Featured post

The Road Ahead for GAIA Earth Sansad – I

What should be a people-led Emergency Response to UN failure to prevent Third World War amidst the unfolding geopolitical crises, bio-fascism and ecological catastrophe

Are we witnessing a specter of mass hypnosis under the guise of Pandemic Control leading to Colony Collapse Disorder, as it happens with bee colonies when they lose their navigation intelligence due to infringement from EMF radiation hazard? This is far more alarming than a conventional Third World War.

GAIA Earth Sansad (GES) is a people-led ‘Emergency Response’ to address the global health and ecological crises that has brought Humanity to the brink of extinction. Its express purpose is to present a suitable alternative of a truly democratic and representative world body that transcends the present maladies created by the abject failure of the prevailing United Nations system.

GES is conceptualised based on nearly two decades of observation and research on the impacts of globalisation and on providing both incremental and transformational solutions to global problems that has evolved as the LACE-GAIA Model. In this model, we also propose a one-time population redistribution to balance human habitats with their natural population carrying capacity for ecologically responsible as well as restorative living. This includes trainer’s training programs and overall capacity building to create win-win for both the skilled migrants and for the host countries.

The need to form a new world body arises from a deep-dive investigation into the role of the United Nations, on how its conduct over this considerably long period betrays its own Charter in over 75 years of its existence:


·  to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

·  to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

·  to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

·  to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom’

Over the past 18 months of the Covid Pandemic, there is clinching evidence of the highly questionable conduct of United Nations, especially its agency World Health Organisation (WHO) raising suspicions about its true intent and moral character.  WHO, whose stated objective is ‘to connect nations, partners and people to promote health, keep the world safe and serve the vulnerable – so everyone, everywhere can attain the highest level of health’ has done just the opposite with ill-informed and misleading Covid Protocols rife with medical malpractice, hiding its real intent of deceptive psychological and biological warfare against the people of all nations, in what is unambiguously a Third World War.  

In such a grim and grave situation, we the co-founders of GAIA Earth Sansad call upon all of Humanity to rise to the occasion. We are looking for suitable candidates as Regional Coordinators / Co-founders from each of the GES Regions that correspond to ~ 600 million population each for a total global human population of ~7.8 billion. Their broad roles and responsibilities are as follows:

1. To propagate the need for GES in their respective regions as an Emergency Response and to further its agenda to stay true to the UN Charter, as shared above.

2. To form a team and set up a Regional Program Office.

3. To appoint CNS Directors for 5-7 sub-regions with a population of ~100 million that form Community of Nation-States in case of smaller countries and of provinces in case of large oversized ones. 

4. To participate in the forthcoming #H13Summit2021 in the month of October.

5. To coordinate grassroots demonstration projects in their region for capacity building and to implement the LACE model.

The Road Ahead

Development of LACE-GAIA model with key salient features as follows: a. Motoring Tracks not Cycling Tracks b. Transform brownfield to greenfield c. In a cradle to cradle approach it not only reduces GHG emissions but create effective Carbon Sinks world over to heal climate and ecological damage d. Appropriate but limited duration use of modern technology in the transition period till Peak Civilization of Sone ki Chidiya is restored.

2001-2021 Development and Attempted Implementation phase
Setting the ground for its  adoption worldwide; Already presented in workshops in 14 states in India and in 6 different countries in past 20 years; 4 international papers on various aspects of LACE-GAIA Model – United Kingdom 2003; Japan, 2004; Singapore 2005; Sweden 2009; United States (Ohio), 2009; Canada 2017; Australia, 2019
Covid Crises as an admission of collapse of modern industrial anti-civilization but leaving large section of human population afflicted by mass psychosis due to prolonged exposure; Blessings in disguise – Creates opportunity to transcend present maladies to a livable equitable and sustainable world and usher towards a holistic and harmonious world order.

2021-2031 First Cultural Revolution
From Car Culture to Cycling Culture with LACE-GAIA model
By 2031 global human population will decrease from 7.8 billion to 6 billion. Many of the avant garde city dwellers will adopt ways as forest dwellers as cities from their very dense core begin to give up cars and turn into forest cities. The projected proportions of global population by 2031 is as follows:
City:1 billion Village: 4 billion Forest: 1 billion

2031-2041 Second Cultural Revolution
From Cycling Culture to Pastoral Culture with LACE-GAIA model
By 2041 Population 6 billion to 5 billion
City: 0.5 billion :: Village 3 billion :: Forest & Pastures 1.5 billion

2041-2061 First Civilizational Leap
Deadstock Civilization to Livestock Civilization (cows goats sheep camel) Pastoral Culture to Forest Culture (Tribal)By 2061 Population 5 billion to 4 billion
City 0.35 billion :: Village 2.65 billion :: Forest 1 billion

2061-2081 Second Civilizational Leap
Augmented Livestock Civilization(Horses, Elephants, Camels…)Forest Culture (Tribal) to Deep Forest Culture (Aranya Sanskriti)
By 2081 Population in steady-state at 4 billion 
City 0.25 billion :: Village 2.5 billion :: Forest 1.25 billion

2081-2100 Peak Civilization and steady-state (Arrival of Golden Era)
Sone ki Chidiya (Restoration of Peak Civilization levels upto 1600 AD as per peer reviewed research for that period and notably the works of Dadabhai Naoroji)
City 0.1 billion :: Village 2.4 billion :: Forest 1.5 billion

1. Agenda For Genuine Progress Sept 2001
2. Current pandemonium due to fatally flawed, filthy rich, polluting industrial civilization, April 2020
3. The Derailment Of Western Civilization – Does It Need A Bail-Out? Oct 2009
4. Importance of indigenous learning to achieve UN goal of combating desertification, drought Oct 2018

contd. The Road Ahead for GAIA Earth Sansad II

For more details, contact:

Chandra Vikash
Convenor – GAIA Earth Sansad
website: www.gaiasansad.org
email: gaiasansad@gmail.com 
mobile: +91 8595397609 (whatsapp/telegram/signal)
twitter: @GSansad
Coalition Partners:
World Council for Health – GAIA Earth Sansad

(With feedback and inputs from our key alliance partners Allama Syed A Tariq, Founder-President of – WORK – https://workglobal.in , Darry D’Souza, Earth Keepers Connect – https://earthkeepersconnect.org and Dr Mark Trozzi – WCH – https://worldcouncilforhealth.org )


Charter for Gaia Nation (Zero Draft for discourse, consensus and ratification)


We, the indigenous peoples of Gaia, Mother Earth:

Considering that we are all part of Gaia, an indivisible, living community of interrelated and interdependent beings with a common destiny;

Gratefully acknowledging that Gaia is the source of life, nourishment and learning and provides everything we need to live well;

Recognizing that all forms of depredation, exploitation, abuse and contamination in the name of ‘development’ have caused great destruction, degradation and disruption of Earth, putting life as we know it today at great risk at the brink of extinction of large number of species, including human beings, through climate and ecological collapse, war and food crises;

Convinced that in an interdependent living community it is not possible to recognize the rights of only human beings without causing an imbalance within Earth;

Affirming that to guarantee human rights it is necessary to recognize and defend the rights of Gaia and all beings in her and that there are existing cultures, practices and laws that do so;

Conscious of the urgency of taking decisive, collective action to transform structures and systems to protect and nurture life on Earth and for peace, prosperity and joy for all in harmony with nature;

Resolve to unite as Gaia Nation for peace, justice, prosperity and joy for all in harmony with nature and with a holistic design to create One World for Many Worlds that respects our diversity of cultures and customs and for human dignity and rights over natural resources of local communities while fulfilling our unity as Gaia Nation;

Proclaim this Charter for Gaia Nation to the end that every individual and institution, including all existing nation governments takes responsibility to promote through teaching, education, and consciousness raising, respect for the rights recognized in this Charter and ensure through prompt and progressive measures and mechanisms, local, regional and global, their universal and effective recognition and observance among all peoples in the world of the Gaia Nation.

Article 1. Gaia, Mother Earth

(1)  Gaia, Mother Earth is a living being.

(2)  Gaia is a unique, indivisible, self-regulating community of interrelated beings that sustains, contains and reproduces all beings.

(3)  Each being is defined by its relationships as an integral part of Gaia.

(4)  The inherent rights of Gaia are inalienable in that they arise from the same source as existence.

(5)  Gaia and all beings are entitled to all the inherent rights recognized in this Charter for Gaia Nation without distinction of any kind, such as may be made between organic and inorganic beings, species, origin, use to human beings, or any other status.

(6)  Just as human beings have human rights, all other beings also have rights which are specific to their species or kind and appropriate for their role and function within the communities within which they exist.

(7)  The rights of each being are limited by the rights of other beings and any conflict between their rights must be resolved in a way that maintains the integrity, balance and health of Gaia.

Article 2. Inherent Rights of Gaia

(1)  Gaia and all beings of which she is composed have the following inherent rights:

(a)  the right to life and to exist;

(b)  the right to be respected;

(c)  the right to regenerate its biocapacity and to continue its vital cycles and processes free from human disruptions;

(d)  the right to maintain its identity and integrity as a distinct, self-regulating and interrelated being;

(e)  the right to water as a source of life;

(f)   the right to clean air;

(g)  the right to integral health;

(h)   the right to be free from contamination, pollution and toxic or radioactive waste;

(i)    the right to not have its genetic structure modified or disrupted in a manner that threatens its integrity or vital and healthy functioning;

(j)    the right to full and prompt restoration for violation of the rights recognized in this Charter caused by human activities;

(2)  Each being has the right to a place and to play its role in Earth for her harmonious functioning.

(3)  Every being has the right to wellbeing and to live free from torture or cruel treatment by human beings.

Article 3. Obligations of human beings to Gaia

(1)  Every human being is responsible for respecting and living in harmony with and as Gaia.

(2)  Human beings, and all public and private institutions, including nation governments, must:

(a)  act in accordance with the rights and obligations recognized in this Charter;

(b)  recognize and promote the full implementation and enforcement of the rights and obligations recognized in this Charter;

(c)  promote and participate in learning, analysis, interpretation and communication about how to live in harmony with Gaia in accordance with this Charter;

(d)  ensure that the pursuit of human wellbeing contributes to the wellbeing of Gaia, now and in the future;

(e)  establish and apply effective norms and laws for the defence, protection and conservation of the rights of Gaia;

(f)   respect, protect, conserve and where necessary, restore the integrity, of the vital ecological cycles, processes and balances of Gaia;

(g)  guarantee that the damages caused by human violations of the inherent rights recognized in this Declaration are rectified and that those responsible are held accountable for restoring the integrity and health of Gaia;

(h)  empower human beings and institutions to defend the rights of Gaia and of all beings;

(i)    establish precautionary and restrictive measures to prevent human activities from causing species extinction, the destruction of ecosystems or the disruption of ecological cycles;

(j)    guarantee peace and eliminate nuclear, chemical, biological and all other weapons causing harm to our body, mind and spirit;

(k)  promote and support practices of respect for Gaia and all beings, in accordance with their own cultures, traditions and customs;

(l)    promote socio-economic systems that are in harmony with Gaia and in accordance with the rights recognized in Charter.

Article 4. Definitions

(1)  The term “being” includes ecosystems, natural communities, species and all other natural entities which exist as part of Gaia.

(2)  Nothing in this Charter restricts the recognition of other inherent rights of all beings or specified beings.

Background Note

This ‘Charter for Gaia Nation’ is adapted from the ‘Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth’ created at the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth held in Cochabamba, Bolivia on April 22, 2010 by the approximately 35,000 participants. With the wide global reach of the internet, we propose a discourse and consensus building for a final draft to be ratified by 22 April, 2023, 13 years after the Cochabamba Declaration on Earth Day along with a formal announcement of Gaia Nation and commencement of the formation of world government.

Indigenous Peoples challenge prevailing Western discourses, such as on human rights and on the normative foundations of the international world order and the UN (Tauli Corpus, 1999). The worldviews of Indigenous Peoples have also challenged the prevalent discourse on sustainable development, calling for recognition and respect of their traditional knowledge and collective rights to use and control the lands and natural resources that they depend on and strive to protect. Indigenous Peoples occupied a prominent role in the preparatory sessions for the 1992 Conference on Environment and Development (Earth Summit) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil (Tauli-Corpus, 1999).

Their lobbying and organizing efforts, which began in Stockholm 20 years earlier, resulted in a wider recognition of Indigenous Peoples in Agenda 21, the programme of action adopted in Rio. In addition to being referenced throughout the 40-chapter action programme, Chapter 26 explicitly called for establishment of a process to empower Indigenous Peoples and their communities through various measures. Chapter 26 also called for the involvement of Indigenous Peoples and their communities at the national and local levels in resource management and conservation strategies to support and review sustainable development strategies. 

Since 1992, Indigenous Peoples have engaged directly in UN processes on sustainable development, including in the Commission on Sustainable Development (1993-2013) and its successor, the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development. At the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in 2012, the outcome document, “The Future We Want,” recognized the importance of the participation of Indigenous Peoples in the achievement of sustainable development.

Indigenous Peoples’ organizations also worked on the sidelines of the sustainable development process adopting a Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth at the World People’s Conference on Climate Change and the Rights of Mother Earth, in Cochabamba, Bolivia, in 2010. This declaration stands in opposition to the green economy and growth narrative, which later underpinned the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the 17 SDGs – Sustainable Development Goals.

Reference: https://www.iisd.org/system/files/2022-04/still-one-earth-Indigenous-Peoples.pdf 

The Travesty of Development

“To keep indefinitely walking on, along a zigzag course of change, is negative and barren. A mere procession of notes does not make music; it is only when we have in the heart of the march of sounds some musical idea that it creates song. Our faith in the infinite reality of Perfection is that musical idea, and there is that one great creative force in our civilisation. When it wakens not, then our faith in money, in material power, takes its place; it fights and destroys, and in a brilliant fireworks of star-mimicry suddenly exhausts itself and dies in ashes and smoke.”
– Rabindranath Tagore in Creative Unity, 1922

‘Development’ is dominantly perceived in the world today as modern technological advancement that creates greater material comforts and ‘quick fixes’ to take us away from an earlier era portrayed as ‘backwardness’. This backwardness of largely the ‘underdeveloped’ and ‘developing’ countries by this definition is marked by poverty, destitution, starvation, deprivation, hunger and mal-nutrition, illiteracy and social evils, disease and large-scale unemployment. In this way, ‘development’ has been heralded as a lofty ideal, where the ‘underdeveloped’ and ‘developing’ countries should catch up with the ‘developed’ countries and the later should keep developing further. In an era in which globalisation has made deep inroads, one of its remarkable successes has been to unite the world with a sweeping consensus it has manufactured across diverse regions on this dominant perception of development. Travesty refers to something that fails to represent the values and qualities that it is intended to represent, in a way that is shocking or offensive.

Like the ‘Covid vaccines’ that are supposed to protect us from a ‘highly dangerous and mutating virus’ that would otherwise cause untold misery of dangerous disease and wipe out the human population, the ‘side-effects’ of the ‘development idea’ have also been widely deliberated. But the benefits of the ‘development idea’ ranging from its purported saving from drudgery of physical labour, savings in time and many other benefits such as greater connectivity, we have been told, far outweigh the ‘side-effects’ just as it has been claimed for the ‘Covid vaccine’. 

Just like the ‘Covid vaccine’, ‘development’ in the aftermath of the Second World War was presented as a panacea for many a ills plaguing the human society, especially for the erstwhile ‘savages’ of the Enlightenment era or the ‘subjects and slaves’ of the Colonial era. They now had a more benign classification as ‘underdeveloped’ and ‘developing’ countries, also clubbed together as Third World and Global South. So wide and popular was its appeal that very soon development was elevated to the status of a new religion and it was made mandatory for every political regime around the world, or they would face the wrath of the newly anointed gods of development and its clergymen. Its adherents traversed diverse ideologies and in most parts of the world, human suffering was equated to lack of this kind of development. To the extent that even more of newer advances of ‘development’ was also considered as the antidote for the ‘side-effects’ even as they kept growing and getting out of control.

‘Negative Externalities’

The disastrous social and ecological impacts of modern materialistic development of comforts and material possessions, for instance have been widely acknowledged for a very long time.These have however, been brushed aside under the carpet as ‘negative externalities’ and the environmentalists demonised, witch-hunted and several killed for being ‘anti-development’ by its loyal adherents. Even when the unbilled costs of these ‘negative externalities’ were acknowledged, it was covered up with a salacious promise that newer technological advancements will bring greater efficiencies and even repair the earlier ecological damage. The scientific warnings that have been issued for at least over 50 years since the Limits to Growth published by the Club of Rome in 1972 have been ridiculed as alarmist and conveniently sidelined under one pretext or another. 

Like a Ponzi bubble that would pass on the liabilities to newer recruits till it hits a dead-end, a large number of people in ‘underdeveloped’ and ‘developing’ countries around the world were hoodwinked and addicted to ecologically destructive energy guzzling and polluting ways of life, through a massive propaganda funded and executed through government machineries in cahoots with an intricate web of multilateral institutions – United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organisation, Food and Agriculture Organisation, World Health Organisations, among others and Multinational Corporations – in an accelerated manner over the past several decades. 

By the beginning of the 21st century, their scandalous claims had busted, leaving humanity in a deep trap of climate and ecological emergency and treacherously pushed to the brink of extinction. The materialistic developmentalists now started blaming the large and growing human population for the climate and ecological crises, even as the data clearly showed that it was the greed and apathy of a small section of pathologically addicted consumers who also wielded considerable influence on policy making that were driving this crisis to the edge of human extinction.  

The Age of Development: An Obituary

Wolfgang Sachs is a researcher, writer and university teacher in the field of environment, development, and globalisation. Sachs is the principal author of Fair Future: Resource Conflicts, Security and Global Justice and Sustainable Germany in a Globalized World, both major studies produced by the Wuppertal Institute. Sachs is also a member of the Club of Rome, a lecturer at Schumacher College and an honorary professor at the University of Kassel, Germany.

In 1992, Sachs wrote a seminal series of essays for the New Internationalist called ‘Development: A Guide to the Ruins’. In this he describes the ‘development idea like a ruin in the intellectual landscape’ and uncovers the foundations of this ‘towering conceit’ to see it for what it is: ‘the outdated monument to an immodest era’. 

Just about when the Covid Pandemic was ‘officially’ discovered, in February of 2020, he wrote an obituary of the ‘development idea’ that he has been researching over several decades. Over a billion vials of the ‘Covid vaccine’ have been injected into the bloodstreams since,  in order to stop a ‘dangerous and mutating virus’ that seems so strikingly similar to what Sachs describes as the mutations of the ‘development idea’.

The concept of development, in his opinion,  lives on – and takes on new shapes as it is reframed by the United Nations, reinterpreted by the Vatican or hijacked by authoritarian populists to serve their own nationalist agenda. But, he argues now, we need to move beyond its misguided assumptions into a new ‘post-development era’ based on ‘eco-solidarity’. 

A brilliant writer, Sachs shares valuable insights that piece together thread by thread, ‘development’ as the final and the most treacherous stage of ‘colonialism’ that has spread its tentacles to far corners of the world. It is safe to conclude by now that ‘development’ has been the greatest and one of the long-lasting ‘con’ in the entire human history. 

Faustian Civilisation in its death throes

Before we delve deeper into Sachs’ commentary on the ‘development idea, we need to take a deeper look into the works of two thinkers spanning over a century – Oswald Spengler and Mattias Desmet – that give us vital clues of how such an elaborate ‘con’ has been possible with the collusion of so many influential people across diverse countries over such a long period of time. 

German philosopher-historian Oswald Spengler wrote about the ‘Faustian’ civilization, a century back in the early Twentieth Century in his two volumes of ‘Decline of the West’ (German: Der Untergang des Abendlandes; more literally, The Downfall of the Occident). The first volume, subtitled ‘Form and Actuality’, was published in the summer of 1918. The second volume, subtitled ‘Perspectives of World History’, was published in 1922. The definitive edition of both volumes was published in 1923.

Spengler introduced his book as a “Copernican overturning”—a specific metaphor of societal collapse—involving the rejection of the Eurocentric view of history, especially the division of history into the linear “ancient-mediaeval-modern” rubric. According to Spengler, the meaningful units for history are not epochs but whole cultures which evolve as organisms. 

In his framework, the terms “culture” and “civilization” were given non-standard definitions and cultures are described as having lifespans of about a thousand years of flourishing, and a thousand years of decline. To Spengler, the natural lifespan of these groupings was to start as a “race”; became a “culture” as it flourished and produced new insights; and then become a “civilization”. Spengler differed from others in not seeing the final civilization stage as necessarily “better” than the earlier stages; rather, the military expansion and self-assured confidence that accompanied the beginning of such a phase was a sign that the civilization had arrogantly decided it had already understood the world and would stop creating bold new ideas, which would eventually lead to a decline. 

For example, to Spengler, the Classical world’s culture stage was in Greek and early Roman thought; the expansion of the Roman Empire was its civilization phase; and the collapse of the Roman and Byzantine Empires their decline. He believed that the West was in its “evening”, similar to the late Roman Empire, and approaching its eventual decline despite its seeming power.

Spengler recognized at least eight high cultures: Babylonian, Egyptian, Chinese, Indian, Mesoamerican (Mayan/Aztec), Classical (Greek/Roman, “Apollonian”), the non-Babylonian Middle East (“Magian”), and Western or European (“Faustian”). Spengler combined a number of groups under the “Magian” label; “Semitic”, Arabian, Persian, and the Abrahamic religions in general as originating from them (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). Similarly, he combined various Mediterranean cultures of antiquity including both Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome as “Apollonian”, and modern Westerners as “Faustian”, which literally means someone who has sold his soul to the devil.. 

According to Spengler, the Western world was ending and the final season, the “winter” of Faustian Civilization, was being witnessed. In Spengler’s depiction, Western Man was a proud but tragic figure because, while he strives and creates, he secretly knows the actual goal will never be reached. The elaborate ‘con’ in this regard is the desperate last flutter of this Faustian Civilization in its death throes.

Mattias Desmet is a Belgian clinical psychologist and professor in clinical psychology at Ghent University. He has a Doctor of Philosophy Psychological Sciences and has a master’s degree in statistics. He has recently authored The Psychology of Totalitarianism.

Desmet argues that society had become individualistic prior to the pandemic, and that there was a lot of “free floating” fear and discontent. He points out, for instance, that huge amounts of antidepressants were prescribed at the time and he refers to the so-called “Bullshit Jobs” – that refers to a book by the same title by anthropologist David Graeber.

This was an ideal breeding ground for Mass Formation psychosis. When the Covid crisis arrived, not only an object of fear (“the virus”) was pointed out by governments and the media, but also a strategy for dealing with this object of fear: “the corona measures”, such as masks, vaccination and social distancing. A “new social bond” was established by the people who came to wage a “war on COVID”. This battle fulfilled their needs for meaningfulness and connection. However, as a result, not only the virus became the common enemy of this new social bond, but also those who did not join in the “war on COVID” or who questioned the government strategy for fighting this war. This is, according to Desmet, because people who ask critical question about the virus and the corona measures, pose a threat to the continuity of this new social bond.

Desmet argues that mass formation is known to have a huge impact on individual’s cognitive functioning; it has similarities with the state of hypnosis He also refers to Hannah Arendt, who described the role of the masses in totalitarianism. For Desmet, this theory is the only explanation why even highly intelligent people don’t question the narrative and the numbers that were in many respects utterly absurd.

In The Psychology of Totalitarianism, Desmet deconstructs the societal conditions that allow this collective psychosis to take hold. By looking at our current situation and identifying the phenomenon of “mass formation”—a type of collective hypnosis—he clearly illustrates how close we are to surrendering to totalitarian regimes. With detailed analyses, examples, and results from years of research, Desmet lays out the steps that lead toward mass formation, including:

  • An overall sense of loneliness and lack of social connections and bonds
  • A lack of meaning—unsatisfying “bullshit jobs” that don’t offer purpose
  • Free-floating anxiety and discontent that arise from loneliness and lack of meaning
  • Manifestation of frustration and aggression from anxiety
  • Emergence of a consistent narrative from government officials, mass media, etc., that exploits and channels frustration and anxiety 

In addition to clear psychological analysis—and building on Hannah Arendt’s essential work on totalitarianism, The Origins of Totalitarianism—Desmet offers a sharp critique of the cultural “groupthink” that existed prior to the pandemic and advanced during the COVID crisis. He cautions against the dangers of our current societal landscape, media consumption, and reliance on manipulative technologies and then offers simple solutions—both individual and collective—to prevent the willing sacrifice of our freedoms.

Connecting the ‘dots’

Connecting the ‘dots’ between Spengler’s Faustian civilisation and Desmet’ s Mass Formation Psychosis, Wolfgang Sachs in February 2020 fills in the blanks with this masterpiece published in the February 2020 issue of New Internationalist titled ‘The Age of Development: An Obituary’, just when the Mass Formation Psychosis around the Covid virus was being manufactured as the last desperate act of the Faustian civilisation in its death throes. Hannah Arendt was prophetic in her proclamation of Totalitarianism as dissipative and self-destructive. Eric Wolff connects the remaining ‘dots’ and traces it back to the venerated Harvard University through its handiwork the World Economic Forum. 

‘Development’ is one of those zombie categories that have long since decayed, but still wander around resembling a worn-out utopia. Apparently buried long ago, the concept’s ghost is still haunting world politics. Despite the huge upheavals in world affairs recently, all of a sudden development appears to have made a comeback.

The new breed of authoritarian leaders are now enthusiastic about development, for example. Yet, with the rise of national populism, the idea of development no longer plays an inspiring, forward-looking role, as it did in the days when nation-states were being decolonized and even at the time of deregulation of global markets. The Trumps and the Bolsonaros, the Erdoğans and Modis of this world still believe in development, in so far as that means large projects, mass purchasing power and unregulated movements for corporations. But, besides being authoritarian and xenophobic, they are declared enemies of the environment.

They promise their followers a roll-back of environmental politics; in fact, they are great fans of the brown economy, rejecting a green alternative. Their image of development is shaped by fossil energy and, more generally, extractivism of natural resources. National populists are nostalgic for the Industrial Age; they are not orientated to the future, but rather to the past.

However, there is a crucial discontinuity in the development agenda of national populists: they are ethnocentric and selfish. From the Second World War until very recently, development, for better or worse, was always conceived as being within the framework of multilateralism. But with the inauguration of Donald Trump as US president, the wind has turned. ‘America First’ is the battle cry of unilateralism. The interests of one’s nation are of primary importance, while those of others are negligible. Trump’s echo resounds, for example, through Matteo Salvini, recently the strong man of Italy: ‘Primi gli italiani’ (First, the Italians) justified his denying entry for refugees in distress at sea.

In other words, far from the Age of Development having long since come to an inglorious end, as people like me once claimed, the zombie term development continues to make all kinds of mischief. And yet it is true that efforts are being made all around the world to base technology more on nature, the economy on the common good, and culture on civilizational diversity; all of which are objectives that can be understood in post-development terms.


We were naive and a little pompous to proclaim the ‘end of the development age’. In the fall of 1988 at Pennsylvania State University, in the house of Barbara Duden, our group of friends began to draw up the outline of what became the Development Dictionary – the key points of which I outlined in a theme issue of New Internationalist in 1992 called ‘Development: a guide to the ruins’. On the track of Ivan Illich, who once had the plan to write an ‘archaeology of modern certainties’, we wanted to explore the key concept of development, which, as we said then, stood as a ruin in the intellectual landscape.

Let’s remember: in the second half of the 20th century the notion of development stood like a mighty ruler over the nations of the southern hemisphere. It was the rallying cry of the postcolonial era. The concept seemed to be innocent, but in the long run it turned out to be detrimental; as a kind of mental infrastructure, it paved the way for the imperial power of the West over the world. As things were in the West, so also should they be on Earth: that was, in short, the message of development.

When did the development age begin? In our Development Dictionary, we focused on President Harry S Truman’s inaugural address to the US Congress on 20 January 1949, in which he labelled the homes of more than half of the world’s population as ‘underdeveloped areas’. The development age was opened with this speech – the period of world history that followed the colonial age of the European powers. The development age lasted about 40 years and was replaced by the era of globalisation. And presently there is another turning point: the rise of national populism.

What constitutes the idea of development? Consider four aspects. Chrono-politically, all nations seem to advance in the same direction. Imagine time is linear, moving only forwards or backwards; but the aim of technical and economic progress is forever fleeting. Geopolitically, the leaders of this path, the developed nations, show the straggling countries which way to go. The bewildering variety of peoples in the world is now ranked simplistically as rich and poor nations. Socio-politically, the development of a nation is measured through its economic performance, according to gross domestic product (GDP).

Societies that have just emerged from colonial rule are required to place themselves in the custody of ‘the economy’. And finally, the actors who push for development are mainly experts from governments, transnational banks and corporations. Previously, in Marx’s or Schumpeter’s time, ‘develop’ was used as an intransitive verb, like a flower that seeks maturity. Now the term is used transitively, as an active reordering of society that needs to be completed within decades, if not years.

What has become of this idea? To put it briefly, the notion took a direction that is not uncommon in the history of ideas: what once was a historical innovation became a convention over time, one that would end in general frustration. Nonetheless, 30 years ago it was premature to claim the end of the developmental age, because disenchantment with the development idea took place over decades – and is still not complete today.

Corporations spread out, and on every continent lifestyles aligned with one another: SUVs replaced rickshaws; cellphones superseded community gatherings; air-conditioning supplanted siestas

Ideas that become powerful in history do not disappear at once, but rather fade gradually as they become increasingly irrelevant to our understanding of the times. All the same, the tide has turned: even development experts are in a fog about the future, being mostly preoccupied with limiting the social and ecological catastrophes caused by the dominant development model. To impeach the development idea has become acceptable. But let us not jump ahead.

From the end of the Second World War, the discourse on development was framed in terms of the nation-state. Practically every young nation saw its raison d’être as lying in development. But in November 1989, the Berlin Wall fell, the Cold War came to an end, and the era of globalisation began.

In the succeeding years the development idea received a further boost. The development mentality spread to the ends of the earth, involving entirely new players. However, the nation-state had become porous, like a container riddled with bullet holes from external forces. Nation-states had to submit to global powers, both economic and cultural. Goods, money, information, images and people poured across borders, creating a transnational social space where interactions take place over great distances, sometimes even in real time.

In this process, other actors, such as transnational corporations and media, played an increasingly important role in development, with the nation-state increasingly falling behind. For example, private foreign investment overtook official development assistance, television programmes marginalised home-grown narratives around the world, and global consumption replaced local craftwork. Development, hitherto a task of the state, was now de-territorialized.

Moreover, transnational value-chains appeared on the scene. With the end of the Cold War and the process of deregulation in full swing, there was no obstacle to laying out networks of production right across the world. Generally speaking, even in the most remote corners of the earth, the capitalist goods and service economy has replaced countless subsistence economies with their traditional markets. And capitalism had changed, as John Kenneth Galbraith had already analysed in the 1950s: from an economy dedicated to satisfying needs to one dedicated to instigating wants.

In such an economy, what counts is increasingly the symbolic power of goods and services. What matters is what goods say, rather than what they do – they are a means of communication. Goods are simultaneously rituals and religion. Corporations spread out, and on every continent lifestyles aligned with one another: SUVs replaced rickshaws; cellphones superseded community gatherings; air-conditioning supplanted siestas. One can understand the globalisation of the markets as development without nation-states.

From this process, the global middle class – whether in Europe, North America and Asia or, less numerous, in South America and Africa – has benefited the most. They shop in similar malls, buy identical high-tech electronics, watch the same movies and TV series. As tourists they freely dispose of the decisive medium of alignment: money. The middle class – now about three billion people with an income of more than $10 a day – is growing more rapidly thanks to fast economic growth in China, India and other Asian countries.

This is in itself a historical feat: it probably took 150 years from the start of the Industrial Revolution to around 1985 to create the first billion middle-class consumers; the second billion took 21 years to cross the threshold; and the third billion, just nine years. If the projections are correct, two billion more will be added to the middle class by 2028 – making a total of five billion people.3 On the lower rungs of the ladder one is able to afford a moped or a washing machine, while on the upper rungs one can invest in long-distance travel or real estate.

Roughly speaking, already by the year 2010, half of the global middle class lived in the Global North and the other half lived in the Global South. Indeed, the Western way of life has spread to other continents, spanning the entire globe. Without doubt this has been the terrific success of development – yet it is a failure waiting to happen.


‘Development’ is a plastic word, an empty term with no positive meaning. Nevertheless, it has maintained its status of global perspective, because it has been inscribed in an international network of institutions from the United Nations to NGOs. After all, billions of people have made use of the ‘right to development’, as it was stated in a resolution of the 1986 UN General Assembly.

However, one can trace the remarkable transformation of the idea into our day. In 2015, for example, one could observe a thickening of the development discourse: the papal encyclical Laudato si’ in June, the UN Sustainable Development Goals in September and the Paris Agreement on climate change in December. Are these international statements still committed to development? Or can one, on the contrary, consider them as a proof of post-development thinking?

It probably took 150 years from the start of the Industrial Revolution to around 1985 to create the first billion middle-class consumers; the second billion took 21 years to cross the threshold; and the third billion, just nine years.

The erosion of the development idea is now obvious in the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Long gone is the time when development meant ‘promise’. Back then, the talk was of young, aspiring nations moving along a path of progress. Indeed, the discourse of development held a monumental historical promise: that in the end, all societies would close the gap with the rich and partake in the fruits of industrial civilization.

That era is over: development is more often about survival now, not progress. The SDGs are designed to guarantee the minimum level of human rights and environmental conditions. No more and no less, but the sky-storming belief in progress has given way to the need for survival. The papal letter Laudato si’ disregards the keywords ‘development’ and ‘progress’, whereas the Paris climate deal is meant to avoid catastrophes and wars.

Moreover, while the politics of fighting poverty has been successful in some places, it has been bought at the price of even larger inequalities elsewhere; and at the price of irreparable environmental damage. The World Inequality Report 2018 confirmed that, since 1980, the share of national income going to the richest one per cent has increased rapidly in North America, China, India and Russia, and more moderately in Europe – 40 years’ worth of gold rush!

In addition, the use of the Earth is drastically overstretched: according to the calculations of the Global Footprint Network, humanity consumes the biosphere 1.7 times over every year. Plastic pollution in the oceans, mass extinction of insects and the melting of the Arctic ice shield are cases in point.

Climate chaos as well as the slow demise of plant and animal life have cast doubt on the faith that developed nations represent the pinnacle of social evolution. On the contrary, progress has turned out to be regress, as the capitalist logic of the Global North cannot but exploit nature. From Limits to Growth in 1972 to Planetary Boundaries in 2009 the analysis is clear: development-as-growth renders Planet Earth inhospitable for humans. The SDGs – which carrying development in their very title – are a semantic deception. The Sustainable Development Goals should really be called SSGs – Sustainable Survival Goals.

The geopolitics of development has also imploded. At the Millennium Summit in New York in 2000, the pattern of the last 50 years was reproduced: the world neatly divided into North and South, where donors hand down capital, growth and social policies to beneficiary countries so as to recondition them for the global race. This pattern is a familiar sediment of colonial history and was, just like the catch-up imperative, omnipresent in the post-War years.

But by the time we reached the SDGs, what had happened to the idea of developing countries catching up with rich nations, this notion that was once so fundamental to the idea of development?

It is worth quoting a passage in the document that proclaimed the SDGs: ‘This is an agenda of unprecedented scope and significance. These are universal goals and goals which involve the entire world, developed and developing countries alike.’ The SDGs claim to be global and universal, and the Paris Agreement followed suit.

You cannot express the mind shift more clearly: the geopolitics of development, according to which industrial nations would be the shining example for poorer countries, have been disposed of. All the planning and passion, the amount of resources and romance that went into realising the dream of catching up! All gone.


Just as the Cold War era ended in 1989, the myth of catching up evaporated in 2015. Rarely has a myth been buried so quietly. What point is there in development, if there is no country that can be called ‘sustainably developed?’ In addition to that, the economic geography of the world has changed. Geopolitically speaking, the rapid ascension of China as the largest economic power on earth has been spectacular. The seven most important newly industrialised countries are now economically stronger than the traditional industrial states, although the G7 still pretends to be the hegemon. Globalisation has almost dissolved the established North-South scheme.

The internet provides one example. In 2016, 3.4 billion people, half the world’s population, used the internet. Private individuals surf the web with computers, tablets or smartphones, companies have huge IT departments, and billions of people are online every day in social networks. The internet has become the ‘central nervous system’ of world society. Incidentally, the digital infrastructure with its data centres requires a tremendous amount of power – it accounts for about seven per cent of electricity consumed globally.5 This corresponds to the annual electricity consumption of the UK.

What is the geographic distribution of internet users? Most live in East Asia (867 million) and South Asia (480 million); Western Europe (345 million) and North America (341 million) are in midtable.6 Since the electricity comes mostly from coal, gas and oil power plants, the carbon footprint of all this internet activity is enormous.

In short, in terms of resource consumption, the upper classes in China, India, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia have already caught up with the US and European middle classes. By the way, in the international climate negotiations, the upper classes of the newly industrialized countries are relatively unscathed because they can hide behind the poor of their own nations.

Furthermore, development has always been a statistical construct. Without the magic number, GDP, it was impossible to come up with a ranking for nations of the world. Comparing income was the point of development thinking. Only in this way could the relative poverty or wealth of a country be determined. Since the 1970s, however, a dichotomy has emerged in the discourse of development, juxtaposing the idea of development-as-growth with the idea of development-as-social-policy.

Institutions such as the World Bank, the IMF and the WTO continued to bow to the idea of development-as-growth, while the UN Development Programme, UN Environment Programme and most NGOs emphasized the idea of development-as-social policy. Thus the term ‘development’ became an all-purpose glue, which could refer to the building of airports just as much as to the drilling of waterholes. The Millennium Development Goals as well as the SDGs that succeeded them were rooted in this legacy.

Over and over again, the relationship between social indicators and economic growth has revealed itself to be a thorny issue. On the one hand, Agenda 2030 (the governing statement of the SDGs) recognizes the decline of marine and terrestrial ecosystems and the increase in social inequality; but on the other hand, it calls for economic growth for the poorer countries of least seven per cent a year. The contradiction between growth and sustainability is said to be overcome by the new concepts of ‘inclusive growth’ and ‘green growth’.

But it is now common knowledge that inclusive growth, driven by the financial markets, is an impossibility because it constantly reproduces inequality. Typically, a decline in poverty goes hand in hand with spreading in­equality. Since 1990, the emerging economies of Russia, China, India and South Africa have experienced a sharp rise in inequality, while in Brazil it has fallen slightly, albeit from a very high level.

The same applies to the slogan of green growth. Even at the highest echelons of the G7 Summits, the fact that fossil-fuelled economic growth is not feasible in the medium term has done the rounds. In 2015, the industrialised countries envisaged the decarbonization of the global economy by the end of the century. However, all recipes for green growth rely on decoupling environmental degradation from growth, even though absolute decoupling (increasing growth while decreasing environmental degradation) has never been achieved in history.

In short, development-as-growth has historically become obsolete, even life-threatening. Nevertheless, Agenda 2030 fails to speak about prosperity without growth, not even for the old industrialised countries. Reducing the compulsion for growth is apparently taboo: that would mean giving priority to sufficiency instead of efficiency in the economy. In an economy where the efficiency principle dominates, ever more things are produced with ever fewer resources.

In a sufficiency economy, however, enough things are produced with a smart use of resources. Some sectors of the economy would shrink while others would grow. This design of the economy would imply a readiness for downscaling the present industrial system. Compared with Agenda 2030, Pope Francis in his encyclical Laudato si’ is more forward-looking, given that he advocates degrowth for the wealthy zones of the Earth.


Mohandas Gandhi, who led India to independence, was a post-developmentalist long before the term was invented. He left to posterity a well-known quotation, which summarized his thinking about development succinctly: ‘The Earth has enough for everyone’s need, but not for everyone’s greed.’

If you look at the quote more closely, its subversive trait becomes clear. No wonder that in present-day India, Gandhi is viewed as a patron saint in disregard, only brought out on ceremonial occasions. Gandhi believes that the resources of the Earth are not scarce, contrary to economic orthodoxy, but rather abundant, certainly enough to satisfy the needs of human society. He assumes that the needs are culturally shaped and more or less circumscribed, another contrast to received economic wisdom. This allows him to put avarice in the dock because systemic greed undermines the needs of the majority of people. Greed is the variable that decides if people have enough to live on or not.

If the authors of the report of the Brundtland Commission, in 1987, had read their Gandhi accurately, they would not have come up with the classic definition of sustainable development: ‘The development meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’ Gandhi would have insisted that not all needs are equally valid, that the needs of the well-to-do would be different from those of the underprivileged. Thus, in the aftermath, the lack of distinction between survival needs and luxury needs has become a pitfall of the debate on sustainability.

Fortress thinking expressed through national populism revives the glorious past of an imagined people. Authoritarian leaders bring back pride, while others are scapegoated – from Muslims to the United Nations.

In fact, lumping together human rights and consumer rights is the legacy of the concept of development, which is blind to class relations. How can one treat the basic social rights to food, housing and health as being at the same level as the consumer demand for SUVs, real estate and stocks? What do the Mapuche in southern Chile have in common with the Wall Street bankers, or the cotton workers in Mali with the start-ups in Shanghai? Not much, except that they are united in the mirage of development.

But this opens up a dilemma that has always remained hidden in the illusion of development. A recent study confirms that, under the current development model, there is an unbridgeable contradiction between the social and environmental goals of the SDGs.8 In relatively wealthy countries where the physical SDGs (poverty, nutrition, health, energy) are reasonably satisfied – as in Europe, North America, Japan, Argentina, Chile, Thailand and the like – there is an ecological problem of huge magnitude. They are all crossing the planetary boundaries, as in the emission of CO2 and nitrogen, and the consumption of phosphorus and freshwater.

Conversely, where countries remain within their environmental frameworks, the physical SDGs are largely unfulfilled. Roughly, the double-bind is this: the higher the standard of living of a country rises, the more the biosphere tends to be degraded. And conversely, the less social human rights are guaranteed, the smaller the ecological footprint tends to be, at least in terms of carbon and materials. What a tragic result of development!

What weighs more heavily, moreover, is the fact that sometimes the wellbeing of the global middle class depends on the poverty of others. There are plenty of examples: local fisherfolk lose out when large factory ships empty the oceans; smallholders are displaced when agricultural corporations massively buy up land; slum-dwellers have to give way when city highways are built; long-established residents are evicted when gentrification reaches their neighbourhoods; workers are subjected to repression if they want to exercise their trade-union rights in factories in the global value chain.

In short, the imperial mode of living often penetrates deeply into the lifestyles, institutions and infrastructure of the global middle class.9 Unrecognized and yet highly effective through a variety of complex economic structures and exploitation mechanisms, the overall result is dramatic: the well-to-do are living at the expense of the poor.


To draw out the essence of Agenda 2030, the encyclical Laudato si’ and the Paris Agreement, one point stands out: the development enthusiasm of the 20th century is gone. In its place, the demise of expansive modernity has been moving to centre stage. The motto of the previous century (playing on the words of the Lord’s Prayer), ‘on Earth as in the West’, now seems like a threat. The world appears to be in disarray; chaos, fear and anger are widespread, contrasting sharply with the triumphalism of the 1990s. The rise of China, the decline of the West, the hegemony of the financial markets, the return of authoritarian states: all of these may serve as examples of the vagaries of contemporary history.

If one had to find a phrase summing up the current atmosphere in the Global North, as well as parts of the Global South, it would be: fear of the future. There is a fear that life prospects are shrinking and that children and grandchildren will be less well-off than their parents and grandparents. A suspicion is spreading within the global middle class that the expectations kindled by development are not going to be fulfilled.

The middle classes in formerly rich countries, thinned out by globalisation, now call for protection and security. At the same time, large parts of the population in the emerging countries, alienated from their traditions, aware of Western lifestyles through their smartphones, yet excluded from the modern world, are resorting to nationalistic pride.

Everywhere there is a huge polarization between rich and poor. However, while in the nation-states of yesteryear the losers were still capable of demanding corrections from the winners, they are no longer able to do so in times of globalization. The transnational economy, especially the financial sector, triumphs over the living conditions of each country. In response, national populism has emerged – with its many facets.

Facing the turbulences of today’s world, framing social problems as ‘development problems’ is strangely outdated. If everything is not misleading, three narratives of social transformation can be identified: the narratives of fortress, globalism and solidarity.

Fortress thinking expressed through national populism revives the glorious past of an imagined people. Authoritarian leaders bring back pride, while others are scapegoated – from Muslims to the UN. This leads to hatred of foreigners, sometimes coupled with religious fundamentalism. A kind of ‘affluence chauvinism’ is widespread, in particular amongst the middle classes whose material goods need to be defended against the poor.

Moreover, national populists have nothing but contempt for ecology. They welcome drilling for oil in the sea, fracking, coal mining and deforestation. They consider climate change to be a finely woven list of the enemies of the national economy. They are so backward looking that they glorify the plundering of nature. Except for their xenophobia, they could be considered as revenants of the developmental ideology of the 1950s. This adds to the anachronism of national populism.

In contrast, the narrative of globalism revolves around the image of the planet as an archetypal symbol. Instead of the fortress mercantilism of ‘America First’, globalists promote an ideally deregulated, free-trade world, which is meant to bring wealth and wellbeing to corporations and consumers. The globalists, however, consider the present economic system unsustainable. Compared with the politics of neoliberalism, they give more space for public investments, more reforms of the social sector, and generally more leadership of public policy. Above all, they strive for economic growth within the framework of a ‘green economy’.

The globalised elite may worry about the future, but such difficulties can seemingly be overcome with inclusive growth, smart technologies and environmental guidelines for market forces. To a large extent, the UN Agenda 2030, with its Sustainable Development Goals, fits into this frame of thought.

The narrative of solidarity is different. The eco-social ethic stands in opposition to fortress thinking as well as to the narrative of globalism. It foresees a post-capitalist era, based on a cultural shift toward eco-solidarity. The economic monoculture, which reigns in large parts of the world, would make room for civilizational alternatives, be it the worldview of Ubuntu or Buen vivir, be it European humanism or community spirit.

In the mindset of solidarity, human rights – collective and individual – and ecological principles are valued highly; market forces are seen not as an end in themselves, but as a means to an end. The politics of solidarity promotes a cultural rather than technical change, underpinned by co-operative economic forms and public-welfare policies. In contrast to globalism, the narrative of solidarity pleads for permeable but no open borders, imposing certain conditions for migrants, commodities and capital, just as a membrane of a living cell.

Furthermore, as expressed in the slogan ‘think globally, act locally’, a cosmopolitan localism is nurtured whereby local politics must also take into account the needs of the transnational community. This means quitting the imperial way of life that industrial civilization demands, leaving land, food and capital in the hands of the Global South. Particularly in the face of ecological collapse, it is imperative, in the North as well as in the South, to phase out the economic system based on fossil resources, supplanting it with an economic system based on biodiversity.

This transition implies wind as well as solar power to provide energy and regenerative agriculture to provide food and fibre. Instead of expansive modernity it is time for reductive modernity: green enterprises, zero-emissions housing, much lower amounts (by European standards) of motorised traffic, much less consumption of meat, and generally less ownership and more sharing. And finally, new forms of frugal prosperity are called for: affluence of time instead of affluence of goods; labour of care instead of wage labour; partaking in nature instead of taking part in the rat race.

As we confront the fear of the future, the basic direction of politics is at stake; this paradigmatic dispute will be on the agenda for decades to come. Thus, development, like monarchy or feudalism, is about to move further and further into the haze of history, of interest only for students and scholars. Shaping our destiny beyond development is the task that lies ahead of us.

Wolfgang Sachs traces the origin of the development idea to the end of the Second World War and the emergence of the United States as the new world superpower, as he presents a guide to the ruins of the development idea.

A World Power in Search of a Mission

Wind and snow stormed over Pennsylvania Avenue on 20 January 1949 when, in his inauguration speech before Congress, US President Harry Truman defined the largest part of the world as “underdeveloped areas”. There it was, suddenly a permanent feature of the landscape, a pivotal concept which crammed the immeasurable diversity of the globe’s south into single category: ‘underdeveloped’. For the first time, the new world view was thus announced; all the peoples of the earth were to move along the same track and aspire to only one goal: development.

And the road to follow lay clearly before the President’s eyes: “Greater production is the key to prosperity and peace.”

After all, was it not the US which had already come closest to this utopia? According to that yardstick, nations fall into place as stragglers or lead runners. And “the United States is pre-eminent among nations in the development of industrial and scientific techniques”. Clothing self-interest in generosity, Truman outlined a programme of technical assistance designed to “relieve the suffering of these peoples” through “industrial activities” and “a higher standard of living”.

Looking back after forty years, we recognise Truman’s speech as the starting gun in the race for the South to catch up with the North. But we also see that the field of runners has been dispersed, as some competitors have fallen by the wayside and others have begun to suspect that they are running in the wrong direction. 

At this time it was thought only resources could be developed, not people or societies.It was in the corridors of the State Department during World War Two that “cultural progress” was absorbed by ‘economic mobilisation” and development was enthroned as the crowning concept. A new world view had found its succinct definition: the degree of civilization in a country could be measured by the level of its production. There was no longer any reason to limit the domain of development to resources only. From now on, people and whole societies could, or even should, be seen as the object of development. Truman’s imperative to develop meant that societies of the Third World were no longer seen as diverse and incomparable possibilities of human living arrangements but were rather placed on a single “progressive track”, judged more or less advanced according to the criteria of the Western industrial nations.

Such a reinterpretation of global history was not only politically flattering but also unavoidable, since under-development can only be recognised in looking back from a state of maturity. Development without predominance is like a race without direction. So the pervasive power and influence of the West was logically included in the proclamation of development. It is no coincidence that the preamble of the UN Charter (“We, the peoples of the United Nations…”) echoes the Constitution of the US (“We the people of the United States…”).

Old World Order – A de facto American Colony 

Development meant nothing more than projecting the American model of society on to the rest of the world. Truman really needed such a reconceptualisation of the world. The old colonial world had fallen apart. The United States, the strongest nation to emerge from the War, was obliged to act as the new world power. For this it needed a vision of a new global order.

The concept of development provided the answer because it presented the world as collection of homogeneous entities, held together not through the political dominion of colonial times, but through economic interdependence. It meant the independence process of young countries could be allowed to proceed because they automatically fell under the wing of the US anyway when they proclaimed themselves to be subjects of economic development.

Development was the conceptual vehicle which allowed the US to behave as herald of national self-determination while at the same time founding a new type of world-wide domination: an anti-colonial imperialism..

Regimes in Search of a Raison D’etat

The leaders of the newly founded nations — from Nehru to Nkrumah, Nasser to Sukarno — accepted the image that the North had of the South, and internalised it as their self image. Under-development became the cognitive foundation for the establishment of nations throughout the Third World.

The Indian leader Nehru (incidentally, in opposition to Gandhi) made the point in 1949: “It is not a question of theory; be it communism, socialism or capitalism, whatever method is more successful, brings the necessary change and gives satisfaction to the masses, will establish itself on its own…. Our problem today is to raise the standard of the masses..”. Economic development as the primary aim of the state; the mobilisation of the country to increase the output: this beautifully suited the Western concept of the world as an economic arena.

As in all types of competition, this one rapidly produced its professional coaching staff. The World Bank sent off the first of its innumerable missions in July 1949. Upon their return from Colombia, the 14 experts wrote: “short term and sporadic efforts can hardly improve the overall picture. The vicious circle… can only be broken seriously through a global relaunching of the whole economy, along with education, health and food sectors.”

To increase production at a constant level, entire societies had to be overhauled. Had there ever existed a more zealous state objective? From then on, an unprecedented flowering of agencies and administrations came forth to address all aspects of life — to count, organise, mindlessly intervene and sacrifice, all in the name of “development”. Today the scene appears more like collective hallucination. Traditions, hierarchies, mental habits — the whole texture of societies — have all been dissolved in the planner’s mechanistic models.

But in this way the experts were able to apply the same blue-print for institutional reform throughout the world, the outline of which was most often patterned on the American way of life. There is no longer any question of letting things “mature for centuries”, as in the colonial period. After the Second World War, engineers set out to develop whole societies, and to accomplish the job in a few years or at the most a couple of decades.

Post-Development – Weaponization of Everything

After development died in the early 1990s, its remains were weaponised. The Old World Order was in a free fall with bouts of paranoia interspersed with hubris, ignorance and vanity. Its first attempt at a massive conceit was the self-inflicted 9/11 terror attack with simultaneous implosions in the basement of the World Trade Centre towers just as the planes struck. As America’s credibility was falling in the eyes of the world and its own people, this was followed by the bombing of Iraq in search of the Weapons of Mass Destruction that its intelligence sources knew were not there. They have only been emboldened to carry out more brazen crimes against humanity – the latest one being the highly deceitful use of a pandemic prevention protocol as a trojan horse to launch a global scale bio-psycho-spiritual warfare. 

Their key agenda with the Covid warfare is to depopulate Earth of nearly 7.5 billion humans, 90% less than the human population of 8 billion to meet their targeted population of 500 million humans by the year 2030, which they believe is Earth’s carrying capacity in the current scenario. 

In normal circumstances, human society would see this as cold blooded mass murder, genocide and pogrom that would erase the memories of Hitler, Mussolini, Churchill, Pol Pot and Mao Tse Tung. But the materialistic developmentalists are remorseless and have been running scot-free despite the humongous scale of their crimes against humanity.  

One of the resounding claims of the materialistic developmentalists from the anthropocentric viewpoint, paradoxically, has been that it was worth the ecological cost as development was improving the quality of life for large swathes of mankind, uplifting them from the depths of poverty, deprivation and backwardness and most emphatically, their claim has been to increase the average lifespan from 30 odd years to about 80 years with better quality of life and human development indicators. This was already achieved in the Developed countries, the First World or the Global North and rest of the world, consisting of underdeveloped and Developing countries were to aspire for the same.

The obvious question that arises is this : 

How did humanity land itself in such a treacherous and murderous Ponzi gamble? 

How did our checks and balances fail so miserably?

90 Seconds to Midnight

“Due largely–but not exclusively–to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and the increased risk of nuclear escalation stemming from the conflict. The last remaining nuclear weapons treaty between Russia and the United States, New START, is scheduled to expire in February 2026. Russia also brought its war to the Chernobyl and Zaporizhzhia nuclear reactor sites, violating international protocols and risking widespread release of radioactive materials. North Korea also resumed its nuclear rhetoric, launching an intermediate-range ballistic missile test over Japan in October 2022. Continuing threats posed by the climate crisis and the breakdown of global norms and institutions set up to mitigate risks associated with advancing technologies and biological threats such as COVID-19 also contributed to the time setting.”
“Doomsday Clock set at 90 seconds to midnight”. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. January 24, 2023

When was the last time when the leading scientists felt that humanity was so close to extinction in the entire known history? 

We must keep these scientific warnings in mind as we plan our way ahead. This has huge repercussions on the sense of urgency, on the intensity and focus of our efforts as well as the pressing need to widen our reach to every corner of the globe using the internet and all the communications tech by growing our influence. It is Now or Never.

The lifeless ruins of Development have been turned into factories for Weapons of Mass Destruction. The dehumanising and despiritualising Competitive Spirit has turned the promises of plenty to death knells for humanity as a whole. They would continue however to measure the commercial gains from the spectre of mass-scale destruction as profits of corporations and as GDP growth of nation-states that would continue to be classified on the basis of GDP per capita as Developed, Developing and Underdeveloped, depending on their capacity to destruct and eventually commit mass suicide for humanity as a whole. Till such time there is no one left to keep the accounts.

Another World is Possible

In Creative Unity, written a century back in 1922, Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore elucidates: 

“The instruments of our necessity assert that we must have food, shelter, clothes, comforts and convenience. And yet men spend an immense amount of their time and resources in contradicting this assertion, to prove that they are not a mere living catalogue of endless wants; that there is in them an ideal of perfection, a sense of unity, which is a harmony between parts and a harmony with surroundings.

Materials as materials are savage; they are solitary; they are ready to hurt one another. They are like our individual impulses seeking the unlimited freedom of wilfulness. Left to themselves they are destructive. But directly an ideal of unity raises its banner in their centre, it brings these rebellious forces under its sway and creation is revealed—the creation which is peace, which is the unity of perfect relationship. Our greed for eating is in itself ugly and selfish, it has no sense of decorum ; but when brought under the ideal of social fellowship, it is regulated and made ornamental; it is changed into a daily festivity of life. In human nature sexual passion is fiercely individual and destructive, but dominated by the ideal of love, it has been made to flower into a perfection of beauty, becoming in its best expression symbolical of the spiritual truth in man which is his kinship of love with the Infinite. Thus we find it is the One which expresses itself in creation; and the Many, by giving up opposition, make the revelation of unity perfect.

The one question before all others that has to be answered by our civilisations is not what they have and in what quantity, but what they express and how. In a society, the production and circulation of materials» the amassing and spending of money, may go on, as in the interminable prolonging of a straight line, if its people forget to follow some spiritual design of life which curbs them and transforms them into an organic whole.

For growth is not that enlargement which is merely adding to the dimensions of incompleteness. Growth is the movement of a whole towards a yet fuller wholeness. Living things start with this wholeness from the beginning of their career. A child has its own perfection as a child; it would be ugly if it appeared as an unfinished man. Life is a continual process of synthesis, and not of additions. Our activities of production and enjoyment of wealth attain that spirit of wholeness when they are blended with a creative ideal. Otherwise they have the insane aspect of the eternally unfinished; they become like locomotive engines which have railway lines but no stations; which rush on towards a collision of uncontrolled forces or to a sudden breakdown of the overstrained machinery.

Through creation man expresses his truth; through that expression he gains back his truth in its fullness. Human society is for the best expression of man, and that expression, according to its perfection, leads him to the full realisation of the divine in humanity. When that expression is obscure, then his faith the Infinite that is within him becomes weak; then his aspiration cannot go beyond the idea of success. His faith in the Infinite is creative; his desire for success is constructive; one is his home, and the other is his office. With the overwhelming growth of necessity, civilisation becomes a gigantic office to which the home is a mere appendix. The predominance of the pursuit of success gives to society the character of what we call Shudra in India. In fighting a battle, the Kshatriya, the noble knight, followed his honour for his ideal, which was greater than victory itself; but the mercenary Shudra has success for his object. The name Shudra symbolises a man who has no margin round him beyond his bare utility. The word denotes a classification which includes all naked machines that have lost their completeness of humanity, be their work manual or intellectual.

They are like walking stomachs or brains, and we feel, in pity, urged to call on God and cry, “Cover them up for mercy’s sake with some veil of beauty and life!””

Evidence of Non-violent Prosperity around the World in the Pre-Development Era

Economic prosperity in various societies of the world before the modern European industrial development was no less. Far more prosperity has been around for centuries in many nations and societies (than the unprecedented economic prosperity that is being attributed only to Europe) even before the 18th century in Mexico, Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Ghana, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Kenya, Zimbabwe, Egypt, Congo, Male, Sudan, Nubia, India, China, Tibet, Japan, Mongolia, Mesopotamia, Sumer, Iran (Persia), Iraq, Turkey, Ottoman, Thailand, Indonesia, Java, Sumatra, Champa, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Korea, Vietnam, etc. 

Many of these countries have been much more advanced in technology than 19th century Europe — millennia ago. The facts about China are well known. Europeans learned many types of scientific techniques from China like gunpowder, printing, paper making method, map making, watch making, meteorology and irrigation system, seismology, anatomy etc. England learned the technology of steel making, smallpox vaccine, silver foil making methods etc. from India. The excellence of Maya, Aztec, Inca, Egypt, Sumer and Babylonia civilizations in astronomical calculations and architecture is world famous. Ghana had no match in gold reserves and prosperity. The richness of the Saraswat civilization of Harappa is well-known by now. 

Thus these diverse countries have been more or at least equally prosperous for centuries without any extra conceit and without adopting any craze for luxury as many countries of Europe and now the United States of America have been in the past 300 years. These countries did not show enmity towards nature. They did not barbarously exploit natural resources and produce consumer goods for monstrous consumption, in the name of technology. 

The reason for this is not that the peaceful and non-violent societies did not have knowledge of technology. Or they did not have that skill and aptitude or did not have scientific vision and intellect. Rather they had a rich understanding of the rhythms of the universe, of truth and ever-changing reality (ऋत), of the universal-individual, the cycle of creation and the cycle of time. They were so assured by their traditional knowledge. In their vision, adopting the madness of looting all the resources in a short time, in the name of development, would be suicidal. They considered it a terrible injustice to our future generations and would be a sin from this point of view. This is the reason why these prosperous societies and nations, despite their advanced technology, restrained their consumption and their production. Whatever information remains today about the prosperity and lifestyle of these societies, it is proven that the prosperity in these societies was mainly associated with a non-violent lifestyle. The traditions of frugality in consumption and fulfilment of essential needs from the point of view of social harmony, have always kept these societies balanced and restrained.

The Climax

Why we need an Emergency Response to a highly treacherous and subversive bio-psycho-spiritual warfare! 

Is an alliance of political and corporate leaders under the aegis of WEF exploiting the Covid pandemic with the aim of crashing national economies and introducing a global digital currency?

How is it that more than 190 governments from all over the world ended up dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in almost exactly the same manner, with lockdowns, mask mandates, and vaccination cards now being commonplace everywhere? The answer may lie in the Young Global Leaders school, which was established and managed by Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum, and that many of today’s prominent political and business leaders passed through on their way to the top.

In a report published in November 2021, the German economist, journalist, and author Ernst Wolff has revealed some facts about Schwab’s “Young Global Leaders” school that are relevant for understanding world events during the pandemic in a video from the German Corona Committee podcast. While Wolff is mainly known as a critic of the globalist financial system, recently he has focused on bringing to light what he sees as the hidden agenda behind the anti-Covid measures being enacted around the world.

Mysterious Beginnings

The story begins with the World Economic Forum (WEF), which is an NGO founded by Klaus Schwab, a German economist and mechanical engineer, in Switzerland in 1971, when he was only 32. The WEF is best-known to the public for the annual conferences it holds in Davos, Switzerland each January that aim to bring together political and business leaders from around the world to discuss the problems of the day. Today, it is one of the most important networks in the world for the globalist power elite, being funded by approximately a thousand multinational corporations.

The WEF, which was originally called the European Management Forum until 1987, succeeded in bringing together 440 executives from 31 nations already at its very first meeting in February 1971, which as Wolff points out was an unexpected achievement for someone like Schwab, who had very little international or professional experience prior to this. Wolff believes the reason may be due to the contacts Schwab made during his university education, including studying with no less a person than former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Wolff also points out that while Schwab was there, the Harvard Business School had been in the process of planning a management forum of their own, and it is possible that Harvard ended up delegating the task of organizing it to him. 

The Forum initially only brought together people from the economic field, but before long, it began attracting politicians, prominent figures from the media (including from the BBC and CNN), and even celebrities.

Schwab’s Young Global Leaders: Incubator of the Great Reset?

In 1992 Schwab established a parallel institution, the Global Leaders for Tomorrow school, which was re-established as Young Global Leaders in 2004. Attendees at the school must apply for admission and are then subjected to a rigorous selection process. Members of the school’s very first class in 1992 already included many who went on to become important liberal political figures, such as Angela Merkel, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Tony Blair. There are currently about 1,300 graduates of this school, and the list of alumni includes several names of those who went on to become leaders of the health institutions of their respective nations. Four of them are former and current health ministers for Germany, including Jens Spahn, who has been Federal Minister of Health since 2018. Philipp Rösler, who was Minister of Health from 2009 until 2011, was appointed the WEF’s Managing Director by Schwab in 2014. 

Other notable names on the school’s roster are Jacinda Ardern, the Prime Minister of New Zealand whose stringent lockdown measures have been praised by global health authorities; Emmanuel Macron, the President of France; Sebastian Kurz, who was until recently the Chancellor of Austria; Viktor Orbán, Prime Minister of Hungary; Jean-Claude Juncker, former Prime Minister of Luxembourg and President of the European Commission; and Annalena Baerbock, the leader of the German Greens who was the party’s first candidate for Chancellor in this year’s federal election, and who is still in the running to be Merkel’s successor. We also find California Governor Gavin Newsom on the list, who was selected for the class of 2005, as well as former presidential candidate and current US Secretary of Transportation Peter Buttigieg, who is a very recent alumnus, having been selected for the class of 2019. All of these politicians who were in office during the past two years have favored harsh responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, and which also happened to considerably increase their respective governments’ power.

But the school’s list of alumni is not limited to political leaders. We also find many of the captains of private industry there, including Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Virgin’s Richard Branson, and the Clinton Foundation’s Chelsea Clinton. Again, all of them expressed support for the global response to the pandemic, and many reaped considerable profits as a result of the measures.

Wolff believes that the people behind the WEF and the Global Leaders school are the ones who really determine who will become political leaders, although he stresses that he doesn’t believe that Schwab himself is the one making these decisions but is merely a facilitator. He further points out that the school’s alumni include not only Americans and Europeans, but also people from Asia, Africa, and South America, indicating that its reach is truly worldwide.

In 2012, Schwab and the WEF founded yet another institution, the “Global Shapers Community,” which brings together those identified by them as having leadership potential from around the world who are under 30. Approximately 10,000 participants have passed through this program to date, and they regularly hold meetings in 400 cities. Wolff believes that it is yet another proving ground where future political leaders are being selected, vetted, and groomed before being positioned in the world’s political apparatus.

Wolff points out that very few graduates of the Global Leaders school list it on their CVs. He says that he has only seen it listed on one: namely, that of the German economist Richard Werner, who is a known critic of the establishment. Wolff suggests that the school seems to like to include even critics of the system among its ranks, as another name among its graduates is Gregor Hackmack, the German chief of Change.org, who was in its 2010 class. Wolff believes this is because the organization wants to present itself as being fair and balanced, although it also wants to ensure that its critics are controlled opposition.

Another thing that the Global Leaders graduates have in common is that most of them have very sparse CVs apart from their participation in the program prior to being elevated to positions of power, which may indicate that it is their connection to Schwab’s institutions that is the decisive factor in launching their careers. This is most evident when the school’s alumni are publicly questioned about issues that they have not been instructed to talk about in advance, and their struggles to come up with answers are often quite evident. Wolff contends that their roles are only to act as mouthpieces for the talking points that those in the shadows behind them want discussed in public debate.

Schwab’s Yes Men in Action

Given the growing discontent with the anti-Covid measures put into practice by the school’s graduates who are now national leaders, Wolff believes it is possible that these people were selected due to their willingness to do whatever they are told, and that they are being set up to fail so that the subsequent backlash can be exploited to justify the creation of a new global form of government. Indeed, Wolff notes that politicians with unique personalities and strong, original views have become rare, and that the distinguishing character of the national leaders of the past 30 years has been their meekness and adherence to a strict globalist line dictated from above. This has been especially evident in most countries’ response to the pandemic, where politicians who knew nothing about viruses two years ago suddenly proclaimed that Covid was a severe health crisis that justified locking people up in their homes, shutting down their businesses, and wrecking entire economies.

Determining exactly how the school operates is difficult, but Wolff has managed to learn something about it. In the school’s early years, it involved the members of each class meeting several times over the course of a year, including a ten-day “executive training” session at the Harvard Business School. Wolff believes that, through meeting their classmates and becoming part of a wider network, the graduates then establish contacts who they rely on in their later careers. Today, the school’s program includes courses offered over the course of five years at irregular intervals, which in some cases may overlap with the beginnings of some of its participants’ political or professional careers – meaning they will be making regular visits to Davos. Emmanuel Macron and Peter Buttigieg, for example, were selected for the school less than five years ago, which means it is possible they have been regularly attending Young Global Leaders-related programs while in political office and may in fact still be attending them today.

A Worldwide Network of Wealth & Influence

Graduates from the Young Global Leaders school, and Global Leaders for Tomorrow before them, find themselves very well-situated given that they then have access to the WEF’s network of contacts. The WEF’s current Board of Trustees includes such luminaries as Christine Lagarde, former Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund and current President of the European Central Bank; Queen Rania of Jordan, who has been ranked by Forbes as one of the 100 most powerful women in the world; and Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, the largest investment management corporation internationally and which handles approximately $9 trillion annually. By tracing the connections between the school’s graduates, Wolff claims that you can see that they continue to rely on each other for support for their initiatives long after they participated in the Global Leaders programs.

Wolff believes that many elite universities play a role in the process determined by the WEF, and that they should no longer be seen as operating outside of the fields of politics and economics. He cites the example of the Harvard Business School, which receives millions of dollars from donors each year, as well as the Harvard School of Public Health, which was renamed the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health after it received $350 million from the Hong Kong-born billionaire Gerald Chan. The same is true of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, which became the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health after media mogul Michael Bloomberg donated $1.8 billion to the school in 2018.

Wolff states that the WEF’s influence goes far beyond those who have passed through the Global Leaders and Global Shapers programs, however, as the number of people who participate in the annual Davos conferences is much larger than many suspect; he mentions being informed that approximately 1,500 private jets bring attendees to the event each year, overloading Switzerland’s airports.

The Alliance of Big Business & Government

The main goal of the WEF’s activities, Wolff believes, is to facilitate and further high-level cooperation between big business and national governments, something which we are already seeing take place. Viviane Fischer, another participant in the Corona Committee podcast, points out that the British-based company Serco processes migrants for the British government and also manages prisons around the world, among its many other activities. The pharmaceutical industry’s international reach is also considerable: Wolff mentions that Global Leaders alumnus Bill Gates, for example, had long been doing business with Pfizer, one of the main producers of the controversial mRNA anti-Covid vaccines, through his Foundation’s public health initiatives in Africa since long before the pandemic began. Perhaps not coincidentally, Gates has become one of the foremost champions of lockdowns and the Covid vaccines since they became available, and The Wall Street Journal has reported that his Foundation had made approximately $200 billion in “social benefits” from distributing vaccines before the pandemic had even begun. One can only imagine what its vaccine profits are today.

Digital technology, which is now all-pervasive, is also playing a prominent role in the elite’s global designs. Wolff highlights that BlackRock, run by Global Leaders alumnus Larry Fink, is presently the largest advisor to the world’s central banks and has been collecting data on the world financial system for more than 30 years now, and undoubtedly has a greater understanding of how the system works than the central banks themselves.

One of the goals of the current policies being pursued by many governments, Wolff believes, is to destroy the businesses of small- and medium-sized entrepreneurs so that multinational corporations based in the United States and China can monopolize business everywhere. Amazon, which was led until recently by Global Leaders alumnus Jeff Bezos, in particular has made enormous profits as a result of the lockdown measures that have devastated the middle class. 

Wolff contends that the ultimate goal of this domination by large platforms is to see the introduction of digital bank currency. Just in the past few months, China’s International Finance Forum, which is similar to the WEF, proposed the introduction of the digital yuan, which could in turn be internationalized by the Diem blockchain-based currency network. Interestingly, Diem is the successor to Libra, a cryptocurrency that was first announced by Mark Zuckerberg’s Facebook, indicating that a global currency that will transcend the power of either the dollar or the yuan, and managed through the cooperation of Chinese, European, and American business networks, is currently being discussed. The International Finance Forum’s supervisory board includes such names as the WEF’s Christine Lagarde; Jean-Claude Trichet, the former President of the European Central Bank; and Horst Köhler, the former Head of the International Monetary Fund.

Wolff further explains that the lockdowns and subsequent bailouts that were seen around the world over the past two years left many nations on the verge of bankruptcy. In order to avoid an economic catastrophe, the governments of the world resorted to drawing on 650 billion special drawing rights, or SDRs, which are supplementary foreign exchange reserve assets managed by the International Monetary Fund. When these eventually come due, it will leave these same governments in dire straits, which is why it may be that the introduction of digital currency has become a sudden priority – and this may have been the hidden purpose of the lockdowns all along. 

Wolff says that two European countries are already prepared to begin using digital currency: Sweden and Switzerland. Perhaps not coincidentally, Sweden has had virtually no lockdown restrictions due to the pandemic, and Switzerland has taken only very light measures. Wolff believes that the reason for this may be that the two countries did not need to crash their economies through lockdown measures because they were already prepared to begin using digital currency before the pandemic began. He contends that a new round of lockdowns may be being prepared that will finish off the world’s economies for good, leading to massive unemployment and in turn the introduction of Universal Basic Income and the use of a digital currency managed by a central bank. This currency might be restricted, both in terms of what individuals can spend it on as well as in the time frame that one has to spend it in.

Further, Wolff indicates that the inflation currently being seen around the world is an inevitable consequence of the fact that national governments, after taking loans from the central banks, have introduced approximately $20 trillion into the global economy in less than two years. Whereas previous bailouts were directed into the markets, this latest round has gone to ordinary people, and as a result, this is driving up the prices of products that ordinary people spend their money on, such as food. 

Democracy Has Been Cancelled

The ultimate conclusion one must draw from all of this, according to Wolff, is that democracy as we knew it has been silently canceled, and that although the appearance of democratic processes is being maintained in our countries, the fact is that an examination of how governance around the world works today shows that an elite of super-wealthy and powerful individuals effectively control everything that goes on in politics, as has been especially evident in relation to the pandemic response. 

The best way to combat their designs, Wolff says, is simply to educate people about what is happening, and for them to realize that the narrative of the “super-dangerous virus” is a lie that has been designed to manipulate them into accepting things that run contrary to their own interests. If even 10% of ordinary citizens become aware of this and decide to take action, it could thwart the elite’s plans and perhaps open a window for ordinary citizens to take back control over their own destinies.

God is in the essence (Devil lies in the details)

Delivering a lecture at the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta on 2nd of November, 2022, S. Jaishankar, India’s Union Minister for External Affairs, said: 

“There is a larger change today underway in international affairs that is very important to comprehend. This emanates from the weaponization of everything. In recent years, we have already seen how trade, connectivity, debt, resources and even tourism have become the point of political pressure. The Ukraine conflict has dramatically widened the scope of such leveraging,” 

The erudite, hard working, dyed-in-the-wool career diplomat Dr Jaishankar was speaking on the topic of “India and the World”. After carefully deliberating upon his statements, tweets and pronouncements since, one can infer that this speech marks a high point of his tenure in the fourth year in his current role. What gets lost in the details of ‘weaponization of everything’ splashed across headlines of news channels, however, is its essence. 

When there is weaponization of everything, there can be no winners or losers as everyone destroys and kills everyone else. This is a recipe for what has been referred to as Mutually Assured Destruction in the context of nuclear warfare, even as in this case the killing is painfully slow and often treacherous, making the consequences much worse than even a nuclear warfare. 

From a higher level of thinking, however, the longing for life is far more powerful at any moment of time than the longing for destruction and death. What looks certain from this viewpoint is that  the weaponizers of everything are about to self-destruct themselves. In that way, they are not some indomitable force, as the Minister seems to believe, but they are more like sick, delusional, psychopathic suicide bombers. We, those who long for life, peace and harmony, even if we are few of us, must deal with them accordingly, as a good doctor would treat their patients. And it is remarkably easy to do so in a short few months as an Emergency Response that allows us to keep all the official and diplomatic protocols aside.

God is in the essence.

Devil lies in the Details

In a subsequent interview to Ashley Tellis, author and geopolitics researcher, a few days later and up to his address on 14th of January 2023 in Chennai, he has been more rhetorical and jingoistic and doesn’t live up to his own call for political creativity and innovative approaches, in his Kolkata speech. In his interview with Tellis, the Minister shares how he keeps getting lots of advice that turns him off. He thinks aloud on the repercussion of making bold moves in the global arena but laments that his ministry presently doesn’t have the capacity to deliver.

This book is aimed as a comprehensive response to his call to civil society for greater participation in global affairs, at a time when as he says ‘the very nature of our existence is globalised’. In between, I wrote to his office for a meeting on continuing the dialogue on his ‘India and the World’ but it did not evoke any response from his bureaucrats. I further learnt that with its policies shrouded in lies and hoaxes, the government is taking extra precaution to be secretive and mislead and delude the masses in intricate mesh of details.

God and Devil

To fully and unambiguously comprehend the meaning of ‘God is in the Essence and Devil is in the Details, let us first elaborate on a rational and logical construct of God and Devil. 

God is the super intelligence that regulates and governs the world. It can also be described as Natural Intelligence or NI. As long as we are truthful and humbly in harmony with its super intelligence, the God force also flows through us. Many of us experience that. From before the beginning, because the universe has always been in existence and its manifestation is cyclical giving the impression of a beginning and end, God or this super intelligence exists. In this spirit, our common belief is in humanism.  

Devil is created when we betray truth and out of hubris begin to believe that we can control and subjugate this super intelligence. Greed, apathy, pathological addictions, anger, fear and insecurity overpower us. This can also be delusional at times as one may profess their belief in God, but betray the truth and become part of the Devil, . They can even sway a large number of followers who may all believe that they are with God. Devil can also be described as Artificial Intelligence or AI. This is manifested in the dehumanising and despiritualising ideology of Transhumanism, which is a cryptic word for Dehumanism, in simple terms.

Competitive Spirit as the Weaponiser

As Wolfgang Sachs eloquently articulates in a chapter titled ‘Technology as a Trojan Horse’, weaponisation is inbuilt in the very design of modern notion of Development powered by competitive technological advancement. 

“There are two entirely different principles which can shape a society’s image of itself. Either a person-to-person or a person-to-things relationship predominates. In the first case, events are examined in the light of their significance with regard to neighbours or relatives, ancestors or gods; whereas, in the second, all the circumstances in the life of society are judged according to what they contribute to the acquisition and ownership of things. The modern epoch, whose thoughts and aspirations revolve mainly around property, production and distribution, devotes itself to the cult of things, the use of technology is thus its beatifying ritual.” – Chapter Five – Technology as a Trojan Horse, The Archaeology of the Development Idea written in 1992 by Wolfgang Sachs

To understand that we must first come to terms with what competition is, is it necessary and does it add real value in a sustainable manner? 

Competition is inherently rooted in the urge to feel superior and as a weapon to wipe out the inferior based on the rules of the competition as they are framed. It can for some time in some places lead to better and/or faster results in terms of product or service developed but if left unchecked it can very soon become counter-productive. The players themselves, whether they are competing nation-states, corporations, religions or other institutions, become incapacitated to offer the checks and balances. If they are also very powerful or ‘sovereign’ they would also resist and ‘veto’ any higher regulatory or governing body. 

Competitive spirit therefore is the root cause of ‘Weaponisation of Everything’. The Minister fails to see the root cause and exults in how his country can become more competitive and powerful in defending its national borders. He fails to see the elephant in the room in the form of a bio-psycho-spiritual warfare that has been wreaking havoc on the lives of his citizens and killing thousands of them, from within its borders administered by his own government.

It is ironic that as ‘External Affairs Minister’, he is oblivious to the fact that the enemy has already made deep inroads and is not limited to only border skirmishes that he mostly focuses and harps upon. A country, we must remember, is not just a landmass separated by borders, but also its people, the citizens of the country, which the government must protect.

Gaia Perspective on Pathways to World Federation by One World – 25 lecture series by Oded Gilad and Dena Freeman

12 December 2022

To: Oded Gilad

Reference: https://oneworld.network/lectures/

Thank you so much for such a wonderful presentation on One World. They have been very enriching for me to develop an even more holistic perspective, even as I have different viewpoint that I would like to share and invite feedback and suggestions. This reinforces why One World is more enriching for all of us instead of being imprisoned inside ‘sovereign nation-states’ that are enslaved by the global oligarchy. A very tricky and treacherous situation that is not only suffocative and miserable already but also increasingly a dangerous threat to our existence.

World government is an idea whose time has come. As Convenor for Gaia Earth Sansad, thinking in this direction, here is one such way forward on pathways to world federation adapted from a 1952 Declaration by spiritual leader and founder of Vihangam Yoga, with over 60 million followers in 50 countries worldwide.

I would also like to share with you this email I sent to our External Affairs Minister in India.

From: Oded Gilad

Dear Chandra – namaste!

Thank you for your good words and for the document you shared. I encourage you in your important work of spreading this message, which is literally the most important in the world.

You might find our other lectures in the series, and maybe particularly this one, also helpful.

Best wishes,


To: Oded Gilad

Thank you Oded,

I have seen the one you referred to on JL Nehru’s vision as well as much of the 25 lectures to get a gist of overall thrust and substance.

The key pointers to where I have different view are as follows:

1. Trusteeship : This must be as a pillar stone of the world government. With all due regards, coming from a euro-centric context, the contractual checks and balances, framed in legalese, cannot substitute a deeply ingrained culture and spirit of trusteeship throughout the organisation. In indigenous terms, we have a concept of Aapt Purush, where one person embodies the well-being of all of humanity and fellow beings. They put the well-being of all others before their own. With that kind of leadership, governance is both simple, effective and far-reaching.

2. Bold and decisive global political reforms: We need to breakaway from the present ‘sovereign nation-states’ and ‘foreign and external affairs’ mindset for rest of the world, where our patriotism is for Mother Earth as sovereign. Keeping in view climate and ecological imperative, we must also commit to create localised abundance and circular economies in the local communities, and where conditions are not favourable for naturally localised human habitation, we must prepare to move out from such areas to more habitable areas. This is reflected in the One world state, 80 provinces with 50 districts/community-states in each province with population of 2 million each.

3. Justice for overt and covert Crimes against Humanity by the Global Oligarchy: People around the world are crying out for justice and equality after centuries of gross injustice. Even as we must bear forgiveness in our hearts, the new global judiciary must provide for appropriate justice and penal action, neither more nor less. This will infuse and instil great confidence and enthusiasm through humankind to rebuild, repair and restore our natural ecosystems and human habitats, systems and structures. Truth always wins.

What is a good time for an online meeting with you and your team in next few days for further exploration and building a shared vision?

Best regards,


Gaia Perspective on Earth Constitution Draft by Prof Glen Martin WCPA

Date: 09 December 2022
To: gmartin@radford.edu; gmartin@earthconstitution.world
Cc: office@wcpa.global; harsh.pant@kcl.ac.uk; harshpant@orfonline.org; manojjoshi@orfonline.org; js@icwa.in; diream@mea.gov.in ; jseamo@mea.gov.in
Subject: Feedback and Suggestions – Earth Constitution Draft

Dear Prof Martin,
Dear All,

Please find a review and suggestions to the draft Earth Government Constitution for speedy and effective implementation and functioning in response to the Emergency situation created by the Covid and Climate Lockdowns, Ukraine War, China Uprising and Central Bank Digital Currency with programmable expenditure. Burdened by the legacy of ‘sovereign nation-sates’ in an era of intense globalisation, world government is urgently needed than ever before. It is an idea whose time has come.

Ref: The Constitution for the Federation of Earth: A Diverse Global Village or World Uniformity?

By Prof Glen T. Martin ( Link : https://www.academia.edu/45614876/The_Constitution_for_the_Federation_of_Earth_A_Diverse_Global_Village_or_World_Uniformity )

(My feedback and suggestions in blue)

2. Design of the Earth Constitution Pg 3

Study of the Constitution for the Federation of Earth reveals that the principle of unity in diversity is built into the structure of the emerging Earth Federation government from beginning to end.

CV: Fully agree with the core principle of Unity in Diversity. I would like to make the following suggestions on the structure and election process for a grassroots-to-global Earth government.

The process should begin with the formation of a Steering Committee with 5-7 members from among founders who are dedicated to this vision and mission and an earliest possible publicly announced timeline in response to the global emergency situation. Starting with the Global Oneness Design 2-member Steering Committee, we should invite 3-5 more members who can work together from a single location – in Rajkot. The Steering Committee will be tasked with raising the funds, talking to state actors starting with the Union Government of India and State Government of Gujarat and to form the secretariat to look after various functions of the Earth Government. 

The Steering Committee will screen all the candidates, who have to fulfill the eligibility criteria for their character and capabilities set and reviewed by the Earth government, as due checks and balances. It will form the Executive body, with a deeply ingrained spirit of Trusteeship, with a World President and Global Council of Ministers.  

I. The World Parliament includes a House of Peoples with delegates from 1000 electoral districts worldwide, roughly equal in population. 

CV: 4000 electoral districts of ~2 million (+/- 10%) population each. These Community-States (CS) based on the LACE (Localized Abundance and Circular Economy) model  are direct democracies where the Head of Community-State is directly elected first through consensus and only if that fails, through voting. The Head will form the Council of Ministers for various roles and responsibiities. They constitute the House of Peoples.  

Ii. The House of Nations includes delegates from all the nations of the world and the Constitution does not prohibit the creation of more nations if we wish to recognize additional diversity among states, for example, a Kurdish state, a Palestinian state, or an Uyghur state. 

CV: 80 Provinces of ~100 million (+/- 10%) each. Each Province is formed with 50 CS.  These 50 elected representatives elect one Head of Province through consensus (including Open House sessions for public consultation) and only if that fails, through voting. These 80 representatives constitute the Legislative Assembly.  

Iii. The third house is the House of Counselors, 200 representatives chosen from 20 World Electoral Regions and again representing the diversity of humankind.

CV: 11 member Peace & Harmony Council, who will mediate in all the conflict zones as well as on contended issues among various parties to meet the overall objective of justice, equality, peace and overall progress of human society. The Steering Committee will screen the nominations for the 11 member council and select from among them. In case, 11 suitable candidates are not selected in the first round, further rounds of nominations will be called. 

Iv. No main agency established under the Earth Constitution is headed by one person. Every agency or department is required to have a presidium of 5 leaders, one from each continental division of our planet.

CV: The Steering Committee in the spirit of Unity in Diversity, will entrust responsibility and authority in single individuals for accountability and decisive action. The House of Peoples and the Legislative Council will have proportional representation from around the world. The Peace & Harmony Council will constitute people with high level of spiritual awakening and intelligence, regardless of their geographical location.

In this light, I would also like to share this presentation adapted from a 1952 declaration by seer-scientist and spiritual leader Sadguru Sadafaldev Maharaj on this link here for your feedback and suggestions.


Best regards,
Chandra Vikash
PGDM – 1995-97 (32nd batch)
B.Tech. IIT Kharagpur
Convenor – Gaia Earth Sansad

Indigenous Wisdom on Human Population Balance

Many thinkers and experts around the world today are worried that unabated growth in the human population will lead to scarcity of food, basic amenities and to catastrophic climate and ecological degradation. If the tide of human population growth continues in this way, then how will the global human society get food and clothes? This was also the prime justification for the Covid ‘vaccine’ to depopulate what the dehumanising and despiritualising forces believe to be excess human population. This has destroyed the moral authority of medical science as well as of governments, corporate and media who colluded to fool the people and instill fear of a dubious pandemic to take the vaccine. Now the same government is now blaming the people for not being aware of their side-effects after a spate of sudden deaths – heart attacks, brain hemorrhage, paralysis, loss of fertility and leading to mental depression and suicidal tendencies among the vaccinated.

Putting aside indigenous wisdom and practices as backward, voodoo science and as underdeveloped, modern medical science has thought out the method of artificial birth control. They say that by cutting off a special vein in men and women, the semen does not fall, nor does it fertilize inside the egg. In that state, even if there is love union between man and woman, there will be no offspring.

Men and women are happily engaged in the artificial birth control methods (including more recent use of condoms, delaying marriage or abstaining from love union altogether), but this is demonic intuition and intelligence. (Unfulfilled men and women, unless they follow the discipline of brahmacharya, tend to be highly consumerist.) This is not human life and human conscience. This is not human sentiment or human spirit. If we understand the importance of indigenous wisdom from our sages and the elderly, human dignity will remain, otherwise the world will continue to hurtle towards its dehumanizing and despiritualising downfall.

 You attain inner strength and force by attaining shum, dum and spiritual qualities. With these, you can rule and influence the material things in life. In the light of soul-spiritual knowledge, when through the practice of yoga, the practitioners master pure conscious power, then they can master over all the material things as well. In that state, the mind, senses etc. start running everywhere under the rules and guidance of the soul. May you be victorious over the mind by guruyukti vidhan. Peace of mind is ‘Shum’ and control of senses is ‘Dum’. When the objects of the senses do not arise even when the objects of the senses are with you, this is ‘Dum’. After getting self-realization, after getting self-confidence, you get self-strength. The natural work of all the above worlds and the love union of man and woman becomes just a sport. The soul of a yogi becomes skillful and skillful in all his works. That’s why you take the support of Guru Yukti Yoga art. It is an equal right of both men and women. 

Due to the fear of material scarcity and deprivation, the modern world wants that there should be a love union between a man and a woman in the world, but there should be no fall of semen, no conception, no growth of progeny. The feeling is that we should enjoy the subject, but children should not come, our expenses should not increase. To fulfill this feeling, Indians and the world should come to the spiritual field and come and do their spiritual healing. All their wishes and desires will be fulfilled. 

Semen does not fall in any way even after making love union with a hundred beautiful girls in a sequence through various experiments of Yoga-kala, Kalpa-kala, Koka-kala, hypnosis. What do people want? This is what they want. Indians should not get their veins cut with their bad sense, rather follow the great science of their sages. Do not fall into the vicious circle of modern science, otherwise life will be destroyed and there will be downfall in every way.

In all kind of worldly affairs, it is essential for every human being to attain their soul power through spiritual knowledge and practice. On attaining self-confidence, all work will be easy and accessible. If you want to have or do not want to have children, then everything will be according to your wish. Don’t get your veins cut in ignorance (or fall prey to false propaganda in case of slow killing and sterilizing Covid vaccine). Having special discretion like this will allow couples to give birth to children, as they want. You become an expert in progeny if you keep practicing the right way. 

For the increase of food supply in the world, so that the earth gives more food, we should learn from indigenous wisdom and treat the soil appropriately. In order to increase the fertility of the earth, there is a predominance of havan-yajna in the Vedas, which should be done scientifically. The one who is an expert in earth, air, sun rays, is a scientist, should perform havan-yajna. Mother Earth will give enough food and there will be no scarcity of food and other resources for our well-being. Indigenous wisdom contained in the Vedas are a storehouse of scientific knowledge. It is a pity that there are no proficient Vedic scholars in the world. The dehumanizing and despiritualising questions confounding humanity will abate once there are rishis (seer-scientists) of mantras (sacred intonations) among us. If we can find the Sadguru (the teacher who leads us to the truth)  and walk in their light, our world will definitely get better. 

This was the key to how the human population worldwide was in a steady state growing from half a billion at the start of the Common Era to less than 2 billion at the turn of the 20th Century. It is only in the last hundred years of unbridled industrialisation and simultaneous rise of dehumanizing and despiritualising forces that the human population has grown 4-fold, from 2 billion in 1920 to the present population of 8 billion, a mark that was officially registered on 15 November 2022. Hopefully, humanity has learnt its lessons by now. We know what the problems are and how we can solve them together. 

(Adapted from Manav-Dharma – a compilation of spiritual discourse by Sadguru Sadafaldeo Maharaj, founder of Vihangam Yoga Sansthan)

Continuing dialogue on ‘India and the World’ lecture by External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar: Letter to IIM Calcutta

Delivering a lecture at the IIM Calcutta on 2nd of November, 2022, S. Jaishankar, India’s Union Minister for External Affairs, said that there is a larger change today underway in international affairs that is very important to comprehend. “This emanates from the weaponization of everything. In recent years, we have already seen how trade, connectivity, debt, resources and even tourism have become the point of political pressure. The Ukraine conflict has dramatically widened the scope of such leveraging,” Jaishankar said on the topic of “India and the World”.

Jaishankar said the scale of measures, technology control, infrastructure and service restrictions and seizure of assets, has truly been breathtaking.

At the same time, it is also a fact, that global rules and practices have been gamed for national advantage, in a manner that can no longer be overlooked,” he added. The minister said sharpening great power competition is inevitably creating stress factors across multiple domains. “At one level, it induces caution about international exposure but beyond a point that cannot be safeguarded because the very nature of existence is now globalized,” he said.

In a marvelous speech with historic proportions, he mentions 10 reasons why India is now taken seriously even as we are moving towards becoming a leading power.

  1. Handling of the Covid crises – Cowin portal, vaccine production and exports etc. (Disclaimer: I am unvaccinated and to the best of my knowledge this was a massive and unprecedented medical-politico conspiracy and should soon be public knowledge, as the lid blows off.)
  2. Robust economic recovery and the digitally enabled socio-economic delivery on a massive scale at a time when the global economy continues to face serious headwinds
  3. A growing economic relevance to the world reflected in greater FDI inflows, greater manufacturing, stronger exports and embrace of startups.
  4. An independent foreign policy in an increasingly polarised world, one that also speaks for the Global South.
  5. An innovative diplomacy that has introduced new concepts and platforms, without according a veto to others on our choices 
  6. A resolute national security policy that has seen us standing up to daunting challenges in border areas, even during the Covid period
  7. A determination to look after our own abroad – Operation Ganga in Ukraine, Operation Devi Shakti in Afghanistan
  8. A willingness to look out for others and often serve as a first responder in humanitarian or disaster response situation, especially in our own neighborhood
  9. Contributing to global betterment through initiatives in solar energy, disaster resilience, maritime security and counter-terrorism among others
  10. A perception that India as a civilizational-state is finding its place once again in the global order

A combination of changes in our political standing, economic weight, technology capabilities, cultural influence and the success of the Indian diaspora is moving India today into a higher orbit. But let us not underestimate the tasks ahead. For any power to rise in the global order is never easy. But to do so amidst the turbulence that I have described is doubly difficult. We see growing recognition in the world that India is getting its act together. Equally there is a realization that the big issue of our times cannot be solved without India’s contribution or participation. This is a moment when India resets the terms of engagement with the world. It is also a juncture when we should be prepared to take up greater responsibilities. India matters more to the world and we must make the best of it.

The inspiring talk was followed by an equally engaging interaction in which the Minister meticulously replied to every question. In response to IIM Calcutta’s announcement on its LinkedIn page, many alumni shared their interest to participate.

Interestingly, the idea of ‘weaponization of everything’ resonates with my presentation at the General Assembly of the World Health Council in April ’22 that tracks the historical markers over the past two millenia on how dehumanising forces in an intensely globalised world, have weaponoised every aspect of life from trade and commerce, education, agriculture, religion, professional guilds, nationalism, gender relations, and now, even healthcare. You can also look up the slides here.

As an alumnus of IIM Calcutta, I have written to the Director for a continuing dialogue on ‘India and the World’ as I share here for your feedback, comments and further participation in forthcoming events on this interesting subject.

The Director
IIM Calcutta
Kolkata, India.

Dear Uttam da,

Hearty congratulations to my alma mater for organizing the Dr S Jaishankar lecture on “India and the World’ on 2nd of November.

As Convenor for Gaia Earth Sansad, a civil society start-up for global peace, equality, dignity and prosperity, I have a keen interest in the climate and ecological restoration, geopolitics and India’s role in an increasingly turbulent, violent, insecure and dangerous world teetering at the brink of human extinction. Thinking aloud, I always wondered why IIMs didn’t engage more actively in national and global policy discourse and to shape the new emerging narrative in the post-industrial world order. 

I am glad and hopeful that the 33rd Institute Lecture by Dr Jaishankar will mark a new beginning in this direction. Through this email, I would like to call for a continuation of the ‘India and the World’ dialogue with Hon. Minister and IIM Calcutta – students, faculty and alumni.

Dr Jaishankar, in his talk on ‘India and the World’, refers to how the world order is fixated with old positions dating back to 1945 at the formation of United Nations, a most diabolical organisation based on the treacherous and fatally flawed precept of awarding permanent seats with veto powers in the Security Council to the aggressors of WWII, when its Charter explicitly calls to avert any further war and talks about peace, equality and dignity.

Yet, why does Hon. Minister stick to hackneyed notions of ‘developed’ world financing the ‘developing’ countries in the ‘Global South’ to meet climate targets, as he shared in response to a question on the Glasgow COP failure?

When in reality, the solution to climate crises lies in the large populations in the developing countries to exit the globalized predatory financial system and thus ‘de-financialise’ the ‘developed’ countries in the Global North and to stop the resources being siphoned and drained away in the neo-colonial era.

BRICS is making good moves in this direction but we need far more innovative approaches to achieve a breakthrough. In his brilliant and thought provoking speech, Dr Jaishankar talked about a combination of 10 factors that have moved India to a higher orbit in the global perception. This includes points 4,5 and 10 as I cite below. 

4. An independent foreign policy in an increasingly polarised world, one that also speaks for the Global South.

5. An innovative diplomacy that has introduced new concepts and platforms, without according a veto to others on our choices 

10. A perception that India as a civilizational-state is finding its place once again in the global order

He mentions how ‘there is a realization that the big issue of our times cannot be solved without India’s contribution or participation. This is a moment when India resets the terms of engagement with the world. It is also a juncture when we should be prepared to take up greater responsibilities.’  

My questions to Hon. Minister in this regard are as follows:

How can we, in the civil society and academia, work together with the government and especially the Ministry of External Affairs, for India to carry this momentum forward?

How can we together build capabilities and deliver on the responsibilities from this higher orbit and lead the much needed global reforms to address global challenges that as he says are increasingly affecting our daily lives, which cannot be ignored?


1. https://www.facebook.com/drsjaishankar/videos/2423406301131644/?extid=CL-UNK-UNK-UNK-IOS_GK0T-GK1C&mibextid=2Rb1fB&ref=sharing

Best regards,
Chandra Vikash
PGDM IIM Calcutta – 1995-97 (32nd batch)
B.Tech. IIT Kharagpur
Convenor – Gaia Earth Sansad

Rise Up Gondwana! – Tectonic Shifts in the Global South

Global problems created by the ‘Global North’ can only be solved at a higher level of thinking than which created them. As Covid blows the lid on how it is stuck with heavily invested ‘path dependency’ -deranged and delusional – and ‘sunk costs’ that have wiped out its ‘net worth’ and sanity, can the vindicated and unencumbered Global South, rise to the occasion?

”We have organizations for the preservation of almost everything in life that we want but no organization for the preservation of mankind. People seem to have decided that our collective will is too weak or flawed to rise to this occasion. They see the violence that has saturated human history and conclude that to practice violence is innate to our species. They find the perennial hope that peace can be brought to the earth once and for all a delusion of the well meaning who have refused to face the “harsh realities” of international life – the realities of self-interest, fear, hatred, and aggression. They have concluded that these realities are eternal ones, and this conclusion defeats at the outset any hope of taking the actions necessary for survival.”

– Jonathan Schell, The Fate of the Earth , 1982 referring to the ‘Global North’ mindset

‘Global North’ and ‘Global South’ in the light of Covid

The concept of Global North and Global South is used to describe a grouping of countries along socio-economic  and  political  characteristics as seen from the ‘non-indigenous’ lens of Euro-Western Universalism. Based on a fatally flawed notion of ‘development’ the North–South divide in a global context has brought humanity to the brink of extinction in just a few centuries by the beginning of third decade of the 21st century, with the Global North, the graveyard of the human species, as its pivot. This, in the new post-Covid world order, needs to be replaced by the indigenous lens if we are to preserve mankind with the so far colonised and oppressed ‘Global South’ as Gondwana, the cradle of the human society, as its new pivot.

Global North and Global South in the Old World Order – from the lens of Euro-Western Universalism

The Global South is a term often used to identify the regions of Central and South America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania – which geographically corresponds to Gondwana or Gondwanaland.

Gondwana makes up around two-thirds of today’s continental area, including South America, Africa, Antarctica, Australia, the Indian Subcontinent, Zealandia, and Arabia – and more than 99% of human population that shares its ethos of ‘cradle of life’. These regions that were part of Gondwana have shared floral and zoological elements as well as socio-cultural-spiritual bonds that persist to the present day.

Going beyond geography, Rise up Gondwana! is a call to the human society to move away from the graveyard mindset to a cradle of life mindset.

Shared Bio-geography, Cultural and Spiritual Traditions of Gondwana or Gondwanaland

‘Global South’ is also used with other de-humanising colonial era terms such as “Third World” and “Periphery”, that denote regions outside Europe and North America, mostly (though not all) low-income and often politically or culturally marginalized countries on one side of the so-called North-South divide.

The term as used by governmental and developmental organizations was first introduced as a more open and value-free alternative to “Third World” and similarly potentially “valuing” terms like ‘developing’ countries. Countries of the Global South have been described as newly industrialized or in the process of industrializing, and are frequently current or former subjects of colonialism.

In economic terms, as of early 21st century, the North—with one quarter of the world population—controls four-fifths of the income earned anywhere in the world. 90% of the manufacturing industries are owned by and located in the North. Inversely, the South—with three quarters of the world population—has access to one-fifth of the world income. As nations become economically developed, they may become part of definitions of the “North”, regardless of geographical location; similarly, any nations that do not qualify for “developed” status are in effect deemed to be part of the “South”. Rather than narrowing, this income divide has only become more steep and exploitative in the past two and a half years of the Covid ‘Pandemic’. With a well-orchestrated plan with hoards of lies, deception and hoaxes and malicious and mischievous Propaganda machine, it has ‘downgraded’ more than 99% of humanity to the ‘Global South’ in just over two years leaving behind a long tail of untold miseries, distress, disease and death.

Ukraine War: A new fault line in the Global North

My reading of the current geopolitical dynamics is that with Russia standing on our side in the people’s defense against bio-terrorism, In the 7 April voting to bar Russia from UNHRC, more than 6 billion people voted in support of Russia or abstained and only 1.5 billion around voted against Russia. The world is already divided into 2 camps. Strategically, on the agenda of the bio-psycho-spiritual warfare against humanity, Russia stands with the people 99% of who are now the ‘Global South’.


“I’m tired today. I’m tired of everything. I want to address the leaders of the world. What happens to you? Which evil plan are you designing?
You are people who are trying to deliberately reduce the population. They are doing this at the cost of lives of innocent people. Tyrants of the world I know your sinister plan to reduce the population of this planet. But today history will show you that collective wisdom and common sense are stronger. We demand that you back down on your plan. I stand here in peace today. And we ask you to keep the minds of the youth and the oppressed in peace. Take a firm step to see that I am aware of your plan. Your policies should change immediately. Your media needs to start telling the truth. America and Europe. If you do not [sic] finish your plan you must also face my wrath. Back off your plan. God and my country or death. VIVA!”

– Historic Speech by Vladimir Putin, President of Russia on 3rd April 2022

A failed United Nations : The other fault line in Global North

How UN agencies like IMF WB WHO WTO UNDP are working at cross purposes with not only it’s own Charter and stated goals to stop environmental vandalism and defend peace and harmony but also with many of its agencies that are doing good work on combating land degradation drought and desertification, protecting biodiversity and protecting from climate and ecological catastrophe.

From a closer reading, the world is divided into two camps that has already deepened the Cold War fault line of the Global North – America and Russia. America has control over money system, technologies, puppet regimes but only less than 1.5 billion people on its side. Russia has more than 6 billion people and has the deterrent military power, oil and gas supplies. Both of them have elaborate intelligence and strategy teams for decision support.

The balance of power in this rapidly emerging scenario is with the Mass Formation of nearly half a billion awakened people and activists around the world and reaching out to more than 99% of humanity in the Global South in the post-Covid world. If we can organise in a coherent cohesive and concerted way, to ally with the Russia camp of more than 6 billion people, we can stop the war and disband UN and WHO and also expose and collapse United States with its unmistakable track record as a rogue terrorist state that has destabilised several democratic regimes, wreaked havoc on those countries to loot and plunder its resources and kill and displace hundreds of millions of people since World War II.

Rise Up Gondwana! is a call to reclaim humanity and our indigenous identity to Gaia – Mother Earth, in these dehumanising times when non-indigenous thinking and ways of life over past few centuries have increasingly and in accelerating manner, violated our unalienable rights, our freedom and our unsullied dignity and brought us to the brink of extinction. This War against Nature and against Humanity must come to an end.
It is my firm belief that together, we can resolve complex issues of greed and gluttony, ignorance and hubris, bioterrorism, geopolitical aggression and expansionism, overpopulation, resource wars and ecological catastrophe that are not only making the world highly unsafe, inequitable and unjust, it threatens the very survival of the human species. 

Time to UN-change

In my reading of the situation, at the heart of this highly alarming crisis is a fatally flawed United Nations system that has failed beyond redemption and betrays its own Charter despite patchwork attempts to get it back on track. These failings have been pointed out by many of the world leaders today. 

“UN is outdated and unrepresentative”- Ramaphosa 

1. Emphasizing on the need “to be democratised so that the Council can be true to its mandate and move beyond the paralysis brought about by a few member states 

2. Need to curb the unilateral actions of these countries to shape global politics through aggression and other coercive measures like the imposition of unilateral sanctions.

3. The entire peace and security architecture of the United Nations needs to be overhauled. (1) 

 “We are bigger than Five” – Erdogan

1. Strong support for a just and peaceful international order – Since the conditions that existed after the Second World War have fundamentally changed, the preferences and expectations of the humanity should no longer be held captive to the will of the five permanent members in the UNS;

2. Plea against permanent membership and the accompanying veto mechanism;

3. Call for reforming the UN to render the UNSC more representative, transparent and accountable;

4. Outcry against imperialist interventions

5. A Security Council that does not represent the entire world can never serve to re-establish peace and justice around the world. (2)

“Empire of Lies” – Putin
1. Over the past 30 years we have been patiently trying to come to an agreement with the leading NATO countries regarding the principles of equal and indivisible security in Europe. Faced either cynical deception and lies or attempts at pressure and blackmail, while the North Atlantic alliance continued to expand despite our protests and concerns. Its military machine is moving and is approaching our very border.

2. The fundamental norms that were adopted following WWII and largely formalized its outcome – came in the way of those who declared themselves the winners of the Cold War

3. First a bloody military operation was waged against Belgrade, without the UN Security Council’s sanction but with combat aircraft and missiles used in the heart of Europe. The bombing of peaceful cities and vital infrastructure went on for several weeks. I have to recall these facts, because some Western colleagues prefer to forget them, and when we mentioned the event, they prefer to avoid speaking about international law, instead emphasizing the circumstances which they interpret as they think necessary.

4. Then came the turn of Iraq, Libya and Syria. The illegal use of military power against Libya and the distortion of all the UN Security Council decisions on Libya ruined the state, created a huge seat of international terrorism, and pushed the country towards a humanitarian catastrophe, into the vortex of a civil war, which has continued there for years. The tragedy, which was created for hundreds of thousands and even millions of people not only in Libya but in the whole region, has led to a large-scale exodus from the Middle East and North Africa to Europe.

5. A similar fate was also prepared for Syria. The combat operations conducted by the Western coalition in that country without the Syrian government’s approval or UN Security Council’s sanction can only be defined as aggression and intervention.(3)

Dissolve itself’ if it cannot punish Russia for war crimes –  Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy  urges UNSC (4)

Humanity continues to do more harm than good to nature, with the planet facing multiple existential threats requiring urgent corrective action – Speakers and panellists today told the Preparatory Committee for “Stockholm+50: a healthy planet for the prosperity of all — our responsibility, our opportunity”, the international environmental conference scheduled for 2 and 3 June 2022 in Stockholm, Sweden (5) 

Russia Condemns NATO Expansion as Sweden and Finland Consider Joining Alliance 

1. Sweden’s ruling Social Democrats said Monday they will review their long-standing policy of military nonalignment, after some lawmakers demanded Sweden apply for NATO membership.

2. Finnish leaders said they’re considering a plan to end Finland’s long-standing neutrality policy in order to join NATO.

3. “We have repeatedly said that NATO remains a tool geared toward confrontation. It’s not the kind of alliance that ensures peace and stability, and its further expansion will not bring additional security to the European continent.” – Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov

With these and a litany of several other failures, It is time to let go of the UN. Its fatal flaw lies in its skewed, prejudiced and unfair representation to the people around the world by preserving and perpetrating the delusionary and deranged power structure of the shameful and deplorable colonialist era and the European Wars. It is time to ‘UN-change’ to restore sanity and sense with the eternal and indigenous world order based on peace and harmony with nature and within human society. The double subduction effect of these two fault lines will speed up the tectonic shifts in the world order from the Global North to the Global South, with India, playing a vital role, just as it did nearly a hundred million years back as it collided with the Eurasian plate culminating in the monumental Himalayan orogeny that is also regarded as the Third Pole. It led to greater biodiversity that makes Gondwana, the cradle for life.

The Himalayas are a fantastic example of the power of uplift. Photo by Erik Tanghe via Pixabay.

As Covid has shrunk the Global North into a Satanic cult of greedy and gluttonous tribe of few thousand oligarchs and a grotesque and macabrous ideology of Transhumanism as a dead-end graveyard for humanity pushing it to the brink of extinction, Rise Up Gondwana! is harbinger of new tectonic shifts in the Global South of geopolitics. It is time for India to rise up and create a new Himalaya of renewed hope and faith in humanity and restore our greater diversity of Gondwana as a new ‘cradle of life’ when humanity needs it the most.

What is Covid Impasse and its resolution? – Tectonic shifts, ‘Global South’ and New World Order

Covid impasse and its resolution refers to an unstated but increasingly pronounced impasse between the first two ideologies and its resolution by the third way.

One, represented by United Nations, WEF and other aligned forces, which wants to ‘depopulate’ Earth of large sections of humans, by deceptively killing them, as it sees that as the only way to avert climate and ecological catastrophe.

Two is a large group of activists, which blindly opposes the UN and its allies. It opposes not only the ‘depopulation’ agenda but also sees the climate and ecological crises as a conspiracy and alleges geo-engineering and other climate altering weapons. It believes that population is not a problem at all.

Three is a relatively much smaller group, which acknowledges both climate and ecological as well as overpopulation problem (in relation to present state of natural ecosystems) and believes in dialogue and consultation to create a shared vision and plan of action for their resolution of the Covid impasse and to usher towards a healthy harmonious and holistic, indigenous and natural world order.

Representing this ‘third way’, the Gaia Alliance invites people who share the Gondwana spirit as ‘cradle of life’ to share their voices to defend our unalienable rights, our freedom and our unsullied dignity from a most treacherous dehumanising and despiritualising terrorism assault by the Global North.

Key pointers:

  1. How do we dismantle ‘obsolete structures’ like WHO, UN and the totalitarian Nation-states and create ‘parallel structures’ by 22 May 2022 when the 75th session of World Health Assembly begins?
  2. How do we decolonise minds and human habitats and make them human-scale and human appropriate in harmony with nature and within the human species?
  3. How do we reclaim the Indigenous as the soul of Humanity in a peaceful and harmonious way with dialogue and non-violent resistance that is the hallmark of Gondwana culture and political ethos?

Date: Saturday 30 April & Sunday 01 May 2022
Time: (Indian Standard Time) GMT +5:30hrs

Session 1: 8am to 10am (Focus on Oceania and South-East Asia)
Session 2: 12pm to 2pm (Focus on Sothasia/ Indian Sub-continent)
Session 3: 4pm to 6pm (Focus on Afrika)
Session 4: 8pm to 10pm (Focus on South America)

4sessions x 2hrs each x 2 days
Total 16 hrs. 32 speakers x15minutes each = 8 hrs + 8 hrs of interaction

Kindly share names of speakers as voices of your regions and guest speakers from the international arena in the comment box or email to gaiasansad@gmail.org .

Oceania/Australia/New Zealand/South-East Asia : 6 speakers

Suthasia/IIndian Subcontinent : 8 speakers

Arabia: 5 speakers

Afrika: 8 speakers

South & Central America: 5 speakers

You are also invited to join our Afro-Asian Sovereignty Coalition group on
Telegram. Kindly join with this link: https://t.me/+-Sm6O945ZqE2ZmU0

Gaia Nation: Reclaiming the Indigenous as the Soul of Humanity

The call for Gaia Union of the Global Indigenous – GUGLI as a ‘sovereign global indigenous nation’ is a legitimate demand within the present United Nations framework. Here is how.

‘We are all indigenous?’

“We are all Indigenous, irrespective of the color of our skin and our iris, our body structure, our skull size or the length of our noses. We are united and complete by the diversity of our cultures and the kaleidoscopic beauty of our languages and dialects, music and  dance, art and poetry, our healing and learning practices, our food and dressing practices, our houses and sacred spaces – as long as we live with the House Rules on this lovely blue-green planet that we believe and regard as our mother.

It is the non-indigenous – the totalitarian global monoculture, in the dark and diabolical shadows of colonialism – that creates mechanized and monstrous, greedy and gluttonous that borders on the inhuman that is dehumanizing de-spiritualizing and lends itself to the grotesque and macabre ideology of Transhumanism. Reviving our Indigenous is the better way to stop the Totalitarian monster that devours its own children.”

– Resolution of the 37th General Assembly of World Council for Health on Monday 18 April 2022

The 37th General Assembly meeting of World Council of Health on Monday  18th April had 425 million viewers from around the world reaching out to more than 50 countries with ~150 coalition partners. They all resonated with the idea that ‘We are all indigenous’ further to the Gaia proposition of what being indigenous truly means. If we can convey in this truthful fashion that indigenous is about following the ‘house rules’ of Gaia – Mother Earth to live in harmony with nature, a vast majority of people worldwide would self-identify themselves as indigenous.

Pointing out the dire current environmental and climate trends, Antonio Guterres, UN Secretary-General said “humanity is waging war on nature,” and that nature was already striking back with growing force and fury.” Consequently, he said that making peace with nature is the defining task of the 21st century. It must be the top, top priority for everyone, everywhere.”

UN Climate Change News, 2 December 2020

The Old World Order has a name. It is Non-indigenous, Faustian and Totalitarian

It must be clear that it is the non-indigenous or the dehumanised and despiritualised human-like people, groups and organisations based on Faustian Culture that are waging war on nature. If making peace with nature is the defining task of the 21st century, it must begin with by making the UN Declaration for Rights of Indigenous Peoples a globally enforceable mandate that has been lying in cold storage for ~15 years after being passed nearly unanimously by the UN General Assembly in 2007. and for the UN to admit its failures and fatal flaws and hand over to a truly representative and effective world body that is founded on indigenous principles and philosophy.

Indigenous identity and rights are enshrined in the epochal UN Declaration for Rights of Indigenous Peoples passed by the UN General Assembly in 2007. This was later shelved by the non-indigenous machination that has seized a near totalitarian control of the United Nations, instead of making it into a global mandate that holds answers not just for the global health crises primarily due to Terrain Toxicity and sedentary lifestyles but also for the climate and ecological catastrophe. As Dr. Tess Laurie, Mark Trozzi and Michael Alexander in the WCH General Assembly meeting on 24th January averred in the deliberations on Indigenous people and Natural Law raised by program host Dr. Jennifer Hibbert and Reiner Fuellmich, we are all Indigenous to Gaia, our Mother Earth. This is a significant break away from the earlier notion of non-indigenous treating Earth as mere material resource, and in words of Francis Bacon, a concubine to be raped and plundered. 

In the larger picture of what makes *non-indigenous as the dominant paradigm, is the raging debate on Eurocentric Universalism, and its fatally flawed world view.

*The Decline of the West* : In his epochal book written in the aftermath of the first world war, Oswald Spengler prophesied the Western Civilisation as *Faustian Culture*. A Faustian bargain is a pact where supreme moral or spiritual personal values or the soul is sold for some worldly or material benefit, such as knowledge, power, or riches.

Spengler introduces his book as a “Copernican overturning”—a specific metaphor of societal collapse—involving the rejection of the Eurocentric view of history, especially the division of history into the linear “ancient-medieval-modern” rubric. 

According to Spengler, the meaningful units for history are not epochs but whole cultures which evolve as organisms. He recognizes at least eight high cultures: 1. Babylonian, 2. Egyptian, 3. Chinese, 4. Indian, 5. Mesoamerican (Mayan/Aztec), 6. Classical (Greek/Roman, “Apollonian”), 7. Arabian (“Magian”), and 8. Western or European (“Faustian”). Cultures have a lifespan of about a thousand years of flourishing, and a thousand years of decline. The final stage of each culture is, in his word use, a “civilization”.

Spengler also presents the idea of Muslims, Jews and Christians, as well as their Persian and Semitic forebears, being “Magian”; Mediterranean cultures of antiquity such as Ancient Greece and Rome being “Apollonian”; and modern Westerners being “Faustian”.

According to Spengler, *the Western world is ending and we are witnessing the final season, the “winter” of Faustian Civilization.* In Spengler’s depiction, Western Man is a proud but tragic figure because, while he strives and creates, he secretly knows the actual goal will never be reached. Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron, Joe Biden, Xi Jinping, Jacinda Ardern and Narendra Modi among the powerful ruling elite in sight, who are criminally complicit, are living embodiment of the Western man, proud but tragic figure, who are keenly aware that Totalitarianism is intrinsically dissipative and self-destructive. They are riding on the wave of #MassFormationPsychosis centred on the ill-conceived Covid Plandemic that is certain to explode on their faces. We must however be prepared to create new system and structures for a healthy harmonious and holistic world order.

Gaia Nation is founded with a mission to create a new Mass Formation for Love & Harmony. Dismantling the obsolete structures and making way for new ‘parallel structures’ it calls for dissolution of the United Nations and hand over to the Gaia Nation – ‘Gaia Union of the Global Indigenous’ with immediate effect as an emergency response to the Covid crises that has brought humanity to the brink of extinction and is causing tremendous distress, disease and deaths with each passing day of the non-indigenous world order that the United Nations represents. The new world order will once again be restored to its indigenous principles that the world had strayed and misled from over past 5 centuries of growing non-indigenous ‘colonialists/settlers’ dominance that also tallies with the period of gross imbalances in human population, that is cited as a cause of concern by the UN, as this chart and the historical markers in the ‘linked’ presentation indicate.

UNDRIP 2007 Articles & the demand for Gaia Nation

In light of the above assertions of what truly is indigenous

Article 1: Indigenous peoples have the right to the full enjoyment, as a collective or as individuals, of all 8 human rights and fundamental freedoms as recognized in the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights law (Resolution 217 A (III)).

Article 2: Indigenous peoples and individuals are free and equal to all other peoples and individuals and have the right to be free from any kind of discrimination, in the exercise of their rights, in particular that based on their indigenous origin or identity.

Article 3: Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. 

Article 4: Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions. . 

Article 5: Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully, if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State. 

Article 6: Every indigenous individual has the right to a nationality 

Article 7 

7.1. Indigenous individuals have the rights to life, physical and mental integrity, liberty and security of person

7.2. Indigenous peoples have the collective right to live in freedom, peace and security as distinct peoples and shall not be subjected to any act of genocide or any other act of violence, including forcibly removing children of the group to another group

Article 8 

8.1. Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right not to be subjected to forced assimilation or destruction of their culture

8.2. States shall provide effective mechanisms for prevention of, and redress for

(a) Any action which has the aim or effect of depriving them of their integrity as distinct peoples, or of their cultural values or ethnic identities

(b) Any action which has the aim or effect of dispossessing them of their lands, territories or resources

(c) Any form of forced population transfer which has the aim or effect of violating or undermining any of their rights; 

(d) Any form of forced assimilation or integration; 

(e) Any form of propaganda designed to promote or incite racial or ethnic discrimination directed against them. – Propaganda against our Right to choose to vaccinate or not as ‘vaccine hesitancy’

Article 9: Indigenous peoples and individuals have the right to belong to an indigenous community or nation, in accordance with the traditions and customs of the community or nation concerned. No discrimination of any kind may arise from the exercise of such a right. 

Article 10: Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories. No relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned and after agreement on just and fair compensation and, where possible, with the option of return. 

Article 11 

11.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to practise and revitalize their cultural traditions and customs. This includes the right to maintain, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures, such as archaeological and historical sites, artefacts, designs, ceremonies, technologies and visual and performing arts and literature. 

11.2. States shall provide redress through effective mechanisms, which may include restitution, developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples, with respect to their cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property taken without their free, prior and informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs. (Note: Our body is cultural, intellectual, religious and spiritual property. Can it be forcefully masked, vaccinated, distanced and discriminated against for not submitting to coercion)

Article 12 

12.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to manifest, practise, develop and teach their spiritual and religious traditions, customs and ceremonies; the right to maintain, protect, and have access in privacy to their religious and cultural sites; the right to the use and control of their ceremonial objects; and the right to the repatriation of their human remains. 

12.2. States shall seek to enable the access and/or repatriation of ceremonial objects and human remains in their possession through fair, transparent and effective mechanisms developed in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned

Article 13 

13.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems and literatures, and to designate and retain their own names for communities, places and persons

13.2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that this right is protected and also to ensure that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means. 

Article 14 

14.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. 

14.2. Indigenous individuals, particularly children, have the right to all levels and forms of education of the State without discrimination. 

14.3. States shall, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, take effective measures, in order for indigenous individuals, particularly children, including 14 those living outside their communities, to have access, when possible, to an education in their own culture and provided in their own language. 

Article 15 

15,1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information. 

15.2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments of society. 

Article 16 

16.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to establish their own media in their own languages and to have access to all forms of non-indigenous media without discrimination. (Note: Discrimination by YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Google etc.)

16.2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that State-owned media duly reflect indigenous cultural diversity. States, without prejudice to ensuring full freedom of expression, should encourage privately owned media to adequately reflect indigenous cultural diversity.

Article 17 

17.1. Indigenous individuals and peoples have the right to enjoy fully all rights established under applicable international and domestic labour law. 

17.2. States shall in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples take specific measures to protect indigenous children from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development, taking into account their special vulnerability and the importance of education for their empowerment. (Note: Indigenous can reject Covid Snake Venom+toxic/hazardous substances Injection being given to children)

17.3. Indigenous individuals have the right not to be subjected to any discriminatory conditions of labour and, inter alia, employment or salary. 

Article 18: Indigenous peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own indigenous decision-making institutions. 

Article 19: States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.

(Note: According to Article 18-19, Indigenous people can reject WHO Pandemic Prevention Preparedness & Response Treaty

Article 20 

20.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of their own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all their traditional and other economic activities. 

20.2. Indigenous peoples deprived of their means of subsistence and development are entitled to just and fair redress. 

Article 21 

21.1. Indigenous peoples have the right, without discrimination, to the improvement of their economic and social conditions, including, inter alia, in the areas of education, employment, vocational training and retraining, housing, sanitation, health and social security. 

21.2. States shall take effective measures and, where appropriate, special measures to ensure continuing improvement of their economic and social conditions. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities. 

Article 22 

22.1. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities in the implementation of this Declaration. 

22.2. States shall take measures, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, to ensure that indigenous women and children enjoy the full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination. 

Article 23: Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for exercising their right to development. In particular, indigenous peoples have the right to be actively involved in developing and determining health, housing and other economic and social programmes affecting them and, as far as possible, to administer such programmes through their own institutions. 

Article 24

24.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to their traditional medicines and to maintain their health practices, including the conservation of their vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals. Indigenous individuals also have the right to access, without any discrimination, to all social and health services. 

24.2. Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. States shall take the necessary steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of this right. 

Article 25: Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinctive spiritual relationship with their traditionally owned or otherwise occupied and used lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources and to uphold their responsibilities to future generations in this regard. 

Article 26 

26.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired. 

26.2. Indigenous peoples have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership or other traditional occupation or use, as well as those which they have otherwise acquired. 

26.3. States shall give legal recognition and protection to these lands, territories and resources. Such recognition shall be conducted with due respect to the customs, traditions and land tenure systems of the indigenous peoples concerned. 

Article 27: States shall establish and implement, in conjunction with indigenous peoples concerned, a fair, independent, impartial, open and transparent process, giving due recognition to indigenous peoples’ laws, traditions, customs and land tenure systems, to recognize and adjudicate the rights of indigenous peoples pertaining to their lands, territories and resources, including those which were traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. Indigenous peoples shall have the right to participate in this process. 

Article 28 

28.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to redress, by means that can include restitution or, when this is not possible, just, fair and equitable compensation, for the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used, and which have been confiscated, taken, occupied, used or damaged without their free, prior and informed consent. 

28.2. Unless otherwise freely agreed upon by the peoples concerned, compensation shall take 21 the form of lands, territories and resources equal in quality, size and legal status or of monetary compensation or other appropriate redress. 

Article 29 

29.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources. States shall establish and implement assistance programmes for indigenous peoples for such conservation and protection, without discrimination. 

29.2. States shall take effective measures to ensure that no storage or disposal of hazardous materials shall take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent

29.3. States shall also take effective measures to ensure, as needed, that programmes for monitoring, maintaining and restoring the health of indigenous peoples, as developed and implemented by the peoples affected by such materials, are duly implemented. 

Article 30 

30.1. Military activities shall not take place in the lands or territories of indigenous peoples, unless justified by a relevant public interest or otherwise freely agreed with or requested by the indigenous peoples concerned. 

30.2. States shall undertake effective consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, through appropriate procedures and in particular through their representative institutions, prior to using their lands or territories for military activities. 

Article 31 

31.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the 23 right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions

31.2. In conjunction with indigenous peoples, States shall take effective measures to recognize and protect the exercise of these rights. 

Article 32 

32.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine and develop priorities and strategies for the development or use of their lands or territories and other resources

32.2. States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources. 

32.3. States shall provide effective mechanisms for just and fair redress for any such activities, and 24 appropriate measures shall be taken to mitigate adverse environmental, economic, social, cultural or spiritual impact. 

Article 33 

33.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine their own identity or membership in accordance with their customs and traditions. This does not impair the right of indigenous individuals to obtain citizenship of the States in which they live. 

33.2. Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the structures and to select the membership of their institutions in accordance with their own procedures. 

Article 34: Indigenous peoples have the right to promote, develop and maintain their institutional structures and their distinctive customs, spirituality, traditions, procedures, practices and, in the cases where they exist, juridical systems or customs, in accordance with international human rights standards. 

Article 35: Indigenous peoples have the right to determine the responsibilities of individuals to their communities

Article 36 

36.1. Indigenous peoples, in particular those divided by international borders, have the right to maintain and develop contacts, relations and cooperation, including activities for spiritual, cultural, political, economic and social purposes, with their own members as well as other peoples across borders. 

36.2. States, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take effective measures to facilitate the exercise and ensure the implementation of this right. 

Article 37 

37.1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honour and respect such treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements. 

37.2. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as diminishing or eliminating the rights of indigenous peoples contained in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements. 

Article 38: States in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take the appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to achieve the ends of this Declaration. 

Article 39 Indigenous peoples have the right to have access to financial and technical assistance from States and through international cooperation, for the enjoyment of the rights contained in this Declaration. 

Article 40 Indigenous peoples have the right to access to and prompt decision through just and fair procedures for the resolution of conflicts and disputes with States or other parties, as well as to effective remedies for all infringements of their individual and collective rights. Such a decision shall give due consideration to the customs, traditions, rules and legal systems of the indigenous peoples concerned and international human rights. 

Article 41 The organs and specialized agencies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations shall contribute to the full realization of the provisions of this Declaration through the mobilization, inter alia, of financial cooperation and technical assistance. Ways and means of ensuring participation of indigenous peoples on issues affecting them shall be established

Article 42: The United Nations, its bodies, including the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and specialized agencies, including at the country level, and States shall promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration. 

Article 43: The rights recognized herein constitute the minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world. 

Article 44: All the rights and freedoms recognized herein are equally guaranteed to male and female indigenous individuals. 

Article 45: Nothing in this Declaration may be construed as diminishing or extinguishing the rights indigenous peoples have now or may acquire in the future. 

Article 46 

46.1. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, people, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to the Charter of the United Nations or construed as authorizing or encouraging any action which would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States

46.2. In the exercise of the rights enunciated in the present Declaration, human rights and fundamental freedoms of all shall be respected. The exercise of the rights set forth in this Declaration shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law and in accordance with international human rights obligations. Any such limitations shall be non-discriminatory and strictly necessary solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and for meeting the just and most compelling requirements of a democratic society. 

46.3. The provisions set forth in this Declaration shall be interpreted in accordance with the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality, non-discrimination, good governance and good faith.

Who are indigenous peoples? – UN Fact Sheet

According to UN Fact Sheet on Who are indigenous peoples?, it is estimated that out of nearly 7.8 billion people on Earth, only more than 370 million indigenous people spread across 70 countries worldwide. It thereby claims that nearly 7.4 billion people, or 94.78% are not indigenous – not the Indian, the Chinese, the Afrikans which together constitute ~54% of world population – or even the French, German, Swedish or Russians.

The UN fact sheet says that indigenous people practice unique traditions, they retain social, cultural, economic and political characteristics that are distinct from those of the dominant societies in which they live. Are we saying that even after 75 years of the UN Charter and 22 years of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous issues, indigenous are only those which are still dominated in their own lands.

Is this not admission of a colossal failure of the UN system? On the principles laid down in the Preamble of its Charter that states: WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom?

The UN fact sheet mentions that indigenous peoples are spread across the world from the Arctic to the South Pacific, they are the descendants – according to a common definition – of those who inhabited a country or a geographical region at the time when people of different cultures or ethnic origins arrived. The new arrivals later became dominant through conquest, occupation, settlement or other means. Among the indigenous peoples are those of the Americas (for example, the Lakota in the USA, the Mayas in Guatemala or the Aymaras in Bolivia), the Inuit and Aleutians of the circumpolar region, the Saami of northern Europe, the Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders of Australia and the Maori of New Zealand. These and most other indigenous peoples have retained distinct characteristics which are clearly different from those of other segments of the national populations.

In the next section, understanding the term “indigenous”, it admits that considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an official definition of “indigenous” has ‘not’ been adopted by any UN-system body. Instead the system has developed a modern understanding of this term based on the following:

  1. Self- identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the community as their member.’
    Most people around the world today self-identify themselves as indigenous peoples. How does the UN arrive at the number of 370 million or less than 5% of human population as ‘indigenous’ even without an official definition?
  2. Historical continuity with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies
    What if the historical continuity has been ruptured and people are unable to reconnect with pre-colonial and/or pre-settler societies as they are still dominated and are denied their fundamental human rights, their freedom and their unsullied dignity and recourse to justice in the present system as per the UN Charter?
  3. Strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources
    Like many other species, humans are migratory and they do it as per their need and wants. Why should we presume that these migrations are necessarily to ‘colonise’ or ‘settle’ in territories that disrupts or robs the indigenous societies that may be previously living there?
    Could these be previously uninhabited areas or could the migrants be living in harmony with already present communities ?
    In a dynamic planet with changing geo-climatic conditions, why should UN presume the ‘indigenous’ to be historically ‘static’?
  4. Distinct social, economic or political systems
  5. ‘Distinct language, culture and beliefs’
    What should indigenous social, economic or political systems be distinct from?
    What if they are even today systemically denied their freedom to have their indigenous, economic or political system and their indigenous language, culture and beliefs?
    Why should indigenous systems and ways of life always be distinct from each other?
    What about the global indigenous social, economic and political systems, language, culture and beliefs?
  6. Form non-dominant groups of society
    Why should the UN presume that indigenous peoples should always be non-dominant groups of society? In an era of globalization, what about global domination by the non-indigenous colonisers, even if the indigenous peoples are dominant locally but subverted by globalist non-indigenous forces?
  7. Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive peoples and communities
    Why should this presume that ancestral environments and systems are static and that indigenous people should not innovate and adapt to the changing realities – whether natural or manmade – in their own ways based on indigenous principles of living in harmony with nature and with human societies? Why should these always be ‘distinct’ from each other ?

A question of identity

• According to the UN the most fruitful approach is to identify, rather than define indigenous peoples. This is based on the fundamental criterion of self-identification as underlined in a number of human rights documents.

• The term “indigenous” has prevailed as a generic term for many years. In some countries, there may be preference for other terms including tribes, first peoples/nations, aboriginals, ethnic groups, adivasi, janajati. Occupational and geographical terms like hunter-gatherers, nomads, peasants, hill people, etc., also exist and for all practical purposes can be used interchangeably with “indigenous peoples”.

• In many cases, the notion of being termed “indigenous” has negative connotations and some people may choose not to reveal or define their origin. Others must respect such choices, while at the same time working against the discrimination of indigenous peoples.

Culture and Knowledge

Indigenous peoples are the holders of unique languages, knowledge systems and beliefs and possess invaluable knowledge of practices for the sustainable management of natural resources. They have a special relation to and use of their traditional land. Their ancestral land has a fundamental importance for their collective physical and cultural survival as peoples. Indigenous peoples hold their own diverse concepts of development, based on their traditional values, visions, needs and priorities. Political participation Indigenous peoples often have much in common with other neglected segments of societies, i.e. lack of political representation and participation, economic marginalization and poverty, lack of access to social services and discrimination. Despite their cultural differences, the diverse indigenous peoples share common problems also related to the protection of their rights. They strive for recognition of their identities, their ways of life and their right to traditional lands, territories and natural resources.

We are all indigenous – II

A beautiful touching story that so lucidly captures the trauma and travails of the colonisers and settler societies on the vital lies that they must hide from their own conscious minds. But the simple truth as the storyteller avers is that the realization deep down that “We are all indigenous” is a cathartic one.


“A voice speaks from the darkest corner. A woman’s voice—strong, settled, confident. She gives a prayer in an indigenous language, a tongue my ears don’t understand. She shifts to English for a moment, calling on the ancestors for protection, honoring them, and thanking them for all life. She prays for the waters, the sky, the rocks. She prays for the people, to be at peace with one another and with all our relations, to live in joyful communion with nature and spirit.

Just as I wonder whether this woman might be asking too much of human beings, she utters something clear and wonderful that catches my attention:

“We are all indigenous.”

She repeats it again, and again. We are all indigenous. We are all indigenous. We are all indigenous to this Earth.

“I am indigenous to this land. And so are you,” she says. “I am indigenous to these waters, and so are you. I am indigenous to this soil, and a child of Mother Earth, and so are you. All of us—all of us—are indigenous to this world. We belong to it. It is our home.”

She continues, “If we are to find peace with one another, we must understand that this planet is our mother, and we are all brothers and sisters. We were all born from the same womb. There is no such thing as my land and yours, unless we say it is so. And if we don’t care for the land as our mother, if we don’t care for our shared home together, we are in danger of destroying her. Please, join with me.”

The room falls quiet. The only light comes from strands of twinkling bulbs strewn across the floor, and their reflections in the many mirrors that circle the room. Blue and white sparkles surround us all like stars. For a moment, a shared understanding fills the room that we are all one, of the same mother, praying under the same sky. And then the dancing begins.

I understand there’s a danger in making the statement, “We are all indigenous.”

In the fall, we celebrate Native American Heritage Month in our country. As I ponder the meaning of that celebration, I think of a comment I heard recently from philosopher Noam Chomsky, remarking on a review of a book by someone he calls a “major American historian.” He said, the book’s author mentions that when early European explorers came to the Western Hemisphere there had been approximately one million native people living up and down the length of the continent. But the historian was far off in estimates of the true population, which Chomsky says would have been closer to 60-70 million.

Why the discrepancy? How did a historian miss 59 million-or-more people and instead only report one million?

Answer: by failing to count the millions upon millions of indigenous people of those lands who were killed—by disease, famine, and war—in the wake of the European settlers’ arrival. Why were those people either not counted, or dis-counted? Did the European settlers (or historians) of that time not see those many millions of people? Did they see them, but not see them as people? Did they see them as people, but following some narrow-eyed convention of the day, presume the native people of the Americas literally did not count? Or, did they see it all and just decide to cook the numbers to hide any blood that might be on their hands?

We are all indigenous – III

“As a Mohawk elder told me once, there was once a time on this planet when all of the races were doing just the same, sitting around fires, prayingto the elemental forces of nature and the Earth and to the mysticism of the skies and stars above; hovelling in circle and community; seeking to connect and live with the land and each other in the most peaceful and harmonious way possible.

This same elder told me that it was an old prophecy that the indigenous of Turtle Island knew that destructive peoples would come one day and many of them would die by their hands. The prophecy foretold that these peoples were struck with madness and that, in fact, they had come all this way to be healed by them, but that the red people would have to go through much sacrifice to help them.

It is time we honoured the sacrifices of our indigenous brethren and go humbly to them to understand them; to learn about their love of their Earth which we have twisted into something dangerous.

It is time, because there is no more time; this is why they’re again putting their lives on the line, for something greater.”

Link: https://www.elephantjournal.com/2013/01/we-are-all-indigenous-darren-austin-hall/

The questions that this raises in my mind are as follows:

Shall we shy away from, deny or defer this stark realization even when this might be our best chance to #StopTheTreaty and #DisbandWHO by creating a mass formation for Gaia Nation as a global indigenous humanist sovereign – a parallel structure in the letter and spirit of UN Declaration for Rights of Indigenous Peoples?

Shall we deny our children their right to life, to good health and well-being just because we can’t come to terms with this dark side of human history?

Shall we agree to be labelled as the non-indigenous, fully aware that it borders on being inhuman and lends itself to the dehumanising and despiritualising descent into the grotesque and macabre ideology of Transhumanism?

#VitalLiesSimpleTruths #WeAreAllIndigenous


What is United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples UNDRIP 2007?

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was adopted by the General Assembly on Thursday, 13 September 2007, by a majority of 144 states in favour, 4 votes against (Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States) and 11 abstentions (Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Burundi, Colombia, Georgia, Kenya, Nigeria, Russian Federation, Samoa and Ukraine). Click here to view the voting record.

Years later the four countries that voted against have reversed their position and now support the UN Declaration. Today the Declaration is the most comprehensive international instrument on the rights of indigenous peoples. It establishes a universal framework of minimum standards for the survival, dignity and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the world and it elaborates on existing human rights standards and fundamental freedoms as they apply to the specific situation of indigenous peoples. 

The UNDRIP (A/RES/61/295) resolution was adopted by the General Assembly on 13 September 2007. The General Assembly, taking note of the recommendation of the Human Rights Council contained in its resolution 61/178 of 20 December 2006, decided to defer consideration of and action on the Declaration to allow time for further consultations and also decided to conclude its consideration before the end of the sixty-first session of the General Assembly, 


Call for Action

1. The Gaia Nation Inaugural Summit

Friday 22 April to Tuesday 26 April 2022

Session I: Press Announcement: Can this GUGLI bowl out the old, non-indigenous and totalitarian Covid world order? – Launch function of Gaia Union of the Global Indigenous
Friday 22nd April 2022 8pm IST

Session II: The Gaia Nation Constituent Assembly Meeting
Saturday 23rd April 2022 4pm IST

Session III: Preparatory Meetings for a. PFII Annual Session, b. UNCCD COP15, c. Better Way Conference, d. Stockholm +50 and e. GAIA Earth Sansad Foundation from 26 April to 5 June, 2022
Sunday 24th April 2022 4pm IST

2. PFII Annual Session  

25 April to 6 May 2022, New York & Online

2.1 Seek endorsement from friendly member-states
2.2 Create consensus for global enforceable mandate for UN Declaration for Rights of Indigenous People passed by UN General Assembly in 2007
2.3 As global indigenous, we are the stewards and custodians for grassroots to global political judicial economic systems as per UNDRIP 2007
2.4 Move resolution at PFII Annual Session to dissolve WHO and UN and hand over to the global indigenous by 20 May and 5 June 2022 respectively

Link: https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/unpfii-twenty-first-session-25-april-6-may-2022.html 


9-20 May 2022 Abidjan, Ivory Coast

3.1 Global mandate for enforcement of LACE-GAIA model to combat desertification, land degradation and drought
3.2 Amalgamation with Climate Change UNCCF, Bio-diversity and UNEP into a streamlined unit
3.3 Dissolution of UN agencies working at cross-purposes with environment agenda – WTO, IMF, WB etc.
Link: https://www.unccd.int/cop15 
Report on UNCCD COP 14 : https://counterview.org/2019/09/20/importance-of-indigenous-learning-to-achieve-un-goal-of-combating-desertification-drought/

4. Better Way Conference

Bath, UK and online, 20-22 May 2022

4.1 Conversation 1: Reclaiming Humanity as the Indigenous (not just Science)

Keynote: We are all Indigenous irrespective of the colour of our skin and our iris, our body structure  our skull size or the length of nose. We are united – robust and whole – by the diversity of our languages and the kaleidoscopic beauty of our languages and dialects, music and  dance, art and poetry, our healing and learning practices, our food and dressing practices, our houses and sacred spaces. It is the non-indigenous – the monstrous monoculture, mechanized and monstrous, greedy and gluttonous that borders on the inhuman that is dehumanizing despiritualizing and lends itself to the grotesque and macabrous ideology of Transhumanism. Reviving our Indigenous is the better way to stop the Totalitarian monster that devours its own children.

4.2 Conversation 2: Disbanding WHO and United Nations for being criminal conspirators and betraying their own Charters

 (Managing C19 Health Consequences is important but not a strategic issue at this critical juncture. We need to work closely together for dialogue with favourable state actors especially as the world is already divided into 2 camps after the Russia/UNHRC voting in UNGA on 7th April)

If you see the two graphics carefully, majority of people globally who are unvaxxed or oppose the Covid genocide also overtly or covertly support Russia and its powerful allies – China South Africa Brazil and India against the Transhumanist World Order.

4.3 Conversation 3: Think Global, Act Local: Fostering Active  Communities for localised abundance and circular economies (we need to build the capacity and create policy frameworks to make the changes on the ground)
4.4 Conversation 4: Reclaiming & Revolutionizing Media and the communication channels
4.5 Conversation 5,6 and 7 (to be merged together with 3 sub-topics): Creating ‘Parallel Structures’ of grassroots to global governance system with GAIA Earth Sansad- A Better Way 

a. Law, Justice, & Human Rights

An astonishing number of people are building the better way around our world. This lighthouse into our future is built on awareness and creating new ways of living, grounded in community, in resilience, in ideas ancient and new. How do we actively create a world in which people thrive?

b. Health, Environment, & Sovereignty

From soil to water and food, the relationship between health, environment, and sovereignty are seamlessly intertwined. As we walk towards a healthy and independent future, we engage one of the most important questions: How do we identify and address environmental health challenges? 

c. Innovate, Integrate, & Meditate

Humans are instinctively drawn to an integrated approach to health, a return to nature, and frequencies of wellness and trust. A health revolution is in our midst, sparked by compassion, courage, and innovation. How do we innovate integrative approaches to managing our health?

Link: https://betterwayconference.org/speakers 

5. Stockholm +50 Int’l Environment Meeting

2-3 June 2022, Stockholm, Sweden

5.1 ‘Humanity Still Doing More Harm than Good to Nature, Speakers Warn Preparatory Committee’ : Dialogue on Corrective Action

5.2 Gaia resolution for globally enforceable mandate for LACE-GAIA model for localised abundance and circular economies & for Devolution of economic powers and commons to grassroots community-states 

(3900-4000 Community-States with population of ~2 million each and not more than one central city/hub with population limit of 0.5 million and geographical limits)

Link: https://www.stockholm50.global/

6. Foundation of GAIA Earth Sansad

5 June 2022, Durban, South Africa

6.1 New global constitution based on UNDRIP 2007, Declaration of Peace & Cessation of War (DPCW) and LACE-GAIA Model
6.2 Transition and Handover meeting with United Nations system
6.3 Announcement of timeline and action plan and policy framework for healthy harmonious and holistic world order and restoring natural eco-systems to protect, support and strengthen indigenous ways of life
Link: www.gaiasansad.org 

Plan of Action – 20 April to 5 June 2022

Dismantle Obsolete Structures and Create ‘Parallel Structure’ in Six and a half weeks (3 fortnights / 45 days)

Note: The 37th General Assembly meeting of World Council of Health on Monday  18th April had 425 million viewers from around the world reaching out to more than 50 countries with ~150 coalition partners. With our continuing efforts, this *Mass Formation of Awakened People and Activists* of nearly half a billion people would be the 3rd largest country in the world. I proposed this Plan of Action for all concerned to consolidate our forces and surge ahead with greater momentum and a coherent and cohesive narrative and concerted campaign.

This is a draft proposal for feedback suggestions and further detailing with roles and responsibilities, resource requirements and shared commitment to the need for Emergency Response to the Totalitarian crises spiralling out of control – growing distress disease and deaths, assault on our unalienable rights our freedom and our unsullied dignity and the irreparable damage to our natural ecosystems.

Link: ‘A Better Way for healthy  harmonious  and holistic world order and Indigenous ways of life’ presentation on Mon 18 April at WCH 37th General  Assembly meeting : 

Program Schedule & Agenda

1. 20 April to 26 April 2022 – Consolidation of the Mass Formation of Awakened People and Activists, World Council for Health along with 150 coalition partners from 50 countries worldwide; other organisations groups and persons into ‘Parallel Structures’ with Shadow roles and responsibilities for a streamlined lean agile effective and responsive world body to take the hand over as we disband UN / WHO system along with all the corrupted and compromised government establishments upto the grassroots levels.

2. 25 April to 6 May 2022 – Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues Annual Session, New York, US & Online

3. 9 May to 20 May 2022 – UN Convention to Combat Desertification, Land Degradation & Drought COP 15, Abidjan, Ivory Coast

4. 20-22 May 2022 – Better Way Conference, Bath UK

5. 2-3 June 2022 – Stockholm +50 Int’l Environment Meeting, Stockholm, Sweden

6. 5 June 2022 – Foundation of WCH++ and GAIA Earth Sansad++, Durban, South Africa


1. Working Sessions 20 April to 26 April 2022 Online

1.1 Working Session I: World Health Alliance Steering Committee

1.2 Working Session II: Gaia Earth Sansad Constituent Assembly

1.3 Working Session III: Preparatory Meetings for a. PFII Annual Session, b. UNCCD COP15, c. Better Way Conference, d. Stockholm +50 and e. GAIA Earth Sansad Foundation from 26 April to 5 June, 2022

2. PFII Annual Session  25 April to 6 May 2022, New York & Online

2.1 Seek endorsement from friendly member-states

2.2 Create consensus for global enforceable mandate for UN Declaration for Rights of Indigenous People passed by UN General Assembly in 2007

2.3 As global indigenous, we are the stewards and custodians for grassroots to global political judicial economic systems as per UNDRIP 2007

2.4 Move resolution at PFII Annual Session to dissolve WHO and UN and hand over to the global indigenous by 20 May and 5 June 2022 respectively

Link: https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/unpfii-twenty-first-session-25-april-6-may-2022.html 

3. UNCCD COP 15 9-20 May 2022 Abidjan, Ivory Coast

3.1 Global mandate for enforcement of LACE-GAIA model to combat desertification, land degradation and drought 

3.2 Amalgamation with Climate Change UNCCF, Bio-diversity and UNEP into a streamlined unit

3.3 Dissolution of UN agencies working at cross-purposes with environment agenda – WTO, IMF, WB etc.

Link: https://www.unccd.int/cop15 
Report on UNCCD COP 14 : https://counterview.org/2019/09/20/importance-of-indigenous-learning-to-achieve-un-goal-of-combating-desertification-drought/

4. Better Way Conference, Bath, UK and online, 20-22 May 2022

4.1 Conversation 1: Reclaiming Humanity as the Indigenous (not just Science)

Keynote: We are all Indigenous irrespective of the colour of our skin and our iris, our body structure  our skull size or the length of nose. We are united – robust and whole – by the diversity of our languages and the kaleidoscopic beauty of our languages and dialects, music and  dance, art and poetry, our healing and learning practices, our food and dressing practices, our houses and sacred spaces. It is the non-indigenous – the monstrous monoculture, mechanized and monstrous, greedy and gluttonous that borders on the inhuman that is dehumanizing despiritualizing and lends itself to the grotesque and macabrous ideology of Transhumanism. Reviving our Indigenous is the better way to stop the Totalitarian monster that devours its own children.

4.2 Conversation 2: Disbanding WHO and United Nations for being criminal conspirators and betraying their own Charters

 (Managing C19 Health Consequences is important but not a strategic issue at this critical juncture. We need to work closely together for dialogue with favourable state actors especially as the world is already divided into 2 camps after the Russia/UNHRC voting in UNGA on 7th April)

If you see the two graphics carefully, majority of people globally who are unvaxxed or oppose the Covid genocide also overtly or covertly support Russia and its powerful allies – China South Africa Brazil and India against the Transhumanist World Order.

4.3 Conversation 3: Think Global, Act Local: Fostering Active  Communities for localised abundance and circular economies (we need to build the capacity and create policy frameworks to make the changes on the ground)

4.4 Conversation 4: Reclaiming & Revolutionizing Media and the communication channels

4.5 Conversation 5,6 and 7 (to be merged together with 3 sub-topics): Creating ‘Parallel Structures’ of grassroots to global governance system with GAIA Earth Sansad- A Better Way 

a. Law, Justice, & Human Rights

An astonishing number of people are building the better way around our world. This lighthouse into our future is built on awareness and creating new ways of living, grounded in community, in resilience, in ideas ancient and new. How do we actively create a world in which people thrive?

b. Health, Environment, & Sovereignty

From soil to water and food, the relationship between health, environment, and sovereignty are seamlessly intertwined. As we walk towards a healthy and independent future, we engage one of the most important questions: How do we identify and address environmental health challenges? 

c. Innovate, Integrate, & Meditate

Humans are instinctively drawn to an integrated approach to health, a return to nature, and frequencies of wellness and trust. A health revolution is in our midst, sparked by compassion, courage, and innovation. How do we innovate integrative approaches to managing our health?

Link: https://betterwayconference.org/speakers 

5. Stockholm +50 Int’l Environment Meeting 2-3 June 2022, Stockholm, Sweden

5.1 ‘Humanity Still Doing More Harm than Good to Nature, Speakers Warn Preparatory Committee’ : Dialogue on Corrective Action

5.2 Gaia resolution for globally enforceable mandate for LACE-GAIA model for localised abundance and circular economies & for Devolution of economic powers and commons to grassroots community-states 

(3900-4000 Community-States with population of ~2 million each and not more than one central city/hub with population limit of 0.5 million and geographical limits)

Link: https://www.stockholm50.global/ 

6. Foundation of GAIA Earth Sansad 5 June 2022, Durban, South Africa

6.1 New global constitution based on UNDRIP 2007, Declaration of Peace & Cessation of War (DPCW) and LACE-GAIA Model

6.2 Transition and Handover meeting with United Nations system

6.3 Announcement of timeline and action plan and policy framework for healthy harmonious and holistic world order and restoring natural eco-systems to protect, support and strengthen indigenous ways of life

Link: www.gaiasansad.org 

Best Regards,

Chandra Vikash
Convenor – GES
GAIA Earth Sansad
+91 8595397605
twitter: @GSansad

Reference: ‘A Better Way for healthy  harmonious  and holistic world order and Indigenous ways of life’
Link: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1CouqCK2iwHHZdKv3AZBrMoJsY2z5hckQIIWtrGyaSuY/edit?usp=sharing