The Hidden Agenda of Globalist Agencies: A Call for Awareness
As we dig deeper into the labyrinth of global governance, it becomes increasingly evident that many institutions wield significant influence over national policies, often bypassing the democratic processes that define America. At Extreme Investor Network, we believe it is crucial for our readers to understand how public funds are allocated to globalist organizations that may not align with traditional American values or interests, especially in light of recent global events.
During the pandemic, we witnessed an alarming shift in regulations imposed by unelected officials. These globalist agencies, including the United Nations (UN), have expanded their reach into various aspects of society, threatening our way of life and undermining the sovereignty of nations.
The UN Population Fund: A Closer Look
One of the most significant players in this narrative is the United Nations Population Fund (UNPF), which boasts a mission of providing sexual and reproductive health programs worldwide. With an annual budget surpassing $5 billion, the UNPF has a history that dates back to its founding in 1967, focused on addressing compounding population concerns and their economic implications.
Historically, influential leaders like President Lyndon B. Johnson and strategist Henry Kissinger have guided the conversation around population control, advocating for U.S.-funded humanitarian efforts in developing nations. Kissinger’s NSSM-200 report, subtitled “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests,” remains a controversial cornerstone of the United States’ stance on population reduction as a means to ensure economic stability.
Kissinger powerfully articulated the U.S. interests in resource extraction from less-developed countries (LDCs), citing that “the U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad.” The underlying message is clear: controlling population growth in resource-rich regions is seen as a strategic imperative for U.S. economic security.
A Legacy of Coercive Policies
The UNPF is not without controversy. Its approach includes providing contraceptives and reproductive care, but it has faced significant criticism for alleged human rights abuses, including forced sterilizations and undue political pressure on sovereign nations. For instance, when Zambia resisted legalizing sodomy, U.S. funding was withdrawn, resulting in an immediate spike in the HIV infection rate by 11%.
With a legacy that spans over a century, the conversation around population control has evolved from the First World Population Conference in 1927 to UN-sponsored conferences aimed at imparting demographic controls. Bilateral actions, however, can often carry a whiff of coercion.
The UNPF’s five-step government-implemented family planning model bears a striking resemblance to military planning, emphasizing the identification of threats, resource allocation, personnel assignment, securing funding, and a robust propaganda strategy.
- Identify the threat and its location.
- Identify the tools to be used to neutralize the threat.
- Identify the people who will use these tools.
- Refine the plan and ensure funding.
- Amplify a propaganda framework supportive of the strategy.
Recognizing the Real Threat
The notion that population pressures from LDCs pose a national security threat remains a prevailing theme in U.S. policy. Kissinger observed that “some LDC leaders will see developed country pressures for family planning as a form of economic or racial imperialism,” a sentiment worth considering in the context of U.S. engagement with global strategies.
The aim to “help” these countries often disguises a paternalistic agenda that may not truly prioritize individual welfare or bolster genuine economic development. Instead, it fosters a dependency that may destabilize the local sociopolitical landscape.
The Power Players
Humanitarian agencies, cloaked in a veneer of benevolence, find themselves backed by influential figures like George Soros, Bill Gates, and Klaus Schwab. This flood of funding aids these globalist organizations in their pursuits, often at the expense of local autonomy—raising the question: who truly benefits from this intervention?
The Call to Action
We, as concerned citizens, must scrutinize where our tax dollars are allocated and challenge the influence that these NGOs hold over domestic and international policy. Do we want our representatives funneling resources into organizations that undermine our values and principles?
We believe passionate discourse on these issues is essential. The first step is awareness—knowing how intertwined our interests are with foreign entities and what that means for our collective future. It’s time to demand transparency, accountability, and an end to funding globalist agendas. Join us at Extreme Investor Network as we delve into these critical discussions, empowering you to stay informed and engaged.
Conclusion
The global landscape is evolving rapidly, and so too must our understanding of how intertwined our economies and policies have become with external influences. It’s time for a collective re-evaluation of how we engage with international organizations and to consider a future where American interests are prioritized. Together, we can unravel the complexities of this scenario and advocate for a governance model that truly represents our values.