Local Community – Resilience, Heath & Economic Policy

Home Learning Hub Monopolies Local Community – Resilience, Heath & Economic Policy

We call them “developing economies.” But for many people this is a false term. Their regions are not developing. But it isn’t something we like to admit, so we keep using the term “developing.” Virtue signalling (using words that sound good that don’t represent reality on the ground) is a common practice in our day. Institutions from the United Nations down virtue signal. The press does it. We do it on social media. It’s a very socially acceptable thing to do. But to address the fundamentals of agriculture, justice and health is rare and not at all socially acceptable.

In our early experience in developing regions we normally see what is done wrong in these regions.  We bring so much cultural superiority from our own background, which causes us to miss so much. It takes us time to see the wrong that is done against “non-developing” nations by the outside world. We have already noted that the world is a net debtor to the non-developing world, not a creditor: it has taken far more than it lends back with interest or gives in aid.

Another mistake we make is to focus on what is lacking rather than the strengths of a local region. When we focus on what is lacking, we try to provide that from the outside. This makes the local region dependant. Much global philanthropy is designed this way. It brings in from the outside ideology, technology and products that are foreign made. Some have called it a colonialism of ideology. Outside ideas on family planning, health care and economics flood into regions and rebuild them the way others desire. This is an early step in dehumanising people. It rejects the diversity and builds a monopolistic monoculture. But the essence of this kind of philanthropy is to build foreign markets. It is to make local regions of high population dependant on foreign goods, and this extracts the wealth from these local regions to the outside world. This kind of charity/ philanthropy is business in disguise. It crushes local economy and local lives.

Concentrating on the strengths of a local region builds its local economic base and frees it from financial dependence. The development of local industry needs to be protected, so outside economic forces can’t take advantage with their large capital reserves. It must be owned and managed locally, government regulated, to prevent the elite from dominating at the local level. Developing the strength of local regions is not the “comparative advantage” doctrine we heard about in economic theory back in the 1970’s. That is more about what is advantageous to outside speculators, looking for regions to exploit. That was a rational for market liberalisation (deregulation), where industries and employment were stripped from one nation and shipped to another, so shareholders could maximise profits.

CFM operates mission stations. One aim is to work together with people as God changes our thinking. We look for what is available in regions that the outside world would generally say are depleted. When we go to places, the people say they need this, or they don’t have that: they need a school, or they need a clinic. One aim of our missions department is to ask the people what they have. What is available in the community? There are strengths in every community, and people who can be brought together to develop strategies and work towards them as a group. This is a rich local resource. Working on this heals interethnic divisions as we build. As they see the progress, they see it can work, and things begin to develop. We are building something that can be locally sustained. It isn’t dependant on someone from the outside to provide maintenance.

We have already spoken about building local agricultural resources through agricultural diversity that heals relationships and heals soils. This takes advantage of local wealth: different ethnicities and their diverse resources in contributing to environmental ecosystem. Bringing these ethnicities together builds local wealth into the soil. The strategy of “divide and conquer” works well for outside agricultural monopolies wanting to build markets for their synthetic fertilizers. Building sustainable and growing fertility into local soils is a massive step towards local wealth building. In any nation, it is fundamental to environmental and social rejuvenation. This is why we refer to “virtue signalling” from monopolies and public bodies like the United Nations, that are not genuine about local development. Their strategy is to make synthetic chemicals more available. As we have said before, this is an extractive industry. It extracts value from local soils and value from local relationships, while destroying both in order to create local markets for itself. Locals lose their money to their addiction to outside “solutions.” Local ecosystem rejuvenation builds local wealth and resilience.

Resilience is another word the United Nations and private sector philanthropists often give lip-service to. But they don’t mean it, or they would be following better policies. Local regions need resilience. Aid generally does not build resilience. Instead, it often builds dependence. These kinds of aid-givers know that developing local strengths will undermine their “industry of philanthropy.” Philanthropy of this kind needs perpetual poverty, to sustain its reputation as a charitable supporter, while it builds markets in global communities. Building local resilience is the last thing such monopolies desire. The kind of aid we need is the kind that builds local resilience and not dependence.

Local resilience means that no matter what happens in the world, the local community is better able to sustain its people. It is resilient against economic or natural cycles, still able to support local wellbeing. If the world goes into lockdown, the local region isn’t hard hit by currency devaluation and a cut in outside supplies to its region. It has local wealth in the region to meet its needs when hard times come. We have seen the kind of agricultural methods that build local resilience. They aren’t dependant on foreign technologies. The wealth is in the natural systems. These natural systems may be hit from time to time by events like water shortage or insect plagues, but building ecosystems is the best defence local regions can have. Building local resilience is the goal of all aid. This is why the term “capitalist philanthropy” is an oxymoron. The term is common for explaining “why the private sector is better than the public sector at managing aid money.” But the term “capitalist philanthropy” means that philanthropy must make a profit. This is its aim, and local development will mitigate against this profit. It’s like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.

The pharmaceutical industry is another area where this extraction of profits from local regions to monopoly powers is rife. Our current pharmaceutical market structures began with Rockefeller, as his legal teams lobbied to legalise certain therapies and outlaw others, to “protect” the public good. The pharmaceutical industry is the most profitable industry in the world, and it spends more on lobbying politicians than any other industry. This lobbying should be illegal. In any normal language it is called bribery. It used to be illegal, but in modern times the courts have changed their view. It’s now seen as “liberalising” the markets: those with the money to bribe should do so, because they are more efficient in the market and must be better agents overall for our economic good. This is one reason why our era is called the era of the “deep state.” The corruption runs deep. When people who own patents in drugs and vaccines, and who have a history in manipulating medical treatment test results, run a nation’s health policy, you don’t have integrity in the industry. The top ten pharmaceutical CEO’s in the world are all multibillionaires.

One way this corruption works is through the industry’s drug testing processes. It sponsors research into the testing of drugs in which the leaders have patents. This also should be illegal, in any plain and honest assessment. Tests can easily be manipulated to disqualify cheap drugs and qualify drugs that are high income earners for those interested. We are speaking here of billions of dollars. The hoped-for vaccines for coronavirus will produce the industry’s largest ever profit streams. This industry has a proven history of manipulating the data to its advantage. To claim this doesn’t require independent and un-censored supervision is, frankly, madness.

Tests can also be suppressed that reveal drugs that gave adverse or dangerous affects. All the top pharmaceutical companies have a history of criminal prosecution, often for many deaths they have knowingly contributed to for profits. These companies are all proven felons in court. And yet they still rule as monopolies over the medical industry.

We can see this corruption in the testing of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the Covid-19 outbreak. This cheap drug has no patent attached to it and has been successfully used (in a mix with other cheap therapeutics) by thousands of doctors to cure Covid-19 patients and has proven effective in valid scientific studies. It is a safe drug which has been used for 65 years, billions of times, and is mostly issued over the counter. It is listed by the WHO as a safe and “essential medicine.” And yet doctors are being dismissed from their positions for using or promoting it for patient health. Pharmacies are being forbidden from supplying it. This level of manipulation for no reason is unprecedented. Many top specialists claim HCQ would have saved around 75% of those who died in Western hotspots from Covid-19. Corrupt tests were run on HCQ and published by Lancet and other journals. They falsified data and ran dangerous and misleading tests, which contributed to the deaths of patients. Lancet published a “decisive” paper with falsified data, which was immediately accepted by the World Health Organisation. Both organisations failed to observe their duty of care in even a simple review of the false study. Yet no apology has been given and WHO still hasn’t admitted its fault.

The top executives of both Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine stated that their research journals have become advertising outlets for whatever the pharmaceutical industry wants to sell. They say they cannot uphold true science in what they publish. They have been taken over by the money. France 24 News quoted these executives. They have been quoted other times speaking in the same regard. A search on the internet will show you reliable sources referencing these statements, and similar statements from other science journal executives. Past leaders in WHO have said the same. They say the organisation has become corrupted by a conflict of interests in its advocacy of certain drugs and relegation of other cheaper non-patented drugs. A multi-page list of references is available on our website www.apeopleofpeace.org.

Tests are sponsored in universities and research centres for drugs in which the industry leaders have personal interest. A false test to support claims against HCQ by Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard has a complex connection with philanthropic and other professional interests. Gilead’s total value fell $21 billion against the news of HCQ’s effectiveness, due to Gilead’s competitive high-priced drug Remdesivir. Eight members of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) COVID-19 treatment panel disclosed recent financial interests with Gilead. The NIH also has financial interests in a Bill Gates funded coronavirus vaccine. A separation of powers is essential to prevent criminal behaviour taking lives.

The pharmaceutical industry’s general control of the treatment testing process makes it difficult for natural therapies that are cheap to have any official backing. France 24 News did a documentary of the plant Artemisia annua, which has proven effectiveness against malaria for over 1,000 years. It has been tested using valid scientific methods. It is more effective against malaria than pharmaceutical treatments. Some pharmaceutical treatments against malaria, such as Lariam, have serious and relatively common side effects, but are still marketed, while the industry pontificates about “dangerous” cheaper treatments. Natural therapists flee into exile, literally, to escape the long arm of the pharmaceutical industry against them. Monsanto does the same in the agricultural industry, persecuting and prosecuting smaller interests and families to ensure their total market control. When I studied economics at university, lecturers privately said that industrial controls are more aimed at protecting the wealth of the industry than the good of the public.

Rockefeller’s representatives also went to China in its transition to the modern medical era, to make sure modern pharmaceuticals took full control of the market, expelling traditional Chinese treatments as “quackery.” Some of these may be quackery, but when we have a corrupt industry deciding for us, we can forget about any truth in the matter. This is not in the public’s interest. China eventually expelled this Western monopoly and adopted a more pragmatic mix of Western and traditional treatments.  Looking through Chinese hospitals and their protocols for treating Covid-19 patients in early 2020, you see a much more varied approach, not curtailed by WHO in the way Western health workers have been.

Western pharmaceuticals want all the legal regulations to be against others, against the drugs they don’t profit from, and to prohibit what the public can access. They don’t want any of the regulations to be against their own industry. They want immunity from legal responsibility in the vaccines they sell, even though they profit hugely from ineffective flu vaccines every year. They want to produce herd immunity with coronavirus vaccines, even though according to the best tests, there is no evidence that flu vaccines, which have been developed for 90 years, contribute to flu herd immunity.  If the pharmaceutical industry claims immunity because vaccines are risky but a public service, then investigative journalists should also have legal immunity when they speak out, since they are an essential public service in keeping others honest.

African traditional health treatments have similarly been cast aside by the culture of modern medicine in most African nations. It took courage for Senegal and Madagascar to stand up to WHO and treat Covod-19 patients according to their own protocols. These nations have extensive experience in epidemics and infectious diseases, as well as robust scientific laboratories. The colonial arrogance with which the West tried to dictate to these nations through the WHO is sad to see. We know of nurses who have been threatened in local hospitals for even discussing local herbal cures with patients. This is monopoly. Elderly people in Nigeria have extensive knowledge of herbal remedies that is genuine. This knowledge is being lost, and along with it great local wealth and wellbeing. These plants are the sources from which most modern medicine has been extracted. This is how monopolies work. They extract value from natural resources and patent it, and them outlaw any product but their own. This they do over and over again.

We are kicking back against this. We want to gain the local knowledge from the elderly before it is lost. There are many treatments that work well, but local pharmacies want to charge you for a pill instead. We want to regain this knowledge and put it to use, alongside other modern medicines. It’s a misnomer when modern medicines are called “traditional,” and local natural treatments are called “alternative.” It is the other way around. The traditional forms of medicine are plant-based therapies that give the right nutrients to the body. The “alternative” is what you use when the traditional has failed. The traditional should be the first “go to” way of health. It’s the same in agriculture. The traditional ecosystems are the right resources to build soil and crops. Synthetic chemicals should be seen as an alternative, only when really necessary for a short period. Our plan is ecological and nutritional recovery in local communities, which rebuilds local wealth and resilience by limiting external extraction.

Instead of a dictatorship, doctors should be allowed to treat their patients according to patient respect and their conscience on everything from abortion, to Covid-19, to gender ideology. We need certified training to ensure patient care, but not dictatorship. No doctor should be disciplined because they don’t follow dictatorial ideologies and the patented protocol of the pharmaceutical industry. A dictatorship in any of these areas is going against the religious nature of humanity and if this continues it will bring destruction to our communities. A dictatorship cannot succeed because it goes against the nature of things.

Commentators have noted that the Soviet Union fell ultimately because it suppressed religious and local identity, and this is the reason for the rise of populism now in the West. Holding people in suppression for profits ensures the system’s failure. The USA is currently breaking at the seams, with riots and rebellion, because it runs a system of economic and military oppression. It needs to learn the lessons of peace it heard from people like Martin Luther King Jr. The pharmaceutical industry has become fascist, expelling good doctors all over the world, pretending it is acting in the best interests of the public, when it is acting in what it wrongly considerers its own best interests.

So, if we are speaking of resilience, then building health treatments from local resources (just like we build soil ecosystems from local resources) builds the local wealth of a community. Having to buy everything from foreign patented monopolies extracts wealth from local community, reducing its chances of building resilience. Philanthropist monopolies have never addressed this matter. They have no genuine concern for true liberation of local communities into real wellbeing. Local people spend a lot each month on even minor health issues. Using proven local treatments that work for many normal local health conditions would reduce the health payments of many people. It would also keep their economy local, ensuring their funds were recirculated within the local region for local employment and opportunity, rather than being extracted to foreign cash reserves. This is a big issue for local development, yet it is never at the top of the agenda at organisations like the UN or WHO. These organisations serve the patent holders, from whom they derive their sponsorship. This issue is not complex.

Human health is a vital local resource. At the end of the day, this health doesn’t come from a pill, or even from a vaccine. It comes from nutrition and sanitation. When local wealth is built through better agriculture and by being given access to their traditional therapeutics, they can build the economy that prospers them, enabling them to provide better nutrition and sanitation. They even have the prosperity to invest in environmental rehabilitation. Monopolies destroy all these things and offer lip-service, virtual signalling at global conferences, but ultimately more patents as their solution.

Technology patents aren’t the answer: building ecosystems in soil, human relationships and nutrition are the answer. We are building nutrition in soil, “nutrition” in neighbourly relationships, and nutrition in health. The “alternative” is often to kill the enemy weed in our farm, or the enemy in our bad relationships locally or globally, or the enemy disease in the body causing ill-health. It’s nurture or poison. The best way of dealing with enemies is justice: agricultural justice, social justice, and health justice.

This rebuilding of local resilience is the answer to child suffering. Yet instead of advocating for these measures, the UN and philanthropist organisations advocate strongly for abortion to fix the poverty issue in many nations. This is a crime, especially when you consider that the industries advocating for abortion are often those who profit from it, and also, the ones whose monopolies destroy local health resilience in the first place. The solutions for child health are simple, but not simple if you want profit for your monopolies. Abortion to control population is a colonial ideology within Africa. The answer for unwanted babies is to serve those who have them, to help the babies become wanted, to build a community that cares for them. As Bill gates himself said, birth control happens voluntarily as females have access to education. Then why is he pushing abortion, instead of working with locals to build schools that aren’t dependant on Microsoft technology.

Local resilience and local democracy are really similar things. When a community has local industry, local employment opportunities, local wealth building, then it is both resilient against challenges that arise and it has democratic, or self-deterministic empowerment. When you take away local empowerment from a community it has no capacity to provide for its own populations or charter a course for its own wellbeing. Then to say that this community needs aid, is both demeaning and condescending. What the community needs is pure and simple justice.

The international community knows very well what provides local resilience. Resilience comes from a stable economic environment. Prior to the Covid-19 event, the president of Nigeria had been slowly building the economy. He had been doing this by shutting out some foreign goods and providing policies that built local industries. Slowly, the local currency began to strengthen. It appreciated by about 10% over four years. But in the last five months of Covid-19, the currency has depreciated again by almost 20%. In the 34 years since we first arrived in Nigeria, the currency has devalued 500%, due to the reasons outlined in the opening chapter of this book. If this happened in any Western nation it would be a national emergency. But no one notices the global injustice when this happens in a “developing nation.” This devastates local savings, wages, and spending power. While the elite do well in lockdown and call those who complain “conspirators,” hundreds of millions of others suffer even worse depravation.

This has been done to Nigeria. Nigeria didn’t do this to itself. Recent currency devaluation happened because of Western lockdown policies that have been reckless towards the poor, shutting off oil demand, among other issues. Some people link this to wider shift away from the oil industry. Cashed up lobbyists and legal teams have been trying to close oil down, as their masters invest in new technologies, they hope will profit them tomorrow. The oil industry and its lobbyists are also responsible for the destruction of many lives and nations. If we don’t want to do oil anymore, to save the environment, that is fine, but don’t kill an economy for hundreds of millions of people and walk away. Oil drilling does large damage to Nigeria’s environment, destroying many lives and economies for millions of people, but this is due to cooperate greed and deregulation. Likewise, if Margaret Thatcher wanted to shutdown coal mines, fine, but promises to care for the vulnerable workers should have been kept, however they weren’t. Its not all about elitist profits.

Europe has done better is securing the interests of its citizens as it shifts its economy to new technologies or revitalises its natural diversity. It hasn’t made the poverty rates America has in its own borders. Don’t say these measures are for the environment, when they are simply to relocate capital to new markets for future profits, while caring nothing about the destruction they bring to human lives. Likewise, printing trillions of dollars to save America (big business) from the economic impacts of the Covid-19 lockdown has devastated foreign currencies, like Nigeria’s. This has further grown American monopolies during lockdown, at the cost of most other people. As the world economy has stopped, America guaranteed its dollar on the foreign markets, meaning marginalised currencies are left out with the homeless.

The lockdown has brought significant benefit to the business community. The huge levels of unemployment have put downward pressure of wages. It is now an employer’s market in most nations, increasing profit margins. As many smaller businesses are closed, bigger cashed-up businesses are moving in and buying them out. This has been a bonanza for the largest global enterprises, further concentrating the global economy. The “new normal” is going to be a more centralised economy than before the Covid-19 event.  This is how monopoly works: create the poorer economic conditions (usually by cutting prices) until smaller competitors go out of business, and then move in and take over the sector, buying out the failed competition. When you have enough cash reserves, as monopolies have (the same monopolies that are running lockdown policy from the WHO) you can benefit a lot from economic lockdown. This is common business practice in the monopoly world. Starving an economy until competition dies enables the stronger to gain more power. It’s policy for the strong, not for the weak.

Deregulation in recent decades, especially from the 1970’s to the present time, firstly detached our currencies from the gold standard. This deregulation of currencies has provided the instability in global economies that profits the larger stronger businesses, while destroying savings for billions of other people around the world. When we are speaking of resilience, we need stability in economic prices, not fluctuating prices with “liberalised” markets, allowing speculative capital to move from one market to another, destroying the stability of local economies. This is criminal. We need currency stability to give justice to people. Otherwise whole generations have their future stolen from them as the rich speculate on their currencies. The level of injustice here has never before happened in history.

Sometimes people speak of wealth redistribution, as though it’s not fair to take money from the rich and give it to the poor. But the truth is that wealth retribution happens the other way around. It is taken from the poor and given to the rich. Low wages, high interest rates on loans, taxing the poor and not the rich, economic austerity, are all ways in which wealth has been shifted to the rich in recent decades. This is why the wealth gap between the rich and the poor is so large now. The poor are paying for the lifestyle of the rich. And with bailouts for the biggest corporations during economic crises, it is socialism for the rich and brutal capitalist realities for the poor.

The rich should pay tax. Corporations should pay tax. They should not be spending their profits as tax-free charity to market sectors they are developing for their own interests. That money should be taxed and spent by government in philanthropy, in a way that is controlled democratically by the taxpayer. Imagine, a company like Facebook earning income from advertisers in Nigeria (a market of over 200 million people) and then not paying taxes in the country where that income was earned. When this is done it is corporate colonialism. It is theft, stealing resources from other nations: resources that should be used in educating the people, and providing their health care infrastructure, in preventing a next generation of terrorists.

But really, what we are asking for isn’t redistribution to the poor through tax. Instead, we are asking that the wealth of the masses isn’t redistributed to the rich in the first place. Stop the theft at the root, instead of trying to claim it all back in taxes. That is, companies should be made to pay fair prices. If people are employed, fair prices must be paid for their labour, in any country where they are employed. If resources are purchased, fair prices must be paid for these resources. This is providing the right levels of income to a local community that are just, to ensure that community has the economic empowerment for its own democracy and resilience. Without this justice, there is no democracy and no resilience and there is no “developing nation.” How many times have we heard that foreign corporations, or offshore “shell companies,” have bought local resources at “theft prices?” One Western oil company is now being tried in an Italian court for buying an oil and gas field in Nigeria, at a level of corruption equivalent to Nigeria’s annual national health care budget. I doubt much will come of the court case.

Today, we hold to the doctrine that lower-wages results in full employment. We are told that if we pay real wages, then companies won’t be able to employ people. So wage laws are “liberalised,” again giving the corporations major profit advantage. This doctrine of lowering wages for the common good isn’t true. It is stability in the economy that provides jobs. It is instability and “liberalisation” of the economy, to the shareholders’ advantage, that takes away jobs. A “liberalised” economy can move capital so easily that local jobs are always in jeopardy. No one has any security. This is undermining our whole family and social fabric. This is why our nations are in riot today all over the world, not just in the “Arab Spring.” This injustice and its consequences are now almost everywhere.

The solution is straight forward. Providing a stable economy takes builds longer term resilience for the whole local community. Economies can still move to the newer technologies and change and improve, but not in an overly competitive way, but rather in a way that enhances community stability. This stability needs to be regulated by government once again, like it was after WWII. The doctrine of “nothing but competition” is destroying lives. Markets should be free, not centralised in either monopoly or government, but government should regulate them in a way that provides stability. Monopolies, that have grown in market deregulation, are anti-capitalist. They are destroying competition. Regulation ensures competition stays within the bounds of social responsibility. Unregulated capitalism produces a non-competitive dictatorial environment.

With “market liberalisation,” large companies can manipulate markets, forcing down prices of commodities, robbing local regions of their resources cheaply. Then these cashed up monopolists say they want to provide aid to the same local region. This aid is often to wash their reputation. Philanthropy can be used to launder one’s reputation, like fake businesses lander one’s illegally gotten money. Companies buy local resources well below a fair price, either through direct corrupt relationships with locals (a collusion between local and global corruption) or by holding the local market to ransom in some way to get an unfair advantage. In today’s unregulated market this is now legal.

In many nations, farmers are being forced out of rural regions by larger companies (in cahoots with large supermarket chains) undercutting their products. These grocery chains take farming products at unfair prices due to their market advantage. This injustice is highly destabilising to a nation’s social fabric and to its environment. It is families that will care for the soils, not “capitalists.” The way to restore the environment in rural regions is to populate it with families who will care for their land, for their next generations and open local markets for their product. The bigger chains must become a thing of the past. These larger companies and market chains are destroying not only our families and job markets, but also our natural environment.

As stated earlier, the UN’s program in its Agenda 21 and World Economic Forum’s Great Reset includes moving populations from rural to urban settings, claiming we need to radically increase our overcrowding in cities to save the planet. This is opposite to the Sabbath plan in creation, where there is an integration that produces stewardships of wholeness. Over population in urban areas, began in the Industrial Revolution, and this happened because of land injustice, where the Commons were taken by the elite by an act of British parliament (Agenda 21 is nothing new), providing near slave labour. Industry should be decentralised. Overpopulation in urban areas and moving market control into large corporations, is producing the poor diets, immune deficiencies, mental health illness, the overstressed welfare budgets and hospital systems, the poor management of the natural environment (soil depletion, eco diversity depletion, lack of carbon sequestering, forest and habitat depletion, fresh water depletion, poisoning of the oceans through chemical run offs from industrial agricultural and cities, bush fires and fauna loss), and the poor economic outcomes for wage earners and remaining rural families. What we are losing here is health, environment, grassroots economic vitality, and families. This sums up wholistic creation.

Jubilee today looks like it did in Moses’ day: stable markets, stable land ownership, stable currencies and interest rates which don’t take advantage of the poor and debtors, stable and fair prices for natural resources, farming, industrial product, and for labour.

Jubilee is about producing local democracy and resilience that builds local communities around the world. It breaks down a predatory economy, like Pharaoh’s, and like we are seeing in today’s global monopolies and unregulated market systems. We build wealth in local communities by breaking down agricultural and health sector monopolies, and by stabilising the economic conditions that encourage a diversity of local ingenuity for productivity in these economies. We build local wealth by stabilising currency, commodity, labour, and product prices. Without doing this, all the virtue signalling of the World Economic Forum is a scam. Their recipe is clearly for a “new normal” that is a dictatorial economy built to enhance the wealth of its patent owners.

Once “speculative liberation” (stealing) is stopped markets can begin to stabilise. This stabilises industrial development in every local region, rather than concentrating industry is a few nations within the world. One reason for recent populism is the destruction of local industry for speculative profits. It isn’t nationalism to rebuild this industry in local regions. It is enhancing the wellness and resilience of local populations. When we seek this justice for every local region then we are not behaving like nationalists, but like people who care for one another, globally.

When we all have local industry and local wealth, we have resilience and we have freedom in local regions. We cannot be controlled by others, and this provides us with local flourishing democracies families, nutrition, health, and environmental restoration. Environmental restoration doesn’t come from dictatorial policies imposed from a central power, but from families rooted in regions who have long-term interests in the environment’s wellbeing. Centralised powers always destroy the environment: local stakeholders nurture and restore the environment. The United Nations can’t provide this wellbeing with its current policies in favour of its big business sponsors. As we continue to enhance the powers of big business, without government regulations, we will continue to put the poor and the environment in serious jeopardy.  Local justice should be the remit of the UN, not technological solutions from the monopolies. Our hope lies in justice.