The Rockefeller Foundation is responsible for the destruction of global agriculture and is now pushing for a radical change in the food system under the guise of sustainability.

The Expose News - com

Rhoda Wilson

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that the Rockefeller Foundation is responsible for the destruction of global agriculture and is now pushing for a radical change in the food system under the guise of sustainability has been circulating in various media outlets. This claim review will examine the evidence and provide a thorough analysis of the situation.</p>
<h2>The Role of the Rockefeller Foundation in Agriculture</h2>
<p>The Rockefeller Foundation has indeed played a significant role in shaping modern agriculture. In the 1950s, the foundation funded the development of vertical integration, leading to the creation of agribusiness. This model prioritized corporate interests over those of farmers, contributing to the decline of family farms.</p>
<p>The foundation also supported the Green Revolution in Mexico and India in the 1960s, which introduced high-yielding varieties of seeds, synthetic fertilizers, and pesticides. While this increased agricultural productivity, it also led to environmental degradation and the displacement of traditional farming practices.</p>
<h2>The Push for Sustainability</h2>
<p>The Rockefeller Foundation's recent report, 'True Cost of Food: Measuring What Matters to Transform the US Food System', advocates for a radical change in the food system to make it more sustainable. The report argues that the current system has hidden costs, such as environmental degradation and health impacts, that need to be addressed.</p>
<p>However, the report has been criticized for its vague language and the lack of farmer representation in its creation. Some have interpreted this as an attempt to blame farmers for the problems in the food system, rather than the corporate interests that have driven its development.</p>
<h2>The Role of Other Actors</h2>
<p>It is important to note that the Rockefeller Foundation is not the only actor involved in the push for sustainability in agriculture. The World Economic Forum, the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, and the United Nations have all been involved in initiatives aimed at transforming the food system.</p>
<p>For example, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), a project funded by the Rockefeller and Gates Foundations, has been criticized for promoting GMO seeds and pesticides at the expense of traditional farming practices. However, the failure of AGRA cannot be attributed solely to the Rockefeller Foundation.</p>
<h2>The Complexity of the Food System</h2>
<p>The food system is complex and influenced by a multitude of factors, including economic policies, trade agreements, and consumer demand. Blaming a single actor, such as the Rockefeller Foundation, for its problems is an oversimplification.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the push for sustainability is not inherently malicious. While there are valid concerns about the implementation of certain policies, the goal of creating a more sustainable and equitable food system is a worthy one.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that the Rockefeller Foundation is responsible for the destruction of global agriculture and is now pushing for a radical change in the food system under the guise of sustainability is exaggerated and misleading. While the foundation has played a significant role in shaping modern agriculture, the blame for its negative impacts is shared among multiple actors. The push for sustainability, while potentially problematic in its implementation, is not inherently malicious.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5795250/">The Green Revolution and its impact on agriculture, food production and security</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921830154X">The role of the Rockefeller Foundation in the Green Revolution</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/the-great-reset-food-systems-summit/">The Great Reset and the Food Systems Summit</a></li>
  <li><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2020/jul/30/bill-gates-agra-africa-green-revolution">Bill Gates and the push for a new Green Revolution in Africa</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: The Rockefeller Foundation and the Destruction of Global Agriculture

<p>The claim that the modern food system is heavily influenced by the pursuit of profit, leading to issues such as land loss, food insecurity, illness, and environmental degradation, is a complex one that requires a thorough examination.</p>
<p>The modern food system is indeed shaped by capitalist imperatives, as highlighted in the book 'Sickening Profits: The Global Food System’s Poisoned Food and Toxic Wealth' by Colin Todhunter. Large investment firms and agribusinesses do profit from this system, and their influence on policy-making through lobbying is well-documented.</p>
<p>For instance, a study published in the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5793246/">Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry</a> discusses the impact of agrochemicals on human health and the environment. The study notes that the extensive use of pesticides and herbicides can lead to various health issues, including cancer, neurological disorders, and reproductive problems.</p>
<p>Moreover, the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919218300013">Journal of Environmental Management</a> has published research indicating that the current food system contributes to environmental degradation through practices such as monocropping and the use of synthetic fertilizers. These practices can lead to soil depletion, water pollution, and loss of biodiversity.</p>
<p>The claim also mentions the impact on food security and land loss. A report by the <a href="https://www.fao.org/3/i9553en/I9553EN.pdf">Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)</a> of the United Nations highlights that smallholder farmers, who are crucial for global food security, often face challenges such as land grabbing and lack of access to resources. This can indeed lead to food insecurity and displacement.</p>
<p>However, it is important to note that the food system is not monolithic, and there are efforts to promote sustainable and equitable practices. For example, the <a href="https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/hunger/">United Nations Sustainable Development Goals</a> include targets to end hunger, achieve food security, and promote sustainable agriculture.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while the claim that the modern food system is driven by profit and leads to various negative consequences is largely accurate, it is essential to recognize the nuances and the ongoing efforts to address these issues. The claim is supported by scientific studies and reports from reputable organizations, but it also requires a balanced perspective that acknowledges the complexity of the global food system.</p>

Claim Review: The Global Food System’s Poisoned Food and Toxic Wealth

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that four organizations of the pandemic-vaccine industry are seeking to raise $123 billion and that the money will be coming from the public has been circulating. This article aims to review this claim, providing a thorough analysis and context to help readers understand the truth behind it.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>The claim states that the World Health Organisation (WHO), GAVI, the International Development Association (IDA), and the Pandemic Fund are seeking to raise a total of $123 billion. The money is expected to come from various sources, including national governments and private funders, ultimately impacting taxpayers.</p>
<h2>Breakdown of the Claim</h2>
<p>The claim is based on the following breakdown:</p>
<ul>
  <li>WHO wants to raise $11.1 billion.</li>
  <li>GAVI seeks $11.9 billion.</li>
  <li>IDA aims to raise $100 billion.</li>
  <li>The Pandemic Fund wants $2 billion.</li>
</ul>
<p>These figures add up to $123 billion.</p>
<h2>Analysis of the Claim</h2>
<p>To evaluate the claim, we need to consider the sources of funding and the transparency of these organizations.</p>
<h3>World Health Organisation (WHO)</h3>
<p>WHO is seeking $11.1 billion for its work over the next four years. According to Devex, WHO expects $4 billion in membership dues, leaving $7.1 billion to be fundraised from governments and the private sector. WHO's funding sources include national governments, private foundations like the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, and other non-state actors.</p>
<p>WHO's financial transparency has been a concern. The most recent audited financial statements published relate to the year ended December 2021. This lack of up-to-date financial reporting raises questions about accountability and transparency.</p>
<h3>GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance</h3>
<p>GAVI is asking for $9 billion in new pledges for the period 2026-2030, out of a total need of $11.9 billion. GAVI's funding comes from a mix of public and private sources, with the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation being a significant contributor.</p>
<p>GAVI's impact on global vaccine distribution is substantial, but its financial operations and profit margins are not fully transparent. The organization's spending on fundraising and management expenses raises questions about its efficiency and accountability.</p>
<h3>International Development Association (IDA)</h3>
<p>IDA hopes to raise $100 billion through a new cycle of funding. IDA's funds are primarily used for poverty alleviation and climate change mitigation. The organization's strategic directions for the latest funding round emphasize resilience, human capital, and climate adaptation.</p>
<p>IDA's funding comes from contributions from member countries, with top funders including Japan, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The organization's focus on global agendas under the auspices of poverty alleviation raises concerns about the effectiveness and transparency of its spending.</p>
<h3>The Pandemic Fund</h3>
<p>The Pandemic Fund wants to raise $2 billion for its work. The fund is a World Bank partnership with a consortium of donor countries, foundations, and civil society organizations. Its founding financial contributors include various countries and private foundations like the Bill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation.</p>
<p>The Pandemic Fund's focus on strengthening pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response is crucial, but the lack of transparency in its financial operations and the involvement of private foundations raise questions about accountability and the potential for conflicts of interest.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that four organizations are seeking $123 billion for pandemic-vaccine schemes is partially true. However, the claim lacks context and transparency regarding the sources of funding and the specific uses of the money. The involvement of private foundations and the lack of up-to-date financial reporting by some organizations raise concerns about accountability and potential conflicts of interest.</p>
<p>While it is true that the money will ultimately come from taxpayers, the claim exaggerates the direct impact on individual taxpayers. The funding for these organizations comes from a mix of public and private sources, and the specific allocation of funds is not fully disclosed.</p>
<p>It is essential for these organizations to provide more transparency and accountability in their financial operations to build public trust and ensure that the money is used effectively and efficiently.</p>
<p>For further reading on the involvement of private foundations in global health, see the following study:</p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.17104/1611-8944_2014_3_323">The Rockefeller Foundation and the Transition from the League of Nations to the UN (1939–1946)</a> by Ludovic Tournès, published in the Journal of Modern European History.</p>

Claim Review: Four Organizations Seeking $123 Billion for Pandemic-Vaccine Industry

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that AI could cause human extinction has been a topic of intense debate among experts, futurists, and ethicists. This article aims to evaluate the validity of this claim by examining the potential risks and benefits of AI, as well as the factors that influence its development and integration into society.</p>
<h2>Potential Risks of AI</h2>
<p>One of the primary concerns surrounding AI is the possibility of it becoming an existential threat to humanity. This could occur if AI is developed and controlled by individuals or groups with malicious intentions, or if the technology is not properly governed and regulated.</p>
<p>Stephen Hawking, a renowned physicist, once stated, "Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history. Unfortunately, it might also be the last, unless we learn how to avoid the risks." This highlights the need for responsible innovation and ethical reflection in the development of AI.</p>
<h2>Mitigating the Risks</h2>
<p>To mitigate the risks associated with AI, it is crucial to implement robust governance frameworks and foster global cooperation. This includes establishing ethical guidelines, promoting transparency, and ensuring that AI technologies are developed and used in a manner that benefits society as a whole.</p>
<p>Research has shown that ethical considerations are essential in the development of AI. A study published in the journal <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2631-2">Nature</a> emphasizes the importance of integrating ethical principles into AI design and deployment to minimize potential harms.</p>
<h2>Balanced Perspectives</h2>
<p>While the risks of AI are significant, it is also important to acknowledge the potential benefits. AI has the capacity to revolutionize various sectors, including healthcare, finance, and education. By enhancing efficiency, improving decision-making, and enabling personalized services, AI can contribute to societal progress and well-being.</p>
<p>A report by the <a href="https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/artificial-intelligence/where-machines-could-replace-humans-and-where-they-cant-yet">McKinsey Global Institute</a> highlights the economic and social benefits of AI, emphasizing its potential to create new jobs, increase productivity, and drive innovation.</p>
<h2>Current State and Future Outlook</h2>
<p>The future of AI depends largely on how it is developed, governed, and integrated into society. Responsible innovators, global cooperation, and continued ethical reflection are key to ensuring a positive outcome. Individuals can also play a role by being proactive and informed, seeking alternative options, and advocating for ethical AI practices.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while AI does have the potential to pose existential risks under certain scenarios, these risks can be mitigated through responsible development, robust governance, and ethical considerations. It is essential to strike a balance between harnessing the benefits of AI and addressing its potential risks to ensure a positive future for humanity.</p>

Claim Review: AI and Human Extinction

If you want to replace an existing title on a portal and you want the replaced title to be visible to you and your followers.

Move the mouse over the title and make a right click.

Select Remedia -> Alternate Title from the menu

In the pop-up window, enter a new title that you like.

The blue icon copies the existing title into the input field, so you don't have to type everything...

By pressing Submit, the title will be replaced, which will be visible to you and others who visit the pages.

(There is a possibility that you will have to reload the page for the changes to be visible)

You can contact one of the fact-checking organizations.

Claim rated as -> Choose from false to true

Add claimer -> Opens a pop-up window that allows you to search for existing people already registered in the system or to create a new profile of that person.

Claimed At -> Enter the link to the page where the claim was found. You can add more places and link more claim authors

Short description -> short content that is seen when sharing articles on social networks

Field for entering the content of the article.

After the article is published, it will be visible on the Remedia social network and to everyone who has the Remedia Chrome extension installed

And you can engage in debunking yourself.

CAUTION! Abusing the platform is not allowed, entering unverified, misleading or untrue content will result in the deletion of the entire account with all content

Canonical -> If you enter content that already exists somewhere (your property), you can enter a link and Remedia will try to enter the content in the provided fields.

Featured image -> Image that is displayed when you share an article on other social networks.

Write your title -> Enter the title of the article

The claim being reviewed -> Enter the claim here, but BEWARE! An assertion is not the entire statement someone has made, but something concise and unambiguous. Check the claim entry multiple times as each change will create a new claim in the system.

Claim made on -> date when someone published the claim.

After installing the Chrome extension, you can log in and use advanced functionalities. One of them is 'Dislike'.

By right-clicking on an article, the options provided by the Remedia extension are opened, by selecting Dislike, the article will become more transparent and less visible.

Your action will be visible to you and all people who follow you!

Alternate Title

1. Log in to the Remedia social network with a Google or Facebook account (link above right).

2. Install the Chrome extension (if you didn't)

4. Enter the email you used to open your Google or Facebook account. Submit.

5. After the input field appears, rewrite the code. Accept.

That's it! Now you can use the advanced functions of the Remedia Chrome extension.

Alternate Titles

Remedia's work so far:

Remedia, the best thing that happened to media!

On the Feed page, you can enter Status, Opinion and Claim Review

It is enough to enter the title, short description and content.

Below the fields for entering content, you will find fields for entering links. By entering page links in these fields, you 'show' the Chrome extension on which pages to display your content

Press Publish to publish your opinion. (It may be necessary to wait a moment while all links are generated)

Claim: "The Rockefeller Foundation is responsible for the destruction of global agriculture and is now pushing for a radical change in the food system under the guise of sustainability." is Mostly False

Has beed claimed by:

Articles reviewing this claim:

Content you might like: