A Progressive Pact for the Future
The Summit of the Future was held on September 22-23, 2024, at the United Nations. It aimed to forge a new international consensus on addressing global challenges. The event brought together world leaders to adopt the “Pact for the Future.” This includes a Global Digital Compact. It also includes a Declaration on Future Generations. The Pact covers themes such as sustainable development, climate change, digital cooperation, and transforming global governance. The Summit emphasized the need for multilateral solutions to ensure a better future. It highlighted the importance of international cooperation in tackling both current and emerging global issues.
Source: https://www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future
Argentina at the UN General Assembly
During his address to the 49th UN Assembly, Argentina’s President Javier Milei acknowledged the UN’s peacekeeping origins but accused it of evolving into a bureaucratic entity pushing a socialist agenda. He argued against sustainable development initiatives, deeming them threats to national sovereignty and individual rights. He believes that the UN proposes to solve “the problems of modernity with solutions that undermine the sovereignty of nation-states and violate the right to life, liberty, and property of individuals.”
Milei’s speech notably omitted the topic of climate change, which he dismisses as a “socialist lie.” His rejection of climate policies stems from a belief that they hinder economic growth. His stance has further isolated Argentina diplomatically, straining relationships with nations such as Spain, China, and Brazil. In opposing the Pact for the Future, Argentina aligned itself with countries like Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea, distancing itself from traditional allies like the United States and Israel.
Milei foresees a bleak future if nations do not abandon global pacts. He predicted a future of “poverty, degradation, anarchy, and a fatal absence of freedom” if countries do not make a swift change. He also urged them to abandon the Pact for the Future to embrace a Freedom Agenda led by him.
The Pact for the Future: A Threat for Freedom?
In a rapidly changing world, the quest for international consensus on how to address pressing global issues is more crucial than ever. Two contrasting visions have emerged at the forefront of this dialogue. The first is the United Nations’ progressive Pact for the Future. The second is the regressive “Freedom Agenda” championed by conservative circles and some business leaders. Each offers a distinct pathway with far-reaching implications for global governance, economic stability, and social progress.
The UN’s Pact for the Future
The UN’s Pact for the Future is a call to action for world leaders to collaboratively forge solutions to modern challenges. At its core, the Pact emphasizes sustainable development, climate change mitigation, digital cooperation, and the transformation of global governance. It seeks to address not only immediate concerns but also long-term global threats, aiming to foster a multilateral system that is more inclusive and adaptive to the complexities of the 21st century.
Key elements of the Pact include a Global Digital Compact and a Declaration on Future Generations. Both are designed to enhance international cooperation and safeguard human rights. By focusing on themes such as peace, security, and the well-being of future generations, the Pact encourages nations to work together in overcoming obstacles that no single country can tackle alone.
The Regressive Freedom Agenda
In stark contrast, the Freedom Agenda promoted by conservative leaders and business figures like Argentina’s President Javier Milei advocates for a retreat from international commitments and a resurgence of national sovereignty. This agenda prioritizes economic growth and individual liberties, often at the expense of collective global efforts. It views initiatives like the UN’s Pact as threats to national autonomy, arguing that they impose constraints that stifle economic potential and personal freedoms.
Proponents of the Freedom Agenda argue that solutions to global problems should be rooted in local governance, free-market principles, and the protection of property rights. They caution against what they see as an overreach by international bodies, which they believe undermines the sovereignty of nation-states.
National sovereignty becomes obstructive to world consensus when it prioritizes unilateral actions over collaborative efforts. This is especially true in addressing global challenges that require collective solutions. This can occur when:
- Isolationism: Countries choose to isolate themselves from international agreements or organizations. They refuse to participate in global discussions or adhere to shared commitments.
- Protectionism: Implementing strict trade barriers and economic policies that hinder international cooperation and economic integration.
- Rejection of International Norms: Ignoring or actively opposing international laws, treaties, or human rights standards. This behavior can undermine global governance and stability.
- Nationalism Over Globalism: Promoting extreme nationalism. This ideology dismisses the importance of global interdependence. It also overlooks the benefits of working together on issues like climate change, pandemics, and security threats.
- Undermining Multilateral Institutions: Actively working against or withdrawing support from international bodies like the United Nations. These bodies are designed to facilitate dialogue and cooperation among nations.
When national sovereignty is exercised in these ways, it can hinder the ability of the international community to reach consensus and effectively tackle issues that transcend borders.
Comparing the Impacts
The divergence between these two approaches is stark. The UN’s Pact for the Future aims to foster global solidarity and shared responsibility, addressing issues that transcend borders such as climate change and digital equity. Its success depends on the willingness of nations to embrace collaboration over isolation, and to prioritize long-term sustainability over short-term gains.
On the other hand, the Freedom Agenda, focused on national interests and economic growth, risks isolating countries from the benefits of international cooperation. While it may appeal to those seeking immediate economic relief and autonomy, it could exacerbate global disparities and undermine efforts to address shared challenges like environmental degradation and economic inequality.
World Goodwill
As the world stands at a crossroads, the choices made today will shape international relations and the future of multilateralism. The UN’s Pact for the Future offers a vision of hope and collective action, striving for a world where nations work together to ensure a better tomorrow. Meanwhile, the Freedom Agenda poses a return to fragmentation and individualism, potentially leading to a world where global problems remain unresolved.
World Goodwill is in favor of the UN’s initiatives for a transformative future. In addressing the Summit of the Future, the latest Lucis Trust’s World Goodwill newsletter emphasizes the importance of planning and cooperation in international affairs.
The Goodwill Movement emphasizes the power of goodwill as a force for social change and the development of a new humanity, aligning with principles of understanding, cooperation, and the evolution of global society. These principles are also central to the UN’s progressive Pact for the Future.
Ultimately, the path chosen will determine not just the future of international cooperation, but the very fabric of our global society. The stakes are high, and the time for decisive action is now. Whether nations will rally around the call for unity (so far, 143 countries have approved the Pact for the Future, including the United States) or retreat into the confines of sovereignty remains to be seen, but the need for a shared commitment to progress has never been more clear.
Sources:
- https://www.lucistrust.org/world_goodwill
- https://www.lucistrust.org/world_goodwill/newsletter/current_issue/recent_issues__1/homepage/world_goodwill_homepage/world_goodwill_newsletter_2024_2_planning_for_a_transformative_future
The conflict in the United States is between a love of freedom which amounts almost to irresponsibility and license, and a growing humanitarian ideology which will result in world service and non-separateness.
“Liberty,” as the Lords of Liberation may endorse it, is in reality the recognition of right human relations, freely adjusted, willingly undertaken and motivated by a sense of responsibility which will act as a protective wall; this will take place, not through coercive measures, but through correct interpretation and quick appreciation by the masses, who are apt to confound licence (personality freedom to do as the lower nature chooses) and liberty of soul and conscience. Yet this liberty is the easiest aspect of the divine will for humanity to grasp. It is in reality the first revelation given to man of the nature of the Will of God and of the quality of Shamballa.
The Hierarchy is a great fighting body today, fighting for the souls of men, fighting all that blocks the expansion of the human consciousness, fighting all that limits human freedom (I said not license) and fighting to remove those factors and barriers which militate against the return of the Christ and the emergence of the Hierarchy as a fully functioning body on earth. There is nothing weak, vacillating, sentimental or neutral in the attitude of the Hierarchy; this must be grasped by humanity, and the strength and insight as well as the love of the Hierarchy must be counted upon.
-The Tibetan Master (quotes from the Alice A. Bailey books)
Discover more from Hierarchical Democracy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
