“Global Governance”: Communists, Globalists All In on World Government

Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) are all in on “global governance.” So too are the Marxists of the Socialist International and globalist elites of the World Economic Forum, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Council of Councils (the CFR’s 27 affiliated foreign Councils; see list), Chatham House (the Royal Institute of International Affairs, or RIIA), the Trilateral Commission, the Club of Rome, the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, etc.

Fully aware that widespread resistance to their plans for world government has rendered an open march in that direction futile, the dedicated one-worlders have for decades settled for gradual encroachments on national sovereignty in the name of “international law,” “rules-based norms,” and “sustainable development goals.” All of this has been packaged under the coded catchphrase of “global governance,” a term that is coming more and more to the fore — and is being fleshed out in alarming detail.

China’s Global Governance Initiative

“I look forward to working with all countries for a more just and equitable global governance system and advancing toward a community with a shared future for humanity,” Chinese President Xi Jinping said upon putting forward a proposal during the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Plus Meeting in September. “The Global Governance Initiative (GGI) proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping provides important guidance for the future development of the United Nations,” said Fu Cong, China’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations, in October. UN Secretary-General António Guterres “underscored the importance of safeguarding the international system with the United Nations system at its core, an international order underpinned by international law, and he welcomed [Xi Jinping’s] Global Governance Initiative,” Guterres’ spokesman said in a press briefing.

Xi’s GGI imagines a totalitarian, communist-style regime for the entire planet. That it is being applauded by internationalists of all stripes is hardly surprising, given that they have been pushing this theme for decades. As we noted back in 1996 (“Target: World Government”), the report of the UN-appointed Commission on Global Governance (CGG), Our Global Neighborhood, had just gone to considerable lengths in a ridiculous attempt to claim that they were not, not, NOT proposing “world government” — which is precisely what they were advocating.

“The development of global governance is part of the evolution of human efforts to organize life on the planet,” CGG co-chairmen Ingvar Carlson and Shridath Ramphal wrote. “As this report makes clear, global governance is not global government. No misunderstanding should arise from the similarity of terms. We are not proposing movement towards world government.” Oh, no, no, no, of course not.

We further noted:

One need only recur to a standard dictionary to glimpse the semantic sleight of hand at work here. Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary gives but a one-word definition for “governance,” and that is “government.” And world government is precisely what the Commission on Global Governance is proposing. That is plainly evident on the face of their proposals, all of which invariably advocate increasing strictures on national sovereignty and the transferring of legislative, executive, and judicial powers to the United Nations or its subsidiary multilateral institutions — always in the name of peacekeeping, nationbuilding, saving the environment, helping the poor, disarmament, fighting organized crime, etc.

Environmental, Health Pretexts

Four years earlier, reporting from the 1992 UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro (“Socializing at Rio: Socialists Run the Earth Summit”), we provided prior background history, showing the alarmist environmental pretexts being used to promote global governance in the 1970s and 1980s. It was billionaire socialist/globalist Maurice Strong, secretary-general of the Rio Earth Summit, who 20 years earlier (as secretary-general of the UN Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden) commissioned Barbara Ward and Rene Dubos to author Only One Earth as an eco-manifesto. That 1972 report was followed 15 years later, in 1987, with the publication of Our Common Future (also known as The Brundtland Report, for former Norwegian Prime Minister and Socialist International leader Gro Harlem Brundtland), which set the stage for Agenda 21 and the other ultra-radical proposals at Rio.

(For more early history of the global governance con game see here, here, here, and here.)

More recently (back in 2017), we reported that “Communist China Opens ‘Global Governance’ School. And we noted in 2018 (“Chinese President Xi Jinping Looks to Take the Lead in Global Governance”) that Xi said China would “show the way in reform of the global governance system, creating an even better web of global partnership relationships.” Then in 2020, in “Globalists, Communists Push Coronavirus as Gateway to ‘Global Health Governance’,” we reported on the glaring globalist-communist concurrence between the CFR and the CCP on “health governance.”

Global governance is coming out of the closet, and ever more brazenly marching toward world government.