Frédérick Leroy Exposing WEF UN EAT-Lancet Meatless Diet Plans

[monty]

More of F. Leroy’s writings here. https://threadreaderapp.com/user/fleroy1974

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1320325767620866053.html

Frédéric Leroy

2,801 views
Relax! The founder of @wef, Klaus Schwab, has described 'stakeholder capitalism' as his preferred model, positioning 'private corporations as trustees of society' to 'address social and environmental challenges'.
In 2019, WEF entered into a partnership with the United Nations to accelerate the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (#sustainabledevelopmentgoals) Its plan is to shape policy proposals through a Fourth Industrial Revolution using the 'URGENCY' credo.
Anybody knows WHY the development of the Sustainable Development Goals (#SDGs), which are now gospel, required the presence of the ex-CEO of Unilever, Podesta, Cameron, etc. in the UN panel of '27 eminent persons'? Philanthropy surely?
The '#PlanetaryHealthDiet' & #Foodcanfixit model developed by the #EATLancetCommission, which is designed to generate a top-down #GreatFoodTransformation, is WEF's dietary model of choice.
EAT's founder: "I contacted Prof Rockström, executive director of Stockholm Resilience Center, to discuss how we could gather the world’s leading experts and stakeholders from different disciplines and sectors to convene a potential ‘Davos for Food’"
Or is the Future of Food= 3D-printed microbial glop?

Also on EAT's advisory board: the founder of Rethinkx, a UK think tank promoting 'precision fermentation protein' to bring the meat and dairy industries to '#collapse' by 2030.
Anybody surprised that BlackRock is on EAT's advisory board too, to decide about our global Future of Food and in support of the Great Food Transformation (check: eatforum.org/people/advisor…)?

The world's largest asset manager and shadow bank: thestrategystory.com/2020/09/18/bla…
EAT works very closely with the World Resources Institute. WRI's Board of Directors has close ties to Davos' WEF, large financial institutions (Goldman Sachs, ..), the Council on Foreign Relations, Rockefeller Foundation, Oxford Analytica, ... wri.org/about/board
WRI's Corporative Consultative Group encompasses major players in the food and beverages industry too (wri.org/business/join-…) Its activities within the dietary sphere include the development of social engineering initiatives to implement EAT's Great Food Transformation.
Their theoretical framework is based on the “Shift Wheel” approach to “#DisguiseTheChange”, make meat “socially unacceptable” & “constrain its display” ... wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/Sh…
Which is all rather needed, since EAT perfectly know that we shouldn't "leave this to the individual or the whim of consumer choice". What is needed according to its commission is: HARD POLICY INTERVENTIONS. thelancet.com/journals/lance…
Stepping up. the above-mentioned EAT, WEF, WBCSD, WRI, UN, & their allies of the industrial-NGO complex (eg. WWF) are part of a "Global Commons Alliance" together with large business platforms [e.g., Ceres, Natural Capital Coalition, and We Mean Business] globalcommonsalliance.org
Oh look who's also part of this larger network (cf. red box in the previous picture). The winner of the highest environmental distinction of the United Nations: Impossible Foods. Is the UN now officially marketing junk food?
Or let me rephrase that: are the United Nations now giving prestigious prizes to forces that want to push animal husbandry into a 'death spiral'?
Because words like 'collapse', 'death' & 'elimination' seem to be part of the vocabulary indeed. So what's the timeline for this Great Food Transformation?
And the UN seems to be happy about mayors of global cities committing themselves to achieve EAT's Planetary Health Diet for their citizens by 2030? Which in an ambitious scenario means no #meat, no #dairy? Don't believe me? Read this: c40.org/press_releases…
Branca, member of EAT & WHO made it clear that, within the food system, 'everything has to be #reset [...] we have to have much smaller amounts of meat on our tables. We need to #reset, and we need to adjust... The WHO will be working on the consumer side'
In parallel to the #GreatReset, 'Action tracks' will be developed at the UNFoodSummit 2021 (#FoodSystems); the track dealing with 'sustainable diets' will be chaired by EAT's founder (Stordalen) & will have the @WHO at its disposition as 'anchoring agency' un.org/sustainabledev…
The goal, according to EAT, is 'to take full advantage of the Summit' and 'to force the kind of far-reaching changes that the world now desperately needs'.

Lean back, they'll take care of your needs.
Another 2021 UN summit (Convention on Biological Diversity), has been targeted by EAT/WEF/WRI's partner WWF to demand a designation of 50% of the planet as Protected Areas by 2050. This agenda involves a critical overhaul of the food production system.
Will it really be the end of meat, as some within this network claim? No, the World Economic Forum will look after you - they'll make it in a lab. Which makes so much more sense. From a totalitarian point of view with control over the food supply that is.

https://twitter.com/o_rips/status/1275505632712380416?s=20

In any case, they are ready to go "DEEP INTO the policy, regulatory environments, and businesses" of some selected countries. Colombia, Indonesia, Ethiopia first. Next up: Nordic countries, Australia, Europe.

eatforum.org/initiatives/fo…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

[monty]

Another interesting twitter thread posted by Frédéric Leroy. He always manages to inject his sense of humor into his presentations.


https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...836371970.html

Frédéric Leroy

淋 THREAD

The current age is one of SYSTEMISM or ‘faith in Systems’.

Below some reflections on the very fashionable #FoodSystems paradigm (based on Gall's great work 'Systemantics'), especially in view of the upcoming 2021 @UN@FoodSystems Summit.

There may be trouble ahead.


The prevailing view is one of the System-as-machine, whereby it would suffice to know & master a set of underlying mechanisms to understand, predict, & steer System’s behaviour & outcomes, in response to a Problem.

However, this utopian mindset has been criticized for the likely failure & damage it entails & the false sense of holistic management it seems to suggest. Frequently, Systems turn out to be an interventionist expression of high-modernist and reductionist top-down administration.


The Problem Food Systems aim to tackle through a #FoodCanFixIt approach consist of an alleged ‘broken food chain’ & the consumption of unhealthy & unsustainable diets. Although there's noble intent in that mission, it's likely to meet the pitfalls of System design & management.
Systems behave unpredictably & go out of control when growing in size & complexity. During that process, they lose some of their basic functions while creating new & unexpected ones. Complexity *emerges*, whereas any element of one system is also an element in countless others.


Worse, Systems usually operate in #failure mode, not functioning as expected. Instead of accomplishing a pre-set goal, they create new, persistent, & encroaching problems associated with their functioning or even with their mere presence.
Such malfunction is not easily detectable (if ever) due to a lack of proper criteria for evaluation, which for large Systems may be beyond human capacity. The LARGER the System, the larger the errors, and the more chance that they escape notice or be excused.
Moreover, old and failed Systems tend to linger as putrefying cadavers or toxic waste, & become new problems to be cleaned up, thereby creating even more new Systems. Also, taking a System down is more tedious than setting it up.

Although System evaluation is cited as a part of its management, this practically translates into an asphyxiating formalization of Goals & Objectives. The latter generate an ILLUSION of achievement & efficiency but mostly imply administrative encirclement & negative feedback.
Systems behave as if they have a will to live & work for their own Goals, rather than for the benefit of humanity or the Stated Purpose of the System (e.g., ‘#BuildBackBetter’).

Both the System & people contained therein tend to *NOT* do what the System claims they are doing.

Instead, they bring new ‘realities’ into existence & perpetuate what they have named (often as a slogan; eg 'war on poverty’). They take credit for desirable events (called Outcomes) that are believed to be causally induced by the System, but disregard output that is undesirable.
Yet, what hasn’t been named or has been denied existence is not considered as ‘REAL’. By then, Systems that are sufficiently large and complex absorb all attention to making its program work rather than on the problem that needed to be solved.


People immersed in Systems are shielded from the real world, being only exposed to filtered & distorted versions of it. This creates a virtual reality, narrowed down by the use of metrics & identifiers, rather than interactions with actual human communities & their environments.

As a result, people in Systems develop a suspension of normal mental activity & replace it by a trance-like state & a ‘mania of self-esteem’, catalyzed by titles & the illusion of power. Systems designers also tend to design ways for themselves to bypass the System.
Systems attract Systems-people, individuals who easily adapt to life in Systems, & select for increasing specialization. The end result of this may be bizarreness, the accumulation of internal communication processes dealing with unfinished tasks, & self-referential NOISE.


Systems aim at data-gathering. This yields little *information* & tends to be self-defeating. With increasing digitalisation, datasets, & ICT, the opportunities for (& impact of) error will rise due to the inability of human imagination to anticipate malfunction. #4IR

Failure will likely decrease if:

- already existing Systems are used, preferably small ones, while working Systems are best left alone

- new Systems evolve from working systems & are gently implemented, to avoid disturbance of working Systems

- Systems *increase* options
- system failures, obtained through proper rapid feedback, are acknowledged & cherished, not used to further ‘push on the System’

- systems are loose, simple in structure, aligned with basic motivations, & working with human tendencies rather than against them
Given all the known damage that can originate from (usually authoritarian) Grand System approaches, I largely prefer the potential of modest, common-sense, organic, bottom-up dynamics. Working *with* communities, animals, & ecosystems. My views here:
Another reason for favouring dialogue with actual farmer communities over transnational corporate networks (in the massive public-private partnerships that are now infesting Food Systems initiatives) is that it minimizes toxic agenda setting.

... and favours traditional, wholesome food solutions over the dystopian evolution towards corporate-owned & lab-grown imitation foods (now presented by some of the Food Systems insiders as the Holy Grail).

BEWARE of Food Systems going in overdrive. Before you know it, you'll be facing a #GreatFoodTransformation....

Presented as a Solution but essentially creating a new Problem. Or better: a whole new set of multiple Problems.
And as for Hotel California, the danger is here: you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave...

END.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh