You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here.
GENEVA, Switzerland (LifeSiteNews) — In a Monday position paper characterizing “climate change” and the “decline of democracy” as joint “global crises,” the World Economic Forum (WEF) argued that adherence to radical climate ideology — including measures to hike up already record-breaking gas prices — is necessary for saving democracy.
“Climate change and the decline of democracy are two global crises that have come to a head in recent years,” wrote Colorado State University Economics professor and WEF “Agenda Contributor” Edward Barbier in the July 11 article.
According to Barbier, “[t]ransitioning to green energy is key to both tackling climate change and creating sustainable economies.”
Skyrocketing gas prices isn’t just some hare-brained Biden idea. It’s the Democrats’ plan. And the World Economic Forum’s plan. They are dead serious. https://t.co/CXmxus2Ovu
— Tara Servatius (@TaraServatius) July 11, 2022
Citing freedomhouse.org, which has described the January 6 Capitol riot as “part of an organized attempt to overturn the results of the  presidential election,” Barbier argued that democracy has declined globally over the past 15 years.
In addition, he asserted that “the world must act now” to keep “global warming” at bay by driving down carbon emissions.
“Major democracies should work together to achieve these two goals,” he said.
The WHO Pandemic Treaty looks set to be one of the biggest power-grabs in living memory, with unelected globalists seeking the power to declare pandemics, and then control your country's response.
But it's not too late to do something about it.
SIGN and SHARE this special petition telling Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that the WHO will never usurp your nation's sovereignty.
The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level.
194 member states representing 99% of the world's population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.
This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations.
SIGN this petition against the WHO's Pandemic Treaty, before it's too late.
Ludicrously, 20 world leaders calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to "dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation - namely peace, prosperity, health and security."
Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.
The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO.
Biden's representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.
These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28 and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed.
SIGN and SHARE the petition telling the WHO that you won't accept any pandemic treaty
The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations "on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response," a U.S. statement read.
"This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive.
"We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multisectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic.
"We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems," the U.S. statement added.
SIGN the petition today to show the WHO that you won't accept this attack on national sovereignty.
These are precarious times in which freedom and self-determination must be defended from those who would ride rough-shod over your civil rights.
We do not want to go back to global lockdowns, vaccine mandates and propoganda.
Sign the petition - speak up now!
For More Information:
Pandemic Treaty is a backdoor to global governance - LifeSiteNews
Dr. Robert Malone on the WHO's power-grab - LifeSiteNews
**Photo: YouTube Screenshot**
“These two aims are not mutually exclusive but complementary,” he said, explaining that “Reducing reliance on fossil fuels and transitioning to low-carbon alternatives also make democratic economies more sustainable.”
The economics professor went on to suggest that governments “end the underpricing of fossil fuels” and impose financial penalties on the fossil fuel industry in a bid to replace traditional fuel sources with “clean energy.”
In addition, “to encourage compliance by other countries,” Barbier advised that “G20 democracies” join the European Union in imposing a “tax on carbon-intensive imports” to make sure companies don’t relocate to countries with less stringent environmental rules.
According to Barbier, “[c]ollective action on a green energy transition is thereby not only good for the climate but also vital for protecting democracy.”
Barbier isn’t the only one arguing for the penalization of the fossil fuel industry to force a switch to “green” energy.
During the World Bank’s “Financing Climate Action” event in April, influential climate economist Baron Nicholas Stern also argued in favor of policies to end subsidies for the fossil fuel industry and put a stop to the sale of vehicles that use internal combustion engines, LifeSiteNews reported.
Likewise, President Joe Biden, who has presided over skyrocketing inflation and historically high gas prices, drew backlash in May when he openly suggested that the high cost of gas was part of an “incredible transition.”
Meanwhile, massive protests sweeping through Europe in recent days suggest that ,contrary to the claims of the WEF, many citizens see climate policies doing the opposite of preserving freedom.
Farmers throughout Europe have engaged in widespread protests against crippling climate measures that could rob them of their livelihoods.
In the Netherlands, thousands of farmers have used their tractors to block off highways and grocery distribution centers to protest a government proposal to cut emissions of nitrogen oxide, ammonia, and other pollutants by roughly 50% by 2030, Fox News reported.
Dutch government data suggests that if enacted, the policy could shut down as much as 30% of livestock farms in the country, The Daily Wire noted.
Backers of the protesters argue that the radical climate policies could hasten global food shortages by artificially hobbling agricultural enterprise.