I have received many emails from readers of my article series “One World Governance – A Common Purpose”. Several readers have noted that they find it difficult to visualize the relationships between the various organizations that advance the UN Global Agenda.
Analysis of currently available information shows that the boundaries between governments, local authorities, national and international businesses, the third sector (charities and other NGOs), and the general public are intentionally It is thought that this has become ambiguous due to the recent remodeling. our society. Two of the consequences of shaping policy and delivering and monitoring public services through a system of stakeholder “partnerships” and “networked alliances” are that both democratic obligations and public accountability That's clearly missing.
On both sides of the Atlantic, citizens, either as individuals or as members of their respective nation-states, are presented with a “political agenda for change” without detailed explanations of where such change will lead them. It's here.
These changes are purportedly for “modernization” and “increased efficiency,” but the waste of taxpayers' money on questionable projects over the past few decades has been extraordinarily expensive. Moreover, historical loyalties are becoming increasingly strained.
Although the evidence appears to indicate that no single actor has yet achieved comprehensive political, economic, legal, or technological control of the new system of global governance; The network diagram above helps illustrate some of the actors that influence the system under development.
