Category Archives: Transhuman News

Hiding behind the respectability of scholarship, wealth and position, the WEF offers a smorgasbord of propaganda and fear-producing possibilities: Vaccine inequality, social fractures. geopolitical tensions, environmental collapse, global warming disaster, cybersecurity failure, migration disorder, war in space.

All of this is to prepare the world for the necessity of a Great Reset, aka Technocracy, that will facilitate the greatest transfer of wealth in world history, leading to Klaus Schwabs smiling prediction, You will own nothing and be happy. Like driving zoo animals with an electric cattle prod, fear is the primary tool to scare people into predictable submission and compliance. TN Editor

As 2022 begins, COVID-19 and its economic and societal consequences continue to pose a critical threat to the world. Vaccine inequality and a resultant uneven economic recovery risk compounding social fractures and geopolitical tensions. In the poorest 52 countrieshome to 20% of the worlds peopleonly 6% of the population had been vaccinated at the time of writing. By 2024, developing economies (excluding China) will have fallen 5.5% below their pre-pandemic expected GDP growth, while advanced economies will have surpassed it by 0.9%widening the global income gap.

The resulting global divergence will create tensionswithin and across bordersthat risk worsening the pandemics cascading impacts and complicating the coordination needed to tackle common challenges including strengthening climate action, enhancing digital safety, restoring livelihoods and societal cohesion and managing competition in space.

TheGlobal Risks Report2022 presents the results of the latest Global Risks Perception Survey (GRPS), followed by an analysis of key risks emanating from current economic, societal, environmental and technological tensions. The report concludes with reflections on enhancing resilience, drawing from the lessons of the last two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. The key findings of the survey and the analysis are summarized below.

Asked to take a view of the past two years, respondents to the GRPS perceive societal risksin the form of social cohesion erosion, livelihood crises and mental health deteriorationas those that have worsened the most since the pandemic began. Only 16% of respondents feel positive and optimistic about the outlook for the world, and just 11% believe the global recovery will accelerate. Most respondents instead expect the next three years to be characterized by either consistent volatility and multiple surprises or fractured trajectories that will separate relative winners and losers.

For the next five years, respondents again signal societal and environmental risks as the most concerning. However, over a 10-year horizon, the health of the planet dominates concerns: environmental risks are perceived to be the five most critical long-term threats to the world as well as the most potentially damaging to people and planet, with climate action failure, extreme weather and biodiversity loss ranking as the top three most severe risks. Respondents also signaled debt crises and geoeconomic confrontations as among the most severe risks over the next 10 years.

Technological riskssuch as digital inequality and cybersecurity failureare other critical short-and medium-term threats to the world according to GRPS respondents, but these fall back in the rankings towards the long term and none appear among the most potentially severe, signaling a possible blind spot in risk perceptions.

The 2021-2022 GRPS included a question on international risk mitigation efforts. Artificial intelligence, space exploitation, cross-border cyberattacks and misinformation and migration and refugees are the areas where most respondents believe the current state of risk mitigation efforts fall short of the challengethat is, efforts are not started or in early development. Meanwhile, for trade facilitation, international crime and weapons of mass destruction, large majorities perceived risk mitigation efforts to be established or effective.

Economic challenges flowing from the pandemic persist. The outlook remains weak: at the time of writing, the global economy was expected to be 2.3% smaller by 2024 than it would have been without the pandemic. Rising commodity prices, inflation and debt are emerging risks. Moreover, with another spike in COVID-19 cases towards the end of 2021, the pandemic continues to stifle countries ability to facilitate a sustained recovery.

The economic fallout from the pandemic is compounding with labour market imbalances, protectionism, and widening digital, education and skills gaps that risk splitting the world into divergent trajectories. In some countries, rapid vaccine rollout, successful digital transformations and new growth opportunities could mean a return to pre-pandemic trends in the short term and the possibility of a more resilient outlook over a longer horizon. Yet many other countries will be held back by low rates of vaccination, continued acute stress on health systems, digital divides and stagnant job markets. These divergences will complicate the international collaboration needed to address the worsening impacts of climate change, manage migration flows and combat dangerous cyber-risks.

Short-term domestic pressures will make it harder for governments to focus on long-term priorities and will limit the political capital allocated to global concerns. Social cohesion erosion is a top short-term threat in 31 countriesincluding Argentina, France, Germany, Mexico and South Africa from the G20. Disparities that were already challenging societies are now expected to widen51 million more people are projected to live in extreme poverty compared to the pre-pandemic trendat the risk of increasing polarization and resentment within societies. At the same time, domestic pressures risk stronger national interest postures and worsening fractures in the global economy that will come at the expense of foreign aid and cooperation.

Respondents to the GRPS rank climate action failure as the number one long-term threat to the world and the risk with potentially the most severe impacts over the next decade. Climate change is already manifesting rapidly in the form of droughts, fires, floods, resource scarcity and species loss, among other impacts. In 2020, multiple cities around the world experienced extreme temperatures not seen for yearssuch as a record high of 42.7C in Madrid and a 72-year low of 19C in Dallas, and regions like the Arctic Circle have averaged summer temperatures 10C higher than in prior years. Governments, businesses and societies are facing increasing pressure to thwart the worst consequences. Yet a disorderly climate transition characterized by divergent trajectories worldwide and across sectors will further drive apart countries and bifurcate societies, creating barriers to cooperation.

Given the complexities of technological, economic and societal change at this scale, and the insufficient nature of current commitments, it is likely that any transition that achieves the net-zero goal by 2050 will be disorderly. While COVID-19 lockdowns saw a global dip in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, upward trajectories soon resumed: the GHG emission rate rose faster in 2020 than the average over the last decade. Countries continuing down the path of reliance on carbon-intensive sectors risk losing competitive advantage through a higher cost of carbon, reduced resilience, failure to keep up with technological innovation and limited leverage in trade agreements. Yet shifting away from carbon-intense industries, which currently employ millions of workers, will trigger economic volatility, deepen unemployment and increase societal and geopolitical tensions. Adopting hasty environmental policies could also have unintended consequences for naturethere are still many unknown risks from deploying untested biotechnical and geoengineering technologies. And poorly regulated green markets could create monopolies, while lack of public support for land use transitions or new pricing schemes could create political complications that further slow action. A transition that fails to account for societal implications will exacerbate inequalities within and between countries, heightening geopolitical frictions.

Growing dependency on digital systemsintensified by COVID-19has altered societies. Over the last 18 months, industries have undergone rapid digitalization, workers have shifted to remote working where possible, and platforms and devices facilitating this change have proliferated. At the same time, cybersecurity threats are growingin 2020, malware and ransomware attacks increased by 358% and 435% respectivelyand are outpacing societies ability to effectively prevent or respond to them. Lower barriers to entry for cyberthreat actors, more aggressive attack methods, a dearth of cybersecurity professionals, and patchwork governance mechanisms are all aggravating the risk.

Attacks on large and strategic systems will carry cascading physical consequences across societies, while prevention will inevitably entail higher costs. Intangible riskssuch as disinformation, fraud, and lack of digital safetywill also impact public trust in digital systems. Greater cyber threats also risk driving states apart if governments continue to follow unilateral paths to control risks. As attacks become more severe and broadly impactful, already-sharp tensions between governments impacted by cybercrime and governments complicit in their commission will rise as cybersecurity becomes another wedge for divergencerather than cooperationamong nation-states.

Growing insecurity resulting from economic hardship, intensifying impacts of climate change and political instability are already forcing millions to leave their homes in search of a better future abroad. Involuntary migration is a top long-term concern for GRPS respondents, while 60% of them see migration and refugees as an area where international mitigation efforts have not started or are in early development. In 2020, there were over 34 million people displaced abroad globally from conflict alonea historical high. However, in many countries, the lingering effects of the pandemic, increased economic protectionism, and new labour market dynamics are resulting in higher barriers to entry for migrants who might seek opportunity or refuge.

These higher barriers to migration, and their spill-over effect on remittancesa critical lifeline for some developing countriesrisk precluding a potential pathway to restoring livelihoods, maintaining political stability and closing income and labour gaps. At the time of writing, the United States faced over 11 million unfilled jobs in general and the European Union had a deficit of 400,000 drivers just in the trucking industry. In the most extreme cases, humanitarian crises will worsen since vulnerable groups have no choice but to embark on more dangerous journeys. In 2021, 4,800 migrants, including families and children, perished or went missing during the journey. Migration pressures will also exacerbate international tensions as it is increasingly used as a geopolitical instrument. Destination-country governments will have to manage diplomatic relationships and immigrant skepticism among their populations.

While humans have been exploring space for decades, recent years have witnessed increased activity, not only creating new opportunities but also signaling an emerging realm of risk, particularly with growing militarization and weaponization in the arena. New commercial satellite market entrants are disrupting incumbents traditional influence over the global space commons in delivering satellite services, notably internet-related communications. A greater number and range of actors operating in space could generate frictions if space exploration and exploitation are not responsibly managed. With limited and outdated global governance in place to regulate space alongside diverging national-level policies, risks are intensifying.

One consequence of accelerated space activity is a higher risk of collisions, which could lead to a proliferation of space debris and impact the orbits that host infrastructure for key systems on Earth, damage valuable space equipment, or spark international tensions. Limited governance tools increase the likelihood of space activity escalating geopolitical tensions, and recent weapons tests in space underscore such risks. Increased space activity could also lead to unknown environmental impacts or raise costs for public goods such as weather monitoring or climate change surveillance.

In 2021, countries deployed new mechanisms to respond to a public health crisis with shifting characteristics, leading to both successes and failures. Two interlinked factors were critical for effective management of the pandemic: first, the readiness of governments to adjust and modify response strategies according to changing circumstances; and second, their ability to maintain societal trust through principled decisions and effective communication.

Reflecting on the distinct resilience goals of governments, businesses and communities will help ensure that agendas are aligned in achieving a whole-of-society approach to tackling critical risks of any nature. For governments, balancing costs, regulating for resilience, and adjusting data-sharing arrangements to ensure sharper crisis management are key to galvanizing stronger interaction between public and private sectors. Businessesrecognizing that better national-level preparedness is critical for planning, investing, and executing their strategiescan leverage opportunities in areas such as supply chains, codes of conduct within their industry, and inclusion of a resilience dimension into workforce benefit offerings.

Communities can help local governments to join up with national efforts, improve communication and support grassroots resilience efforts. At an organizational level, strategies such as grounding resilience analyses in key delivery outcomes, appreciating systemic vulnerabilities and embracing a diversity of approaches can help leaders build better resilience as well.

Read full story here

View original post here:
WEF Global Risks Report 2022 Imagines ... - technocracy.news

All of us need our human rights protected and upheld. This is a fundamental value that rises above the politics of the day.

That is why the United Nations has robust mechanisms in place internationally to ensure that National Human Rights Institutions (NRHIs) can operate independently of the changing priorities of any government.

These are known as the Paris Principles the minimum standards required for NHRIs to meet to be considered effective and credible. For an NRHI to achieve an A status, which allows them to participate at the UN Human Rights Council, they must be fully compliant with these principles.

We believe that recent statements made by the Equalityand Human Rights Commission (EHRC), Great Britains NHRI, indicate that they can no longer be considered compliant with the Paris Principles, and are no longer fit for purpose as a National Human Rights Institution.

This week, a coalition ofLGBTQ+ and trans focusedcharitiesand human rights bodies, led by Stonewall and supported by the Good Law Project, wroteto the United Nations and the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANRHI) to formallysubmit evidence to support calls fora Special Review of theAstatus ofEHRC asGreat Britains National Human Rights Institution.

The submission is prompted by the EHRCs recent, and significant, change in stance on theissue of trans rights. Their recent statements on GRA reform in Scotland, and the conversion therapy ban in England and Wales, not only reverse their long-held positions, but are in stark contrast to international human rights standards. The EHRCs stance seeks to strip trans people of legal protections, and pose a grave threat to the abilityoftrans people to participate in daily life with dignity and respect.

The 19-page submission outlines substantial evidence that reveals the numerous ways the EHRC now finds itself falling short of international standards.

The 19-page submission outlines substantial evidence that reveals the numerous ways the EHRC now finds itself falling short of international standards. It outlines a complete absence of financial autonomy from the UK Government, and cites excessive governmental interference including politically motivated appointments to the Chair and Board, many of whom have repeatedly and publicly demonstrated their opposition to the expansion of human rights, and whose appointments have drawn widespread criticism from NGOs.

The signatories of this exercise accept that UK Government policy changes based on their democratic mandate.

However, the important point of NHRIs is that they should operate according to the principle of acting independently, free from political inference, and focus on upholding international human rights standards regardless of the politics of the day.

The politicisation of GB'shuman rights body to take a determinedly anti-trans stance has placedtrans peoplein the firing line.

The politicisation of the GBs human rights body to take a determinedly anti-trans stance has placedtrans peoplein the firing line.

But the EHRCsattempt to create ahierarchyofhuman rights in Great Britain is a very real threat to everyone, particularly those of us protected by the Equality Act. That is why we have taken swift action to call for an international review, and domestically, we are calling for the Women & Equalities Select Committee to hold a review into the matter.

It is difficult to see how the EHRC can continue to hold itscurrent status, given how compromised it appears to be, and how farfrom Paris Principles compliance it has drifted. We call on the UK Government to show leadership byensuring we have a revived and truly independent EHRC that is fit for purpose.

Signatories

Good Law Project

Liberty

Feminist Gender Equality Network

Allsorts

Tonic Housing

Global Butterflies

Quotes from signatories

The EHRC is walking away from its duties to uphold basic human rights for trans and non-binary people. It no longer commands our confidence, and we fear what it now intends. It will take some strong and swift actions to convince us that it is on our side, actions we no longer think it is capable of. -TransActual

As the UKs leading charity supporting trans people, we join Stonewall in calling on the UN to review the A status of the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The EHRCs biased approach to trans rights raises big questions around its integrity and so-called independence. The EHRC uses its A status as evidence of its credibility on its website a credibility that creates an authority which is currently contributing to the roll-back of trans rights in the UK. We ask for a thorough examination of the EHRC through the lens of the UN, because the public deserve an impartial watchdog, not one that drives government agendas. -Mermaids

"As independent human rights organisations we must uphold human rights equally, regardless of political whim or public opinion. The EHRCs recent announcements however, run contrary to this basic principle. Far from pushing UK governments to go further and strengthen equality and rights protections for LGBT people it is calling for UK governments to pause their plans. It has also made suggestions about conversion therapy which actively undermine the health and well-being of trans people in the UK right now. The departure from its purpose is as staggering as it is unacceptable. The EHRCs role as a National Human Rights Institution must be reviewed. -Martha Spurrier, Director of Liberty.

"The past years have seen LGBT and other human rights organisations lose faith in the EHRC to serve as an independent body, or one that works for the protection of our rights. It has shown again and again it will take dangerous, swingeing moves against marginalised people if it deems it politically expedient to do so. This is doubly true, as the last few weeks have shown, for the trans and non-binary people whose rights it should be standing up for, not seeking to undermine." - Gendered Intelligence

At GIRES, our aim is to ensure that national and international legislation and practice meet the needs of trans and gender diverse people. We call on EHRC and our Government to work with trans communities now, to call out prejudice and discrimination, improve our existing equality legislation, strengthen our fight for trans human rights, in the UK and elsewhere. - Cat Burton, GIRES Chair and Shaan Knan, GIRES Vice Chair

"The EHRC is subject to a level of oversight and micro-management from the Department which is just not consistent with being a UN Human Rights Institution. They are supposed to be independent from Government but the EHRC looks much more like a tool of Government." - Jolyon Maugham, Director of the Good Law Project

As a national LGBT+ specialist infrastructureand membership organisation, Consortium share the serious concerns raised by member organisations and allies about the direction of the EHRC. We are deeply troubled by the threat that the EHRCs actions pose to the human rights of trans people. We stand with all trans and non-binary people in defending their human rights, dignity and safety In the UK and globally. - LGBT Consortium

A review of the EHRC is urgently needed. As a UN-accredited National Human Rights Institution, it should operate according to the Paris Principles, which include the commitment to promote and protect all human rights and to contribute to a world where everyone, everywhere fully enjoys their rights. We believe the EHRC fail in this. Defending trans and non-binary peoples rights, dignity and safety is critical. - Rob Cookson, Deputy Chief Executive, LGBT Foundation

This submission clearly sets out our concerns about undue UK Government influence on the EHRC. The EHRC also seems to be riding roughshod over the arrangements that are in place to ensure proper consultation in Scotland on devolved matters including gender recognition reform. - Tim Hopkins, director of the Equality Network

"We are supporting this submission, because as a feminist organisation with members worldwide and one committed to equality for everyone including trans people, we are concerned and disgusted by the activities of the EHRC and its failure to support the human rights of trans people in the UK. We believe the UN and the international community as a whole needs to take action against the EHRC's threat to human rights of many groups of people in the UK." - Feminist Gender Equality Network

The way the EHRC is constituted makes it institutionally unfit for purpose. It is subject to unacceptable levels of political and financial control and thus cannot meaningfully be regarded as an independent reviewer of human rights within the UK. This follows serious shortcomings called out previously in the Women and Equality Select Committee report as well. EHRC has now advocated multiple policies which pose a serious threat to the human rights of trans individuals. We demand a complete overhaul. - Trans Safety Network

Galop has significant concerns about the EHRC's views on trans rights. As the largest organisation in the UK working directly with LGBT+ victims of abuse, we believe its current position will have serious negative impacts on those we support, and on our community as a whole. - Galop

Under the direction of Baroness Falkner, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has proved time and again that it is no longer fit for purpose, or global recognition as an independent human rights body. We stand with Stonewall and other LGBTQIA+ charities and human rights organisations in condemning the EHRCs failure in its mission to encourage equality and diversity, eliminate unlawful discrimination, and protect and promote the human rights of everyone in Britain. - Sparkle The National Transgender Charity

Our concerns about EHRCs change in approach in Scotland, resulting in the potential adverse impact on the human rights of young LGBTI people, are included within this submission. They are echoed in an open letter to Scottish Government by our Trans Rights Youth Commission who recently highlighted that EHRC are meant to be defenders of our human rights while clearly expressing their hurt and anger to this change in stance. We welcome this request to GANHRI and add our voice calling for a Special Review -Dr Mhairi Crawford, Chief Executive of LGBT Youth Scotland

"With EHRC's complete reversal on their own positions they have shown that current leadership is actively hostile to trans people in the UK and cannot be considered fit for purpose as a human rights organisation." - Gemma Dellbridge, Operations Director, Be Trans Support and Community

Government interference with the EHRC has led to it being unfit for purpose which we believe is strategic in the UK's escalating hostile environment towards marginalised communities. A special review by the UN will give hope to many that although this small island may appear adrift, we are seen and heard by much greater countries internationally. - Carla Ecola, Co-founder, The LGBTQI+ Outside Project

Spectra welcomes this rigorous and detailed initiative from Stonewall calling for a special review of the EHRC. Concerns with organisational independence from government together with the failure of the EHRC to attend to issues of trans equality have eroded the EHRC's reputation, underscoring the necessity of action. -Spectra

Follow this link:
Major LGBTQ+ organisations spark international review of the EHRC - Stonewall

Seth Acheampong, Eastern Regional Minister has visited the site fir the new military base

The Government will set up a military base in Akyemfuor near Maame Krobo in the Afram Plains South District to tackle growing insecurity associated with conflicts between cattle herdsmem and local farmers.

Akyemfuor Asiedu Agyemang, the Chief of Abetifi and also Adontenhene of Kwahu Traditional Area, allotted the 50-acre land to the state for the construction of the camp dubbed, Forward Operation Base.

Provision of the land has been hailed as a good intervention that would assist the Government to help tame recurring conflicts between local farmers and Fulani cattle herdsmen, and further improve general security in the Afram Plains.

Mr Seth Acheampong, Eastern Regional Minister and Chairman of the Regional Security Committee, visited the site on Wednesday in the company of top military officers, including Brigadier-General Michael Amoah-Ayisi, General Officer Commanding Southern Sector and Brigadier-General Gyane Adoh Richard, Director for Planning and Research Development.

The team inspected the land and was also shown temporary structures at Kwanin that have been provided by the chiefs to accommodate personnel as efforts were being made to construct the permanent camp.

Mr Acheampong told the Ghana News Agency in an interview that the establishment of the Special Forces base had become imperative because several efforts to get the security issues in the Afram Plains addressed had proved ineffective.

The objective of the establishment of the military base is to ensure that there is peace in the community. Crop farming is an economic activity and similarly, cattle farming is truly an economic event and we should not despise what they(Fulani Herds men) do, he said.

All that the government require is for these farmers to live interdependently and grow the community progressively, he added. This is the reason of engaging and setting up the camp so that whenever conflicts arise, they can step in to restore peace.

He stressed that the setting up of the Forward Operation Base would certainly happen at Akyemfuor with the inspection of the parcel of land, We are commencing it.

He added, A journey of a thousand miles always begins with a start so coming here today is building up the foundation that will help us to achieve the overall objective of permanent stay of the military men here in Afram Plains South District.

Also speaking with the GNA, Mr Evans Kyei Ntiri, District Chief Executive of Afram Plains South District, explained that the issues with crop farmers and Fulani cattle herdsmen had been occurring seasonally, and that, he believed with the presence of a military base it would be curbed.

Afram Plains has one of the biggest markets in the Eastern Region, generating substantial revenue, but people who trade in and out of the geographical enclave do not get a safe passage due to rampant robbery attacks and theft, which local farmers blame on the trans-human cattle herdsmen.

This has often erupted into conflicts between the farmers and the herdsmen, escalating insecurity in the predominantly farming area.

But Mr Ntiri assured residents and traders of a lasting solution and urged them to calm down tempers because those security issues were going to be things of the past following the establishment of the military base.

He expressed the hope that within one month, the military personnel would arrive as it had been said.

He praised the Chiefs and people of the area, especially Akyemfuor Asiedu Agyemang for giving out the land, as well as Daasebre Akuamoah Agyapong, Paramount Chief of Kwahu Traditional Area, for his continuous support to finding a lasting solution to the menace.

Continued here:
Government to set up Military Base in the Afram Plains - GhanaWeb