By Ramon Tomey
The United Nations (UN) touted the supposed “benefits” of world hunger in an op-ed dating from 2008. The piece, which the UN initially defended as “an attempt at satire,” was subsequently taken down.
In the article published in the UN Chronicle, University of Hawaii political science professor George Kent argued that hunger actually has “great positive value” for many people. He also denounced the detrimental perception of widespread hunger as a “naïve view.”
“We sometimes talk about hunger in the world as if it was a scourge that all of us want to see abolished, viewing it as comparable with the plague or AIDS. But that naïve view prevents us from coming to grips with what causes and sustains hunger,” he wrote.
“Indeed, it is fundamental to the working of the world’s economy. Hungry people are the most productive people, especially where there is a need for manual labor.”
Kent dubbed the concept of well-fed people being more productive as “nonsense,” explaining that “people who are well-nourished have greater capacity for productive physical activity, but well-nourished people are far less willing to do that work.”
“No one works harder than hungry people,” the professor pointed out, citing incidences of poor people holding up signs that say “will work for food.”
He warned in the op-ed that the global economy would cease to exist the moment global hunger is alleviated.
“How many of us would sell out services so cheaply if it were not for the threat of hunger? When we sell our services cheaply – we enrich others; those who own the factories, the machines and the lands; and ultimately own the people who work for them. For those who depend on the availability of cheap labor, hunger is the foundation of their wealth.”
Globalist elites consider hunger an “asset”
Kent also pointed out that “people at the high end” – the globalist elites – “are not rushing to solve the hunger problem, adding that they view it as an “asset.” (Related: Looming food shortages are not an accident: they’re part of a planned globalist “Reset the Table” initiative.)
“For those of us at the high end of the social ladder, ending hunger globally would be a disaster. If there were no hunger in the world, who would plow the fields? Who would harvest our vegetables? Who would work in the rendering plants? Who would clean our toilets? We would have to produce our own food and clean our own toilets.”
But following a July 6 article by InfoWars senior editor Jamie White tackling the op-ed, the UN subsequently removed the piece from its website.
In an attempt to dodge criticism of the piece, the UN Chronicle posted on Twitter that Kent’s op-ed was “an attempt at satire and was never meant to be taken literally.” It added: “We have been made aware of its failures, even as satire, and have removed it from out site.”
The explanation nevertheless failed to mollify White.
“The global power structure must actually be pleased to see the emergence of food shortages as a result of a suspicious spate of food distribution plant disasters, ‘green’ initiatives, regional conflict, supply chain breakdowns and rampant inflation. Prepare accordingly,” he wrote.
Watch “American Journal” host Harrison Smith talking about the UN Chronicle‘s now-deleted op-ed about hunger below.
This video is from the InfoWars channel on Brighteon.com.