The globalist-led World Bank issued a report recently that proposes the idea of making drastic cuts to global agriculture production in order to achieve "net zero emissions."
The plot involves centralizing the world's farms in the hands of just a few wealthy individuals who plan to cut almost one-third of the world's greenhouse gas emissions by radically altering the way food is grown.
The report touts the proposed changes in nice-sounding terminology that claims food production will continue in such a way as "to feed a growing population." The reality, though, is that the proposal threatens to eliminate large swaths of agricultural production that in turn could lead to famine and starvation.
"While the food on your table may taste good, it is also a hefty slice of the climate change emissions pie," claims Axel van Trostenburg, a World Bank figure.
The good news is that the global food system can heal the planet – making soils, ecosystems and people healthier, while keeping carbon in the ground. This is within reach in our lifetimes, but countries must act now: simply changing how middle-income countries use land, such as forests and ecosystems, for food production can cut agrifood emissions by a third by 2030."
The end of food
Instead of promoting diverse agricultural practices that local family farmers have been honing for centuries – such practices are good for the environment rather than bad – the World Bank wants to throw the baby out with the bathwater by getting rid of agriculture entirely in some areas.
We are seeing that push in the Netherlands and other parts of Western Europe. And now the World Bank is proposing even more agriculture reductions because it claims the climate is warming from all the food people are growing.
"Action should happen across all countries to get to net zero, through a comprehensive approach to reducing emissions in food systems, including in fertilizers and energy, crop and livestock production, and packaging and distribution across the value chain from farm to table," the World Bank says.
As usual, the globalists are proposing a one-size-fits-all solution to standardize farming practices even though local ecosystems vary widely from place to place. It does not matter to them, though, because the investment returns from their proposal are massive.
"Annual investments will need to increase to $260 billion a year to cut in half agrifood emissions by 2030 and to reach net zero emissions by 2050," the World Bank says.
"Making these investments would lead to more than $4 trillion in benefits, from improvements in human health, food and nutrition security, better quality jobs and profits for farmers, to more carbon retained in forests and soils."
Greed is once again ruling the day, and the shortsightedness of these globalists will spell their own undoing. Once they, too, run out of food, all that money they are stealing will be worthless because there will be no food left for them to buy with it.
"Ultimately, the World Bank’s ambitious project to restructure global agriculture underestimates the risks of unintended consequences, including food shortages, economic disruption, and increased hardship for the most vulnerable," warns Watts Up With That.
"History teaches that centralized interventions in complex systems such as global agriculture often lead to outcomes opposite those intended, driven by a failure to account for the organic and evolved nature of these systems. The portrayal of these interventions as low-risk and high-return is not only misleading but potentially dangerous, paving the way for a future where the global food supply is less secure and more susceptible to the whims of bureaucratic mismanagement."
