The policy paper was published in 2017 when Theresa May was Prime Minister.
Here is how the UK government describes its approach:
The 17 Global Goals for Sustainable Development (the Goals) will shape the world’s approach to growth and sustainable development until 2030. Building on the progress made by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) between 2000 and 2015, this ambitious agenda sets out the framework through which the world will work together to combat the most pressing challenges of our time, including eradicating extreme poverty, ending hunger, protecting our environment and breaking down gender barriers. The Goals were agreed by 193 member states of the United Nations (UN) in September 2015 and apply to every country.
The UK Government is firmly committed to delivering the Goals both at home and around the world. The UK was at the forefront of negotiating the Goals and will be at the forefront of delivering them. The underlying aims of the Goals are reflected in the UK Government’s programme of work, and as such they are being embedded in Single Departmental Plans (SDP).
…including the website Our World in Data which has a tracker to measure progress::
On the face of it, we might reasonably ask, “What’s not to like?”
After all, who would want to argue against “No Poverty” or “Affordable and Clean Energy” or “Reduced Inequalities”?
But the devil is in the detail. It is important to look beyond the soundbites and to consider what achieving these goals might mean in practice.
In order to think a bit more about what might actually be going on, I invite you to consider the discussion in the podcast here featuring Aman Jabbi, a former Silicon Valley electrical engineer and computer scientist with expertise in the development of smartphone camera technology.
I have transcribed some of the more relevant parts under the headings of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, with occasional added comments and links.
Two preliminary comments:
This podcast was recorded in the context of technical difficulties that surgeon-turned-podcaster Ahmad Malik says are unprecedented in the 179 podcasts he had previously recorded (see 1:10-2:06). Wondering whether the various gremlins are not a coincidence, he asks, “What is it that [this guest has] to say that people maybe don’t want to be heard by the masses…?”
Again, please can I urge everyone listening to the podcast or reading the transcript below to try and discard a common assumption, namely that those who are most powerful and influential in the world have the interests of ordinary people at heart. I am thinking not only of governments here, but of those who influence and even control them.
Introduction
[20:40] [Doc Malik, after summarising the Sustainable Development Goals] What’s your problem, man? This all sounds wonderful!?
[21:45] [Aman Jabbi] Once people spend enough time reading papers on the UN and World Economic Forum websites and [considering] their public-private partnership cronies and NGOs, one will realise very quickly that there is inversion in language. So everything is inverted…
[22:23] [Aman Jabbi] When they talk about zero hunger, it’s about controlling the food supply, getting rid of natural agriculture, and moving to synthetic meats, and getting rid of natural proteins such as beef and pork and chickens and so on…
And that was before the recent change in the law on inheritance tax as eloquently articulated here at The Owl Tree Substack:
3. Good health and well-being
[22:39] [Aman Jabbi] When they talk about good health and well-being, it’s about the WHO controlling viruses and vaccinations and making sure everyone is taking their jabs and boosters for the rest of their lives
[23:02] [Aman Jabbi] It’s all about dumbing down the population through UNESCO programmes just as they have done so far, at least in America… I’ve seen the new generations of kids… they don’t know how to think critically even one iota.
[Doc Malik] And universities… and schools are indoctrinations
The indoctrination now starts very early:
And Doc Malik is surely correct about universities:
And I am reminded of these graphs of the usage of woke DEI-related terms1 in academic papers over the past 125 years:
5. Gender equality
[23:24] [Aman Jabbi] It’s about transgender and the transhuman agenda. It’s about merging man and woman into a unisex.
Here are the results of a Google search for “drag queens uk schools”:
Featuring articles from The Telegraph, The Guardian and The Independent. And the BBC.
Which reminds me of the BBC News website’s Transgender people section, which has almost a thousand articles, the first of which appeared in 2018, the year after the UK government published its Agenda 2030 policy paper.
[23:38] [Aman Jabbi] It’s about… going from sewer to tap. They want to take water from the sewer… clean it up, recycle it and give it to you as drinking water.
[Doc Malik] Do you know, honestly, the water here (in the UK) is… full of chemicals, pesticides, insecticides, hormones [or hormone-like synthetic chemicals], plastics, heavy metals.
[Aman Jabbi] In the name of sustainability and conservation they want to use every drop of water and feed it back to you.
[Doc Malik] No thanks. I distil all of my water and… at the end of the distillation process, you’ve got this crud at the bottom of the pan. And it stinks to high heaven. And you just think… it’s not even a lot of water. It’s like 4 or 5 litres of water. And after [you get] your distilled water, you’ve got this muck, this slime. And you just think, “Wow, I would have drunk that garbage...”
Far-fetched? Try this BBC article which says that, “By 2030 [yes, as in Agenda 2030], toilet water could be deposited into rivers near treatment plants so it can be collected and processed as drinking water”:
Sewage is discussed in more detail in this Doc Malik podcast (from 3:43-10:41ff):
Perhaps one to listen to after rather than during a meal.
7. Affordable and clean energy
[24:48] [AmanJabbi] Essentially it’s all about rationing energy. They want to ration energy, food and water across the world… because they can control you.
It’s like the favelas in Brazil. The mafia in Rio de Janeiro, they give them water, they give them schools and they give them energy, and they are beholden to the mafia…
If I take away essentials from you and then give you back the essentials in limited amounts, you will touch my feet… for giving you back something after I have taken it away. That’s what the agenda is.
[In the context of lack of increased investment in power stations in the UK and rising energy prices.]
It’s not really about profits… It’s about incrementally taking away essential needs from the large majority of the people, and making things so bad that government will then come to you as a rescuer.
“We’ll come to the rescue, and if you take on a Digital ID, and if you sign onto the sustainability agenda, and now that you have a smart meter and all your devices in your house can communicate with the smart meter, which then communicates your usage of smart appliances to your electric company… your carbon credits are then computed by the company for your new digital currency.” So the smart meter collecting data on you is far more valuable to the electric company than them making money off your expensive electricity.
Hmm. I cannot recall my electricity company pointing out any of the above. But they are keen to impress upon me how smart meters will make energy more “convenient”. For whom, I wonder.
The fact that they only speak of the “advantages” is one reason why I don’t trust them. And I am not alone of course.
But they have ways of nudging us into compliance. And they have been offering incentives for years:
But it doesn’t appear that the general public is so keen. According to the above article, written in 2018, “the Government was aiming for all homes and businesses to have [smart meters] by the end of 2020.”
Yet according to this government report from August 2024, “63% of meters are now smart or advanced meters”:
Which means, presumably, that 37% are not.
8. Decent work and economic growth
9. Industry, innovation and infrastructure
[28:58][Aman Jabbi] They are basically destroying the economy and they are saying we are going to give you decent work — essentially. They are changing the whole economy into a social impact investing system…
Are you familiar with all the homelessness that’s been happening in American cities over the last 15 years or so…? The question to ask is: “Why is it happening?”
It is not because housing is getting too expensive. That’s not the real reason. It’s being done by design. And… having homelessness in tents and downtowns of cities is pushing the Hegelian dialectic where they are saying: “Oh look, the economy is bad.” Or: “People are getting priced out because of greedy capitalists. And now we have people who can’t afford homes. So we have so much homelessness in America.”
The homelessness and drug addiction on the streets is not something most people like… [that is the problem]
And the reaction is… [people] complaining about local governments and their…policies about how bad it is and how horrible things are getting.
Guess what the pre-determined solution will be: social impact investing.
And that’s already started in many of the American cities including San Francisco and LA… where social impact investing is… You are a billionaire philanthropist or whatever. You are going to come and say, “I’m going to help. I’ll put $5 million dollars for a drug addiction programme or a temporary homeless shelter programme and we are going to do impact investing. But I need real-time monitoring of everybody and the programme. So I’m going to put up cameras and sensors and LED smart lights all over the city and inside these shelters so I can monitor the people in real time.
And so it’s becoming a combination of a 24/7 data collection/surveillance system for new digital currency and the new international economic order while pretending to be making a social impact to improve the lives of the downtrodden homeless people that needed affordable housing.
It’s all one big plan.
I am reminded of the Problem-Reaction-Solution paradigm which is described in this post…
42:35 Doc Malik There’s going to be massive inequalities… I look at what is happening as neo-serfdom. We’re going to have this elite class living with everything, eating steak, and [then] the rest of us…
[Aman Jabbi] Reduced inequality is about increased inequality. Again, inversion in language. But everybody is going to be equal at a very low level… And they are using level city equity and inclusivity… as variables for the ESG scoring in the new financial system.
If you haven’t seen it, it’s well worth reading about ESG — Environmental Social Governance — in Section 5 of this post:
[49:26] [Aman Jabbi] It’s really about putting people in smart cities and then tracking them, tracing them, optimising their movements… having 5G infrastructure in a smart city environment with smart LED lights where… all your devices… movements are being sensed for the Internet of Things.
And then the next generation is going to be cognitive cities which… adopt 6G networks where the city and the AI and the algorithms will already know your next move before you make [it]… there are a lot of dark agendas to this smart city infrastructure and the plans that are happening…
Almost all of the LED lights that have been installed in the last four years across the world… they are smart LED lights on smart poles… They are wireless computers essentially which wirelessly communicate with the adjacent LED lights 20 or 30 years away. So whenever you are walking in a town or a street, or you are driving… they are taking wireless data through wi-fi… protocols. So these lights know exactly where you are, where your car is, who you are with… So basically we are being blanketed with surveillance architecture. And cameras are not the only surveillance devices… No, the LED lights are everywhere. And the ratio of LED lights to cameras is probably 50-100:1. And these LED lights then communicate wirelessly to 5G towers or through fibreoptic [cables]… There’s a lot to it…
In the US, all automobiles since 2003 have some sort of internet connection so they know where your car is… They can control most of the subsystems in your car… So your brakes can be activated without your will. Your steering wheel can be turned to the left… by AI… or by an operative sitting [remotely] that can control your car… the specs are out there… I have been working in tech for a while so I know exactly the roadmaps of… many of the automotive manufacturers.
12. Responsible consumption and production
53:43 [Doc Malik] Basically they want us to eat less, be colder, use less energy and suffer
[Aman Jabbi] Exactly
13. Climate action
54:17 [Aman Jabbi] The one with the eye in the middle… The eye represents artificial intelligence and the all-seeing eye. Which means we need to track and see everything and every activity of all humanity and all of nature all the time. So that’s about the infrastructure going up and tracking everything…. And doing natural asset companies and taking pictures of trees from satellites, assigning digital IDs to everything, and being able to put a value… extract value from nature and humanity.
I am reminded of the design of the UK’s Supreme Court, as viewed from above e.g. in the picture below in this 2019 article in The Times:
Plus the UK government’s steady push for Digital ID:
Promoted by the likes of Tony Blair and William Hague — I wonder what their motivation is:
The slow march towards Digital ID is in progress, even this week:
According to this BBC article, digital driving licences “will be accessed on a new government smartphone app and could be accepted as a form of ID when buying alcohol, voting, or boarding domestic flights”:
I wonder what the government’s motivation is for the introduction of digital driving licences.
I wonder too how many people will embrace this “technology revolution”, and how much idea people have about its potential implications.
If you haven’t already seen it, I recommend the section about the Chinese social credit system in Section 6 of the Stakeholder Communism? post.
…the Chinese social credit system forces compliance by punishing people who break the government’s rules.
People considered untrustworthy by the government have their details — even their addresses — plastered across screens e.g. at cinemas.
They want to control all of sea life. They are going to ban fishing completely at some point in time in the name of conservation and many other things. And life underwater will also be controlled. They will have sensors all under… the floors of the ocean… and a way to monetise and bet on how fish are dying or swimming or behaving... It’s about… taking full control of everything in the seas.
15. Life on land
[56:18] [Aman Jabbi] Life On Land is about taking control of everything on land, which means you won’t be able to eat beef. We are going to track and trace every human as well as every animal…
Hmm. “Track and trace. The £37 billion spent on “NHS Test & Trace” in the name of “averting another lockdown” springs to mind:
In the name of conservation biodiversity we are going to cut off access of land to all humans… who are going to be sitting in their cubicles in smart cities, and that’s what it’s all about.
They are also working through many corporations and foundations on AI governments. So governments are going to be replaced by Artificial Intelligence. There are going to be no governments left in most parts of the world.
And they are building a Digital Bill of Rights. They are building digital constitutions. I would recommend people go and look at the Council [for] Inclusive Capitalism, which was an offshoot of the League of Nations. Look at all the board directors there and which companies they work for... they are registered in Rome or in the Vatican…
Here it is:
[Doc M] Isn’t this just simply a way of corporations owning and running everything?
[Aman Jabbi] It’s a technology developed by corporations… Humans won’t have recourse, because you will be at the mercy of AI. If you are given a ticket today, you can go to a judge in court… And, while most of the time you won’t win, at least you are talking to a human being and you have a place to make a case…
In relation to digital courts, I am reminded what Northern Ireland GP Anne McCloskey had to say about her recent experience, as featured in this post:
[1:11:43] [Aman Jabbi] I suspect that is basically the public-private partnerships… which is the private corporations with the most power and the people running those things… They are masquerading as public-private partnerships… They are controlling all the governments who are then going to be told what to do. And the people will think that their governments are raping them rather than… the people who control the governments…
It seems that the public-private partnership — in the UK launched as private finance initiatives under the Major government and then substantially expanded under Blair — is relatively new:
I am reminded of this famous quote:
“Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power” — Benito Mussolini
