UN Plan to move 250 million Third Worlders to Western Countries Won’t Work

Canadian political commentator Frank Vaughan provides a guided tour and a superb analysis of efforts to transfer 250 million people from the Third World (particularly from Asian countries such as China,Pakistan and India as well as from African countries) to Western countries. He strongly opposes this plan.

(1) Vaughan uses the term “Geopolitics” to describe the use of resources (oil, timber, water, farmland, etc.) to make political changes in the world. The people who practice this kind of politics are both elected and non-elected. The elected are members of federal, provincial and municipal governments. The non-elected are the immigration industry, world-wide NGO’s, the EU, the United Nations and technocrats such as Canada’s Century Initiative. Under the guise of humanitarianism and supposedly superior technical expertise, the advocates of this resource-based kind of politics want the West which they think has abundant resources to make room for 250 million people from other parts of the world by 2030. Essentially, this is a wealth transfer from Western countries to the ecologically-degraded countries of the world. For Trudeau’s December wealth transfer, see https://www.thespec.com/news-story/9062221-trudeau-tweets-50m-pledge-for-girls-education-around-the-world-during-mandela-festival/

(2) Frank Vaughan uses aerial photos to demonstrate the level of ecological degradation in the world. He begins with China and India which contain a significant part of the 250 million people that the UN would move. China, India and neighbours are all ecological disasters. China and India have the largest populations of any countries in the world. Their land masses are almost completely in use. They have gone beyond the ability of their land mass to feed their populations. They rely on the West which serves as their bread basket. China is only one major drought away from major social unrest, a standard by which China’s central government judges its parts. Their current population borders on areas such as deserts and mountains which cannot support agriculture. The West has provided wealth transfers called “Foreign Aid” to many of these countries for 40 years, but that 40 years has been almost a complete failure. Japan , which is much more westernized than other parts of Asia, has a large population, but has moved to protect its agricultural land. It also has a very clean culture compared to those in other parts of Asia. But it too faces ecological problems. South Korea has moved to limit ecological destruction, but it, like most of the Asian OLD WORLD, has limited agricultural capability and relies on the “NEW WORLD” for agricultural products.

(3) Frank Vaughan moves on to Africa. He provides aerial photos of places like Egypt and shows that it also suffers from severe ecological degradation. Africa’s Equatorial area is one of the few areas in the world with a good land resource and food production capability. But it too has to deal with exploding populations.

(4) He then provides photos of Europe whose member states are much cleaner than countries in most of Asia, but are at their ecological limits. Almost all of Europe’s lakes and rivers are degraded and polluted.

(5) Next, he moves on to Canada where the best food-producing land in Southern Ontario and B.C.’s Fraser Valley are seriously threatened by population expansion. The northern parts of Canada’s prairies and other parts of Canada’s North are covered by scrub forest which sits on a thin layer of soil and a thicker layer of rock. If ever cleared, Canada’s North would provide very little additional food-production.

(6) Vaughan then focuses on the U.S. which has moved to clean up the ecological destruction created in its early industrial years. It strives to be clean, but it too faces problems created by population growth and water depletion. The Southern California area is a good example of a place dealing with serious negative ecological pressure.

(7) Vaughan concludes that, in order to preserve its standard of living, Canada and the rest of the West have to protect their ecological status from cultures with ecologically destructive histories. These people have already brought their attitudes to Canada, the U.S. and other Western countries. With their ingrained cultural behaviour and voting, they will repeat in the West the destruction they have caused in their own countries.

For more details, see Frank Vaughan’s video :