The United Nations has signed the Pact for the Future. Will the people of the world comply with their Technocratic vision, or chart our own course?
On Sunday September 22nd, the United Nations signed the Pact for the Future on the first official day of the Summit of the Future. The UN also signed two complementary documents, the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration on Future Generations. As The Last American Vagabond (TLAV) has been reporting since July 2023, the Summit of the Future and the signing of the Pact for the Future represent a significant step towards empowering the UN to be a world government.
The Summit of the Future was held at the beginning of the current 79th session of the annual UN General Assembly. The summit has been in the making since at least 2022 after repeated calls by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to shift financial resources to rapidly complete the Agenda 2030 goals set by the UN in 2015.
The United Nations official Summit of the Future website states:
“World leaders adopt a Pact for the Future that includes a Global Digital Compact and a Declaration on Future Generations. The Pact covers a broad range of themes including peace and security, sustainable development, climate change, digital cooperation, human rights, gender, youth and future generations, and the transformation of global governance.”
While the vast majority of the UN's member states voted in favor of the Pact, seven nations voted against the document, including Iran, Russian Federation, Belarus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Nicaragua, Sudan, and Syria. Fifteen countries abstained from the vote.
The UN notes that the Pact for the Future is only the latest step in a long line of moves towards world government, or, as they prefer, "global governance".
"The Pact and its annexes foresee concrete follow-up mechanisms: a high-level review for the Global Digital Compact in 2027, a high-level plenary meeting in 2028 for the Declaration on Future Generations, and a Heads of State and Government meeting at the beginning of the 83rd session of the General Assembly in 2028 for a comprehensive review of the Pact for the Future."
The UN references several other upcoming gatherings as opportunities to "build on the agreements and advance the actions contained in the Pact for the Future". These upcoming meetings including the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development, the Second World Summit for Social Development and upcoming UN Climate Change Conferences.
The completion of the Pact for the Future's goals will require "national-level engagement, implementation and accountability". This should be seen as an indication that individual nation states will now use their national budgets and laws to enforce the aims of the Pact.
Emergency Platforms Dropped from the Final Document
Only days before the signing of the Pact for the Future, the 4th draft of the Pact was released. The 4th version featured noteworthy changes from the 3rd draft, including the removal of references to “Emergency Platforms”. TLAV has been warning that these emergency platforms were one more way for the UN to grant itself powers to direct national responses to perceived crises.
The 3rd draft of the Pact read (emphasis added):
“(a) Present for the consideration of Member States protocols for convening and operationalizing emergency platforms based on flexible approaches to respond to a range of different complex global shocks, including criteria for triggering and phasing out emergency platforms, ensuring that emergency platforms are convened for a finite period and will not be a standing institution or entity.
(b) Ensure that the convening of emergency platforms supports and complements the response of United Nations’ principal organs, relevant United Nations entities, United Nations-coordination entities and mechanisms…”
This section in the final version reads:
“(a) Consider approaches to strengthen the United Nations system response to complex global shocks, within existing authorities and in consultation with Member States, that supports, complements and does not duplicate the response of United Nations’ principal organs, relevant United Nations entities, United Nations- coordination entities and mechanisms, and specialized agencies mandated to respond to emergencies…”
The removal of emergency platforms is significant because it is these platforms which are supposed to be the mechanism by which the UN acts in the event of a declared emergency. The 3rd draft of the Pact claimed that the emergency platforms will only be “convened for a finite period”, and would not be a standing institution or entity with respect to national sovereignty. These statements were likely intended to sway critics of the UN who fear that these emergency platforms will be seized upon and used to grant the UN new legal powers.
Now, rather than emergency platforms, the document is focused on considering ways to “strengthen” UN “system response” to “complex global shocks”.
This removal is a small victory for supporters of national sovereignty and independence.
The UN continues to claim the world is facing “global shocks”. The UN defines “complex global shocks” as events that “have severely disruptive and adverse consequences for a significant proportion of countries and the global population”. These shocks would require a “multidimensional multistakeholder, and whole of government, whole of society response.”
Under “Action 56”, the 4th draft of the Pact for the Future calls for strengthening the “international response to complex global shocks”.
TLAV has previously reported that discussion of “global shocks” and calls for an Emergency Platform are reminiscent to previous calls for the UN to declare a planetary emergency. While the language regarding Emergency Platforms has been removed, it’s important to understand the root of these discussions, and the calls for declaring a Planetary Emergency.
UN-affiliated organizations like the Climate Governance Commission (CGC) have been calling for such a declaration over the last year.
In late November 2023, just before the opening of the UN Climate Change Conference COP28, the Climate Governance Commission released a report titled Governing Our Planetary Emergency. In this report, the CGC continues their advocacy for updating our ideas on governance.
We can trace the call for a Planetary Emergency back to the infamous but obscure group, the Club of Rome. The CGC’s November 2023 report even notes that the belief in a “polycrisis” is “recognized in the work of the Club of Rome Planetary Emergency Project“. This reference to the Club of Rome reveals yet another reason the public ought to be concerned with the push for a planetary emergency and claims of crossing planetary boundaries
The Club of Rome has been calling for declaring a Planetary Emergency since at least 2019 with the publication of their “Planetary Emergency Plan”. The report would be updated in August 2020, after the beginning of COVID1984. The Club of Rome’s Emergency Plan is described as a “roadmap for governments and other stakeholders to shift our societies and economies to bring back balance between people, planet and prosperity”.
Lack of Diverse Opinions at the UN Action Days
In the two days leading up to the official start of the Summit of the Future, the UN held two "Action Days" focused on bringing together "stakeholders" from government, Big Tech, Non-governmental Organizations, and non-profits.
I attended several panels as part of the Action Days at the UN headquarters in New York City. These panels offer more insight into the plans and vision of the UN and their partners.
One panel titled What's Next for Global Governance? focused on the UN's efforts to promote world government under the guise of "global governance" and "multilateralism". The panel featured Maja Groff, from the Climate Governance Commission that I've reported on in recent months. Groff is also a member of the Global Governance Forum with extensive connections to the technocrats, including the Rockefeller Foundation who helped finance the work of the CGC. This makes perfect sense when you recall that in 2023 the Rockefeller Foundation made it clear that the climate agenda was their new focus.
Another panel titled Mutlistakeholder Dialogue on National Digital Health Transformation was described as "supporting equitable health systems of the future, raising awareness of the role of investment in digital public infrastructure, and digital health solutions". The term "digital public infrastructure" (DPI) is becoming increasingly popular in globalist circles as part of the overall push towards the digital ID scam. The goal of using digital IDs for healthcare was advanced in the summer of 2023 when the World Health Organization and the European Commission agreed on plans to roll out digital health certificates in the post-COVID1984 world.
Several speakers on the panel mentioned Estonia as an example for nations which have already shifted their legal infrastructure towards digital platforms. Estonia was one of the first places to shift towards a completely digital society and has been promoted as an example for the rest of Europe.
One panel called Truth, Trust, and Hope in the Global Governance Information Environment focused on "global trends in AI and social media, and how to advance human rights and the SDGs with information integrity". The panel featured members of the International Panel on the Information Environment and was a thinly veiled effort to advance censorship efforts for digital platforms. TLAV will be investigating the International Panel on the Information Environment in future articles.
Finally, several panels focused on the financial goals of the Summit of the Future and the Pact for the Future, namely creating new financial instruments to rapidly advance the 2030 Agenda. Panels included Tapping into Innovative Financing instruments to Accelerate the Sustainable Development, and How can Parliaments Help Close the SDG Financing Gap.
The goal of reforming the international financial system to fund the SDGs and Agenda 2030 mimic statements by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres calling for a “new Bretton Woods moment”, referencing the infamous 1944 international agreement which established the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
These calls mirror similar ones made during the “Summit for a New Global Financing Pact” held in Paris, France in June 2023. The Summit, led by French President Emmanuel Macron, welcomed 50 heads of state, representatives of NGOs, and civil society organizations to discuss the effort to reset the international financial system as part of the continued push towards the 2030 Agenda and Net Zero goals.
Overall, these panels detailed plans for advancing global governance/multilateralism, digital health, digital IDs, fighting misinformation, and remaking the financial architecture of the world.
The Action Days were exactly what I anticipated -- lots of buzzwords thrown around by people who may have positive intentions for the world. Yet not once was a contrary opinion expressed nor did anyone mention the possibility that, perhaps, the people of the world do not consent to the UN's goals.
The groups and individuals who follow the UN and attend events like this are ostensibly seeking solutions for the world's problems. Unfortunately, they have been misled as to the true nature and purpose of the UN -- establishing a one world government which overrides national and individual sovereignty.
The vast majority of the people are not even aware of the Summit of the Future and the Pact for the Future. Those who do know of it, likely learned about if AFTER the documents were signed.
This lack of consent is one of the major reasons I co-founded The People's Reset movement (formerly The Greater Reset). Our gathering focuses on solutions for some of the same problems the United Nations identifies, but rather than promoting top-down centralized "solutions" we promote grassroots actions and strategies that can be taken by individuals and communities in a voluntary fashion.
Where the UN believes it has the mandate to act for the world and speak for the people of the world, as they attempt to enact their Technocratic tyranny, the solutions-focused movement believes we can change the world on a voluntary basis and still respect consent of the people.
Ultimately, regardless of what the UN signs or declares, we do not have to obey their edicts. We can choose non-compliance and reject their demands.
Most importantly, we must chart our own course. This truly is an ideological battle, and the fact remains that the UN is funded, organized, and supported by most of the world's governments and corporations. They host in-person events, release white papers, and propagandize the masses into believing they are the best tool for dealing with issues which impact the entire planet.
At the end of the day, if we the people choose to do nothing but complain on the internet we will be swept up in the UN/WEF/Club of Rome/ Bilderberg etc. vision of 2030 and beyond. Instead of accepting their dystopian vision, we must put time and energy into our own visions of the future.
Join us in Bath, UK for The People's Reset: UK from September 27 to 29th to learn tips, strategies, and solutions you can use in your life. Watch the livestream for free by registering at ThePeoplesReset.org.