By Jaclyn De Candio for Protect The Harvest
The call to negotiate a global “Plant Based Treaty” is putting animal agriculture in the crosshairs of environmental and animal extremist NGOs. This radical document, a sister initiative to the Climate Save Movement, calls for individuals, organizations, businesses, and cities to endorse three demands with the goal of halting, reducing, and, ultimately, eliminating animal protein production. The crux of the issue is placing blame on animal agriculture as a major driver of climate change. Radical activists, pseudo-scientists, mainstream news media, NGOs, and some governments believe the only way to deal with this issue is to eliminate the alleged cause.
Unsurprisingly, the Plant Based Treaty’s global campaign coordinator is vegan activist Anita Krajnc, co-founder of the radical direct-action group Toronto Pig Save and executive director of the Animal Save Movement.
Using Globalist Sledge Hammers to Accomplish Extremist Goals
The Plant Based Treaty team is urging members of its cult-like cabal to apply pressure on national governments around the world. The goal is to formally negotiate each nation’s treaty as a companion to the ill-conceived United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) Paris Agreement.
Incorporating the proposed Plant Based Treaty into UNFCCC’s Paris Agreement (a legally binding international treaty on climate change) “would put food systems at the forefront of combating the climate crisis. Modeled on the popular Fossil Fuel Treaty, the Plant Based Treaty aims to halt the widespread degradation of critical ecosystems caused by animal agriculture and to promote a shift to healthier, sustainable plant-based diets,” according to the treaty’s fanatic crusaders.
The treaty’s creators and supporters make no effort to hide their agenda. They want to eliminate consumer freedom of choice and enforce their extremist, physiologically challenged diet on a global scale through political action.
A Trifecta of Threats to Food Production, Security, and Affordability
The treaty outlines three core principles designed to relinquish, redirect, and restore land and climate usage from food animal production.
Their first stated objective aims to enforce policies that prohibit animal agriculture expansion or prohibit producers from obtaining additional land.
Proponents openly list what would be banned by this treaty, some of which would include:
• No building of new animal farms or slaughterhouses;
• No expansion or intensification of existing farms;
• No conversion of plant-based agriculture to animal agriculture or of any land for animal feed production;
• No clearing of land for animal agriculture.
They also mention a ban on live animal exports.
The second component of the document calls for a global move away from animal-based food systems to a plant-based system. This may be accomplished in part with the declaration of a “climate emergency” and “methane emergency” while using the power of government to reduce food choices. Indoctrination would take place in schools to further their agenda, and exclusively plant-based meals would be mandated in hospitals, schools, government institutions, and other entities. The World Health Organization (WHO) would have exclusive global control for food labeling, which would require carbon and cancer “warning labels” on products such as processed meats.
The third element of this treaty talks about ecosystems, similar to “rewilding” legislation in the U.S.
Creating Global Control
Currently, the treaty boasts 134,589 individual endorsers (earth’s current population is more than 8,100,000,000 people), 1,319 organization endorsers, 1,644 business endorsers, and 24 city endorsers (there are 4,000,000 cities worldwide).
Unsurprisingly, supporters include like-minded extremist groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and a litany of hardcore vegan and animal extremist organizations and businesses.
These groups have the same unified goal of ending animal agriculture and eliminating consumer freedom of choice. Even more alarming is the inevitable path to increased global food insecurity the treaty’s ideology promotes. Eliminating or severely restricting animal agriculture removes an agricultural component from the global economy that could cause crippling damage, ignoring an animal-human dynamic that has lasted as long as mankind.
For many reasons, societies and economies based solely on plant diets would be unhealthy and unrealistic. Plant-based diets still require massive resources to produce enough calories to meet the needs of eight billion people. The land, fertilizer, water, pesticides, and other resources needed to grow crops and replenish soil nutrients the plants drain would be a major challenge. Animal agriculture takes advantage of naturally created manure to replenish nutrients in the soil that helps crops flourish.
To ensure A Free and Fed America™, people should benefit from having food choices, not restrictions. The elitist practice of placing power in the hands of globalists and non-elected government bureaucrats is a recipe for agricultural, economic, and social disaster.
Protect The Harvest stands firmly in support of American agriculture and for A Free and Fed America™ by preserving consumer freedoms and protecting food security through thoughtful and reasonable food production. In the face of extremist propaganda, it is more important than ever that consumers remain informed and united against the wild-eyed ideologies of global elitists, radical NGOs, and politicians with a thirst to control people and restrict liberties and freedoms.
