top of page

The Rise of the Global Police State

Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked Verified October 17th 2023


The United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals are not about sustainability. They’re tools to facilitate the implementation of a One World Government.

The term the globalist alliance uses to describe its network is a “global public-private partnership,” or G3P. The G3P is composed of most of the world’s governments, intergovernmental organizations, global corporations, major philanthropic foundations, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and civil society groups. Collectively, they are the “stakeholders” that are implementing the SDGs. While SDG16 claims to advance “peaceful and inclusive societies” and “justice for all,” this goal is really about consolidating authority, exploiting threats to advance regime hegemony, and implementing a centrally controlled global system of digital identity (digital ID). A digital identity is not merely a form of identification. Your “identity” is who you are, and

a digital identity will keep a permanent record of your choices and behaviors, 24/7.

Universal adoption of digital identity will enable the G3P global governance regime to

establish a behavioral-based system of reward and punishment.

The COVID pandemic was used to redefine human rights and to get people used to the

idea that the rights of individuals are conditional and can be ignored or suspended “for

that stands against freedom, justice, and peace, and all of the UN’s SDGs need to beme

that stands against freedom, justice,the and peace, and all of the UN’s SDGs need to be

understood within this context.

At this point in time, it’s crucial to realize that the United Nations’ Sustainable

Development Goals (SDGs) are part of the plan to implement a One World Government,

where the entire world will be run by unelected bureaucrats beholden to technocratic


In a two-part Unlimited Hangout investigative series,independent journalists Iain Davis

and Whitney Webb expose how Sustainable Development Goal No. 16 (SDG16), which

claims to advance "peaceful and inclusive societies" and "justice for all," is really about

consolidating authority, exploiting threats to advance regime hegemony, and forcing a

"centrally controlled global system of digital identity(digital ID) upon humanity."

As explained in Part 1,the term the globalist alliance of technocrats use to describe its

network is a "global public-private partnership," or G3P:

"The G3P is toiling tirelessly to create the conditions necessary to justify the

imposition of both global governance ‘with teeth’ and its prerequisite digital ID

system. In doing so, the G3P is inverting the nature of our rights. It

manufactures and exploits crises in order to claim legitimacy for its offered


The G3P comprises virtually all of the world’s intergovernmental organizations,

governments, global corporations, major philanthropic foundations, non-

governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society groups. Collectively, these

form the ‘stakeholders’ implementing sustainable development, including


What SDG16 Is Really About

The central objective of SDG16 is to strengthen the UN-led regime, and of all the

subgoals included in this SDG, the establishment of "a legal identity for all" (SDG16.9), is

the most crucial, as other goals rely on the use of digital identity. As noted by Davis and


"Universal adoption of SDG16.9 digital ID will enable the G3P global governance

regime’s to establish a worldwide system of reward and punishment. If we

accept the planned model of digital ID, it will ultimately enslave us in the name

of sustainable development ...

SDG16.9 ‘sustainable development’ means we must use digital ID ... Otherwise

we will not be protected in law, service access will be denied, our right to

transact in the modern economy will be removed, we will be barred from

participating as ‘citizens’ and excluded from so-called ‘democracy.’"

Understanding Digital Identity

The World Economic Forum (WEF), founded by Schwab, has for years promoted the

implementation of digital identity. The problem with calling it "digital ID" is that people

misunderstand it to be something it’s not. There’s a huge difference between identity and


Identification refers to documents that prove you are who you say you are. A digital

identity is NOT merely a form of identication. Your "identity" is who you actually are,

and a digital identity will keep a permanent record of your choices and behaviors, 24/7.

Your identity encompasses everything that makes you unique, and that’s what the

globalist cabal is really after. Step out of line, and every social media interaction, every

penny spent and every move you’ve ever made can be used against you.

Indeed, having access to everyone’s digital identity is the key to successful manipulation

and control of the global population. Everything you can think of is to be connected to your digital identity, and your behavior, beliefs and opinions will dictate what you can and cannot do within society. It will unlock doors where someone like you is welcome, and lock the ones where you’re not.

If you think the idea of vaccine passports is insane, wait until your access to critical

infrastructure and services is dependent not just on your vaccination status, but also

what books you’ve bought, what ideas you’ve shared, and who you’ve given money or

emotional support to.

Interoperability Will Link Disparate Systems Together

As people are coming to understand the threat of a One World Government, resistance

against digital ID and the social credit score that comes with it has started to mount.

The G3P’s answer to that dilemma is the construction of an interoperable system that

can link disparate digital ID systems together. As explained by Davis and Webb.

"This ‘modular platform’ approach is designed to avoid the political problems

that the social issuance of a national digital ID card would otherwise elicit.

Establishing SDG16.9 global digital ID is crucial for 8 of the 17 UN SDGs. It is

the linchpin at the center of a global digital panopticon that is being devised

under the auspices of the UN’s global public-private partnership ‘regime.’"

You Have No Rights, Only Permits, Under the New World Order

You may be wondering where human rights enter into all of this. If your digital ID records

every move you make, which can then be used against you, won’t that violate some of

your basic rights as a free human being? Well, that depends on how human rights are

defined — and who defines them. Davis and Webb explain:

"... the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ... was first accepted by all

members of the United Nations on December 10, 1948. The preamble of the

Declaration recognizes that the ‘equal and inalienable rights’ of all human

beings are the ‘foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’

After that, ‘inalienable rights’ are never again mentioned in the entire

Declaration. ‘Human rights’ are nothing like ‘inalienable rights.’

Inalienable rights, unlike human rights, are not bestowed upon us by any

governing authority. Rather, they are innate to each of us. They are immutable.

They are ours in equal measure. The only source of inalienable rights is Natural

Law, or God’s Law.

No one — no government, no intergovernmental organization, no human

institution or human ruler — can ever legitimately claim the right to grant or

deny our inalienable rights. Humanity can claim no collective authority to grant

or deny the inalienable rights of any individual human being.

Beyond the preamble, the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

concerns itself exclusively with ‘human rights.’ But asserting, as it does, that

human rights are some sort of expression of inalienable rights is a fabrication —

a lie.

Human rights, according to the UDHR, are created by certain human beings and

are bestowed by those human beings upon other human beings. They are not

inalienable rights or anything close to inalienable rights.

Article 6 of the UDHR and Article 16 of the UN’s 1966 International Covenant on

Civil and Political Rights ... both decree: ‘Everyone has the [human] right to

recognition everywhere as a person before the law.’

Note: We put ‘[human]’ in brackets ... to alert readers that these documents are

NOT referring to inalienable rights. While the respective Articles 6 and 16 sound

appealing, the underlying implications are not.

Both articles mean that ‘without legal existence, those rights may not be

asserted by a person within the domestic legal order.’ As we shall see, the ability

to prove one’s identity will become a prerequisite for ‘legal existence.’ Thus, in a

post-SDG16 world, persons without UN-approved identification will be unable to

assert their ‘human rights’ ...

Article 29.3 of the UDHR states: ‘These [human] rights and freedoms may in no

case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United


In plain English: We are only allowed to exercise our alleged human ‘rights’

subject to the diktats of governments, intergovernmental organizations and

other UN ‘stakeholders.’ The bottom line, then, is that what the UN calls ‘human

rights’ are ... government and intergovernmental permits by which our behavior

is controlled."

COVID Was an Opportunity to Reset the Playing Field

Our behavior is also controlled through censorship and control of information. In its

"COVID-19 and Human Rights" document, published in April 2020, the UN presents

human rights as policy tools and openly admits that "securing compliance" with health

measures that severely restrict (or outright eliminate) human rights will depend on

"building trust," and that includes censoring that which might undermine trust in


Censorship of "misinformation" and "disinformation" is also required under the proposed

International Treaty on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response, which places

the World Health Organization at the center of all pandemic-related agendas, and in the

proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs). Importantly, both

of these instruments will be binding. As noted by Davis and Webb:

"The current proposed amendments to the IHR illustrate how ‘crises’ provide

unique opportunities for the UN and its partners to control populations —

through purported ‘human rights’ — by exploiting those ‘rights’ as ‘a powerful

set of tools.’

Here is one example of the proposals being put forth: The WHO wishes to

remove the following language from IHR Article 3.1: ‘The implementation of

these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and

fundamental freedoms of persons.’

It intends to replace that regulatory principle with: ‘The implementation of these

Regulations shall be based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and

in accordance with the common but differentiated responsibilities of their

States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic


This proposed amendment signies that the UN and its partners wish to

completely ignore the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights

whenever any of these agencies declares a new ‘crisis’ or identies a new

‘international threat.’ This exemplies the ‘course-correction’ the UN envisioned

would arise from the ‘unique opportunity’ presented by the COVID-19 crisis."

The UN Has Already Assumed Authority; No One Granted It

Right now, the WHO appears to be set up to become the de facto global government, but

the UN is also a contender, and it has openly assumed this authority.

For example, in its "UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda"

document, published in 2013, it states that "A global governance regime, under the

auspices of the UN, will have to ensure that the global commons will be preserved for

future generations."

“ The United Nation’s Charter establishes a global

governance regime that stands against freedom,

justice and peace, and all of the UN’s SDGs need to be

understood within this context.”

As noted by Davis and Webb:

"The UN calls itself a ‘global governance regime.’ It is arbitrarily assuming the

authority to seize control of everything (‘the global commons’), including

humans, both by enforcing its Charter — citing its misnamed ‘Human Rights’

declaration — and by fullling its ‘Sustainable Development’ agenda.

Note that the ‘global governance regime’ will ultimately ‘translate into better

national and regional governance.’ This means that the role of each national

government is merely to ‘translate’ global governance into national policy.

Electing one political party or another to undertake the translation makes no

material difference. The policy is not set by the governments we elect.

As nation-states one by one implement SDG-based policies, the regime further

consolidates its global governance. And since the ‘global governance regime

will be critical to achieve sustainable development,’ the two mechanisms —

global governance and sustainable development — are symbiotic.

Again, by the UN’s own admission, inalienable rights are the ‘foundation of

freedom, justice and peace in the world.’ Yet the UN’s entire Charter-based

human rights framework comprehensively rejects the principle of inalienable

and imm