UN Migration Madness

Dr Brian Brown, Going Postal

Global Population Growth and the United Nations Global Compact for Migration: The Death of Nationhood

“One must remember that resources are finite and cannot accommodate indefinite population growth. Families must plan their families just as Government has to plan the Nation’s development. There can be no long-term stability when the rate of population exceeds the rate of job creation” Queen Elizabeth II, British Monarch, 1952 – present.

“One thing you can say is that in places where women are in charge of their bodies, where they have the vote, where they are allowed to dictate what they do and what they want, whether it’s proper medical facilities for birth control, the birth rate falls.” Sir David Attenborough, Naturalist, 1926 – present.

“… population growth is a devastating statistic. Even the best efforts to encourage economic growth will fail unless Africa’s population growth can be brought under control. The population issue must move further up the African agenda. A basic shift of attitude is required” Douglas Hurd. UK Foreign Secretary, 1990 -1995.

“Those who do not halt mass migration are lost; slowly but surely they are consumed” Viktor Orban, 2018.

“…the idea that Europeans have simply stopped having enough children and must as a result ensure the next generation is comprised of immigrants is a disastrous fallacy …” Douglas Murray, The Strange Death of Europe, 2017.


The developed nations have over the decades poured billions of dollars in foreign aid into developing nations with little or no impact on the greatest challenge facing humankind; population growth. In the immediate decades after the second World War the United Nations have focused on generating economic growth to accommodate population growth, however this has patently failed and over the last two decades efforts have refocused on facilitating migration into the developed world as a strategy to manage global population growth through redistribution or ‘population replacement’. The developed nations have witnessed an unprecedented increase in illegal migration over the last decade, in particular the European nations have faced an ever growing migrant crisis that has created a sense of foreboding among indigenous peoples and led to a successful rise in political parties who place nationhood and controlled immigration at the centre of their manifestos. This political development has exposed the globalist agenda of the economic and political elites, dominated by the liberal left and cultural Marxists, who seek to establish ‘world government’ as a response to global problems, for example, population growth, global poverty and global warming. Many commentators now view this emerging divide as a conflict between Nationalism vs Globalism. According to the independent journalist, Faith Goldy (2018), the ascendancy of political nationalism appears to have halted the globalist objective to introduce a forced multi-culturism and to make the nation state obsolete through uncontrolled mass migration or has it? In order to answer that question lets briefly explore the population growth issue.

Global Population Growth and the Globalist Suicide Pact

The Population Reference Bureau (PRB) is a global organisation providing research on global population, health and the environment. The PRB estimates that by 2050 the global population will reach 9.8 billion an increase of 31 percent on the current estimate of 7.5 billion people. It is worth noting that in 1950 the estimated world population was 2.5 billion. When the future estimated population growth figure is dis-aggregated by continent the most significant figure is the African continent which is expected to grow to 2.6 billion people by 2050. This growth represents more than a 50 percent increase on the current population but alarmingly contributes a staggering 57 percent to the global population between now and 2050. Other increases will occur for example, the population of Asia will increase by 750 million to reach 5.2 billion and the Americas population will increase from 1 billion to 1.2 billion people.

The statistical outlier is the population of Europe, including all of Russia, which will witness a slight decline, shrinking from 745 million to 736 million by 2050. No wonder the globalists see European countries as prime relocation areas for the increasing populations elsewhere, in particular from the African and Asian continents. According to the UN (a globalist institution) report, ‘Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?’ (Oct. 2016), it is advantageous for continents like Europe to facilitate mass migration to prevent population decline adversely affecting economic growth and longer term prosperity.  Yet evidence suggests that Europe’s population level is at a sustainable level, in short has reached an equilibrium where it can sustain the resource consumption by the current population level. Therefore to promote mass migration via an ‘open borders’ policy across European states breaks that equilibrium and places pressure on available resources and services; a nonsensical endeavour. Thankfully European citizens have reacted intuitively to this nonsense and used their democratic right to vote political parties more disposed to managed and controlled migration.

But the earlier question was – ‘Has the rise of Populist Nationalist parties halted the globalist objective of ever increasing migration into Europe?’ – the answer depends on how the governments of each European state reacts to the United Nations ‘Global Compact for Migration’ (Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration, 2018). Whilst the Global Compact states it is not legally binding on the signatory nations there is little doubt the compact directives will dictate how migration will proceed into European states. The British people were categorically assured by the Heath government in 1972 that joining the Common Market (EU) would not result in a loss of Parliamentary Sovereignty and Democracy; it was signed away under the Lisbon Treaty.

Any European state who signs or allows the EU Commission to collectively adopt the UN Global Compact for Migration is committing an act of ‘nationhood suicide’, as recognised by the American government who withdrew from the negotiations 12 months prior to completion of the final draft document. According to Elspeth Guild, Professor of Law (2018) a proposal by the EU Commission (March, 2018) was put before the EU Council requesting that the EU Commissioners be granted authority to sign off the UN Migration Compact on behalf of the EU. Alarmingly the EU Commissioners would approve migration policy for the EU rather than the governments of the member states. This approach was likely fuelled by the dissent by one member state (Hungary) against adopting the UN Compact and with a view to heading off any further dissent and non-adherence. But a number of other European and world nations have refused to adopt the compact; Australia, Austria, Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Bulgaria and Croatia. This proposal demonstrates the undemocratic nature of the EU governance framework. It would seem the number of dissenting countries is growing but Maja Kocijancic, EU Foreign Affairs spokesperson stated (Nov. 2018) that according to UN practice, the state representatives would not sign the compact, but adoption would be by consensus or vote. There is a UN organised intergovernmental conference to ratify the compact scheduled for 11th/12th Dec 2018.

The UN migration compact sends a very clear message that refugees and migrants are entitled to universal human rights and fundamental freedoms which must be respected, protected and fulfilled at all times. When decoded this means migrants must have access to financial and service support in the country they choose to settle in. It doesn’t really count that these migrants are entering and occupying space illegally as the UN compact negates this illegality; illegal migrant is omitted from the compact text. There are 23 objectives contained in the UN Compact the most concerning aspects are summarised below:

  • Refugees and migrants are entitled to the same universal human rights and fundamental freedoms, which must be respected, protected and fulfilled at all times (Par. 4. UNGCM). This simply means that migrants are free to travel where they wish and be supported to do so.
  • Countries must reduce the risk and vulnerabilities migrants face at different stages of migration … providing them with care and assistance (Par.12. UNGCM). This means countries are required to provide safe transport and passage to the migrant’s country of choice.
  • Signatory states must advertise and actively promote and enable migration into their countries. This means countries must provide multi-media information channels to inform potential migrants about what is available should they choose to come Objective 3). In essence market the countries welcoming open borders and availability of free services, education and employment. In addition readily available information should be provided to migrants at different stages of their journey to support their choices.
  • Ensure all migrants, regardless of their migration status, have access to basic services (Objective 15). This means that all migrants have access to housing, health, education and financial support services.
  • Countries must ensure all forms of discrimination and intolerance against migrants are eradicated (Objective 17). This basically means the end of freedom of speech and ensures there is no dissent or comments about inward migration regardless of how it might impact on indigenous communities. Countries must actively deter any media reporting that is deemed xenophobic and promotes intolerance of migrants. So the media is effectively silenced.
  • Countries must accommodate qualifications and recognise skills and expertise acquired in the migrant’s country of origin to promote employability (Par. 18). This means migrants can apply for jobs using qualifications and skills not normally accepted in the host country.
  • Establish mechanisms for the transfer of social security entitlements and earned benefits (Par. 22). This means that migrants can transfer benefits entitlement to their own country should they return or decide take employment in another country.

The above is just a sample of the contextual narrative and 23 objectives in the UN Global Compact for Migration and I would suggest interested parties read the document.

Putting everything together it would seem that the globalist strategy to encourage mass migration into Europe is gathering pace with a renewed urgency. The only difference the UN Compact makes is that migration shifts from a ‘disorderly movement’ to an ‘orderly movement’, where host nations will actively support migrants to achieve safe movement and be provided with appropriate information, services and opportunities to realise their goals. It might be argued that the peoples of Europe will react against this as evidenced by the withdrawal of several EU states. However the inherent message in Objective 17 is that governments need to silence any voices of dissent and work with their media outlets to ensure only positive messages about migration are transmitted. Perhaps equally alarming is that once migrants are resident there are subtle moves to give them voting rights. An example of this is the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP) who announced that they would be carefully considering the call (not sure where from?) to give asylum seekers and refugees the opportunity to vote in elections where the SNP have the power to determine the franchise. It is pretty apparent that such a move is designed to keep parties like the SNP in power as migrants will vote for them but given time the same migrants and their offspring will vote for themselves and ultimately take over. Simple nationhood suicide by our politicians.

Analysis and Comment

It would be remiss not to acknowledge that global population growth, with the exception of the European continent, is a monumental problem facing humankind. The human race is currently estimated to be using 1.7 times the resources it should be annually (Jones, 2017), this problem will exacerbate as the population increases year on year. Overpopulation is a complex problem with no easy fix. I don’t believe that Global Government is the answer, rather global cooperation seems more appropriate if we are to maintain our much vaunted democratic liberties and rights.

Reducing population growth relies heavily (apart from a major natural disaster) on a managed fertility rate strategy. In a study by Cynthia Gorney (National Geographic, Sept. 2011) on Brazilian population decline it was noted the average family size dropped from 6.3 children to 1.9 children per woman in two generations as a result of improved female education, improved career prospects and greater availability of contraception. Perhaps the UN/EU should learn and promote these lessons. However, there is a sting in the tail in that lower fertility and reduced population growth are usually coupled with better education and greater affluence thus more resource is used creating a paradox and exacerbating the problem associated with climate change. But if education can reduce population growth then education and legislative controls that can limit resource consumption and reduce climate change. It does not need global government. So what is the link between global population growth and mass migration? As it stands the accelerating population in Africa creates a massive ‘push’ factor, that is, as population increases people feel pushed toward seeking opportunities elsewhere; primarily affluent Europe. Couple this ‘push’ factor with a ‘pull’ factor, which is essentially the EU position to encourage mass migration as a strategy to combat falling birth rates in Europe, then the outcome is uncontrolled mass migration. Uncontrolled mass migration into Europe will have a devastating impact on existing cultures and way of life. There is already irrefutable evidence that mass migration into Europe has led to unprecedented crime levels (see: Migrant Crime Wave: The EU Cover-up Revealed, Janice Atkinson, MEP, 2018).

The Globalist vs Nationalist divide represents the greatest political challenge of our era with massive implications should the globalists succeed. In my opinion the UN Global Compact for Migration (2018) is the greatest threat to every European nation who has signed up to accept it directives. Many people will not have even heard mention of the UN Global Compact for Migrant because true to form there has been a virtual mainstream media blackout. In effect the UN and our political class by adopting this UN Global Compact have circumvented the backlash from the people of Europe who have reacted to the sight of illegal migrant caravans over-running their continent. Mass migration has now been legalised and will be conducted in an orderly manner below the radar of European people. The existing migrant backlog currently held up in Southern European states will be redistributed to other nations in an orderly manner under the directives of the UN compact and thousands of new migrants will arrive. This insanity is more than betrayal it is cultural suicide that will bring about the death of nationhood as we know it in Europe and further afield.

The UN Global Compact for Migration will be adopted, with the exception of countries that chose to opt out, by UN member states on 11th December, 2018. The adoption of the compact by the British government is anti-democratic as elected representatives assume the power to make a decision not in any manifesto thus having no democratic mandate to do so. If this proceeds without any consultation with the British people it is the nation that will bear the loss of sovereignty and identity as a consequence of unfettered mass migration.

If this process is not reversed then Europe’s indigenous peoples, inundated by mass migration and hybridisation, will simply succumb to the transition to ‘global citizens’. Europe will be borderless to become a multi-culturist zone of the emergent 21st century UN administered borderless, where freedom of speech and democratic rights are lost forever.

It is now imperative that those among the UK electorate who fundamentally disagree with UN compact, undertake to sign the petition ‘Stop The United Nations Migration Pact’ located on:  www.change.org website.

© Dr Brian Brown 2018, Democrats & Veterans Party, for Direct Democracy. dvparty.uk


Atkinson, J. (2018) – Migrant Crime Wave: The EU Cover-Up Revealed. Europe of Nations and Freedom (ENF).

Guild, E. (2018) – Tensions as the EU Negotiates the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration. Queen Mary, University of London. eumigrationlawblog.eu

Goldy, F. (2018) – UN Migrant Compact: The Death of Nations. https://youtube.be/MSbzav6UITA

Jones, B. (2017) – The Earth’s Population is Going to Reach 9.8 Billion by 2050. Published by World Economic Forum (WEF), 2017.

United Nations (2018) – Global Compact for Migration (Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration – Final Draft).

United Nations (2017) – ‘Replacement Migration: Is it the Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations’. UN Report.

Audio file