms of agricultural export subsidies and all export measures with equivalent effect, in accordance with the mandate of the Doha Development Round[.]”
The UN wants free trade for food. They want free trade and all of its implications in every area, however, they limited this suggestion to only food in this target. It is a psychological tactic. It’s a camel sticking it’s nose under the tent.
The Doha Development Round is seriously one of the most hypocritical things I have ever read which serves to show the bias of the UN. Doha trashes on any nation which give subsidies to farmers. At the same time the UN is talking out of the other side of it’s mouth demanding social protections to the poor, which includes farmers in other nations. Would this not be a farmer’s subsidy? The UN is asking for all the money in the world to give to farmers around the world to convert to sustainable methods (as they define). Any nation which is well-to-do which has their agricultural output under control is a target the UN wants to destroy. And that destruction will result in the same systems that were destroyed in other nations which are less well-to-do.
“2.c Adopt measures to ensure the proper functioning of food commodity markets and their derivatives and facilitate timely access to market information, including on food reserves, in order to help limit extreme food price volatility”
Target 2.b explicitly states that food prices will rise, especially in nations which incorporate subsidies for their farmers by removing those subsidies. This target, 2.c, explicitly states that when those food prices go up, the UN is ready and willing to ban derivative markets, set quotas for food reserves, and engage in price fixing. The effects will be treacherous for the first world and murderous for the Lest Developed Countries. Each of these three is a Communist tactic to break a nation. When people are hungry and starving they are far easier to lead around by the nose. The United Nations knows this.
Summary
The UN goal of ending hunger, achieving food security and improved nutrition and promoting sustainable agriculture is failing in all areas except one, sustainable agriculture
The agenda is to murder as many people as possible through ‘natural’ causes as possible, term those deaths as due to hunger, climate change, or disease, and, by 2030 to align these goals with reality. Sustainable Development Goal #2 is no exception. They have thrown billions of dollars at the problem of hunger and it has worsened. The UN has responded by demanding more money and more resources go to people which are not familiar with those specific resources or are unwilling to change their agricultural practices. The entire idea of sustainable farming practices does not deal with feeding the 9 billion people expected to be on earth in 2050, it deals with a concept called Gaia which sustains earth, and only earth.
Gaia is a New Age garbage religion which disregards the life living upon it being as though the earth, itself, is alive and conscious and needs no life upon it to continue on. An ancient belief, however, the Humanists are readily accepting of this delusion. “Quite simply, Gaia is life. She is all, the very soul of the earth. She is a goddess who, by all accounts, inhabits the planet, offering life and nourishment to all her children. In the ancient civilizations, she was revered as mother, nurturer and giver of life. It’s she who created and sustained us, and to whom we returned upon death.”
The Complete Jewish Bible, Genesis 1:1-2 - “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was unformed and void, darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God hovered over the surface of the water.” There is no Gaia. There is no Humanist. There is only God.
Further, in Genesis 1:24-31, “God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth each kind of living creature -each kind of livestock, crawling animal and wild beast’; and that is how it was. God made each kind of wild beast, each kind of livestock and every kind of animal that crawls along the ground; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind in our image, in the likeness of ourselves; and let them rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air, the animals, and over all the earth, and over every crawling creature that crawls on the earth.’ So God created humankind in his own image; in the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. God blessed them: God said to them, ‘Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air and every living creature that crawls on the earth.’ Then God said, ‘Here! Throughout the whole earth I am giving you as food every seed-bearing plant and every tree with seed-bearing fruit. And to every wild animal, bird in the air and creature crawling on the earth, in which there is a living soul, I am giving as food every kind of green plant.’ And that is how it was. God saw everything that he had made, and indeed it was very good. So there was evening, and there was morning, a sixth day.
The Humanists and Gaia cults miss or outright reject these points in the Bible. They also reject the very simple to understand commands of God in Leviticus. God command humans to not eat sea creatures which have no fins and scales (Leviticus 11:9), the meat of eagles, vultures, osprey, kites, any buzzard, any raven, ostrich, screech-owl, seagulls, any type of hawk, little owl, cormorant, horned owl, pelican, great owl, storks, any heron, hoopoe, or bat (Leviticus 11:13-19). God establishes edible insects as locusts, grasshoppers, katydids, and crickets (Leviticus 11:22). God establishes edible animals as any that chew cud and have a divided hoof (11:3).
All of these are God-given food sources, in addition to plants. That includes, cows, chickens, and a wide variety of fish and birds. But those food sources are exactly what the UN, WEF, Gaia cultists, and animal rights activists are waging war on. With the billions of dollars the UN has received for food aid and the number of still hungry people on earth the UN claims to be taking care of, something is really wrong somewhere along this pipeline. It is not addressed anywhere because the point is to starve to death as many as they can by 2030 and even after 2030 if necessary, which does not look likely.
The people at the United Nations have a Communistic outlook which will result in a Fascistic compromise with the nations of the world in which the UN will operate a totalitarian technocratic dictatorship over the lot of us. If you take no action, I will see you in the Gulag this system is creating, implementing, and expanding unless I get called home prior to our potential date of meeting.
Open a Bible and read it. May God Bless You.
All quotes were found on 3/22/2022 at https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal1 unless otherwise documented.