The Gospel According to Jeffrey Sachs

Jeffrey D. SachsJeffrey D. SachsColumbia University professor Jeffrey D. Sachs is special adviser to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and to Pope Francis. As director of the Earth Institute, globalist Sachs is spreading palm branches, as it were, before the Holy Father’s delivery of a major Papal encyclical to American bishops and the United Nations in September.  In an essay entitled “A Call to Virtue,”  published in the Jesuit journal, America, The National Catholic Review, Sachs predicts Pope Francis will directly challenge the “American idea of God-given rights embodied in the Declaration of Independence.”

The media luminary postulates that America is “a society in thrall” to the idea of unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  In the treatise, Professor Sachs attempts to integrate the philosophies of Immanuel Kant, Thomas Payne, Aristotle, St. Thomas Aquinas, and Jesus Christ in support of Pope Francis’s compassionate APOSTOLIC EXHORTATION EVANGELII GAUDIUM  (the joy of the Gospel) which the pontiff proclaims can help the world to overcome the globalization of indifference to others.

The cagey writer prudently avoids negatively charged media catchphrases such as population control, abortion, anthropogenic global warming, socialism, and one world government, while enhancing his hypotheses with feel-good words like virtue, justice, and charity. “Pope Francis sees a crisis of the human spirit in our time,” declares the macroeconomist, “characterized by our inability to hear the suffering of others. We suffer a poverty of the spirit in the midst of material plenty, a failure to live properly in an age of unprecedented material affluence.” While Sachs stops short of indicting American constitutional ideology for these moral failures, the implication is conspicuous.

Metaphorically comparing the twenty-first century challenges of social compassion to a moral balance sheet, the Vatican advisor weighs the economic costs of extreme global poverty, controlling epidemic diseases likes AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and Ebola against earth friendly environmental solutions such as solar, wind, geothermal and hydroelectric power vs. climate-changing fossil fuels.

He advances the Aristotelian principle asserting that the “state is by nature clearly prior to the family and to the individual, since the whole is of necessity prior to the part.” Aristotle does not mean that the state can willfully crush the individual, but rather that the individual finds meaning in life, and the path to happiness, as a citizen of the polis, the state. In a phrase that reverberates powerfully still today, Aristotle noted “man is a social animal.”

Directly referring to American constitutional ideology, Sachs writes, “we learn that the route to happiness lies in the rights of the individual. Most important, the rebellious American colonists believed that they would find happiness as individuals, each endowed by the creator with individual, inalienable  rights.” He refers to this as ideology of grandeur, declaring that such rights are only one facet of our humanity.

Advancing the inevitability of a borderless one-world government, Sachs proclaims that the United Nations must “dictate the course of nations and individual rights must be sacrificed for the greater good.”  In his book, The End of Poverty, he advocates extracting more than $845 billion from the American people through global taxation in order to finance what he calls “Sustainable Development Goals,” as envisioned by a Sustainable Development Solutions Network run by none other than Jeffrey Sachs.

On Sept. 25, Pope Francis will speak to the largest number of assembled heads of state in history. Professor Sachs seems convinced that these leaders will adopt new Sustainable Development Goals for the coming generation. The pontiff will come to the United States and the United Nations in New York on the 70th anniversary of the United Nations, and at the moment when the world’s 193 governments are resolved to take a step in solidarity toward a better world. These lofty goals will be a new worldwide commitment to build a world that aims to harmonize the pursuit of economic prosperity with the commitments to social inclusion and environmental sustainability.  

If Mr. Sachs’ predictions become reality, America as an exceptional sovereign nation will meld into a communal member of the New World Order.

God forbid!


Comments (4)

  • Avatar



    These are Professor Sach’s titles:

    [i]Prof. Jeffrey D. Sachs

    Director, Earth Institute, Columbia University
    Quetelet Professor of Sustainable Development
    Professor of Health Policy and Management[/i]

    What a bunch of new-age nonsense!

    Here’s a guy with moonbeam credentials lecturing at an [i][b]economics[/b][/i] summit while rolling out a red carpet for a [i][b]religious[/b][/i] leader in the name of global warming. Could it be any more obvious that that the climate change agenda has nothing to do with [i][b]science[/b][/i]?

    Leftist politics certainly makes for some strange bedfellows…

  • Avatar



    Why can’t this guy at least have the intellectual honesty to stop hiding behind grandiose and misleading titles? Why can’t this guy just be truthful and tell the public that he is [i]primarily[/i] an advocate for Marxism?

    Why can’t Marxists step out from behind this facade of sky-is-falling climate change and compare Marxism (and its history) to free-market capitalism? Drop all the hyper-funded cr@p about science.

    Marxists – make your case honestly and openly. Stop hiding and pretending, and grow a pair! Let truly informed people decide.

    The fact is that the Marxist economic record is dismal while their social record is much worse. Their only argument seems to be that we need leftist totalitarian rule because free-market economics are imperfect. New age leftists continue to believe that the only problem with Marxism is that it hasn’t yet been run by the right people – not that it is fundamentally flawed.

    Such rationalism will only lead to the next set of Utopian promises followed by the next Marxist tyrants.

  • Avatar



    I always appreciate when socialist weasels finally summon the courage to speak plainly and honestly about their objectives . It would seem this big hat isn’t there yet .

    It is nice to see who the main actors are in the climate hustle . Eventually their egos can’t stop them from scrambling to stand on stage.

    Sachs and the Pope would be wise to mind their own business and leave USA internal affairs off their preachy circuit .

    A Call To Virtue … really… coming from a group with RC history and a university academic .

    Sounds a lot like the science is settled preachers who love to refer to some obscure scientist to validate their pitch .

  • Avatar



    Mr Sachs shows his ignorance by not understanding the words of our founders. “The pursuit of happiness” was not about a hunt for individual bliss, it had a much higher meaning and calling…

    [i]“Happiness” in the public discourse of the time often did not simply refer to a subjective emotional state. It meant prosperity or, perhaps better, well-being in the broader sense. It included the right to meet physical needs, but it also included a significant moral and religious dimension. In correspondence between James Madison and James Monroe in 1786, Madison notes that “happiness” cannot simply be identified with meeting people’s interests, but includes a higher reference:

    “There is no maxim in my opinion which is more liable to be misapplied, and which therefore needs elucidation, than the current one that the interest of the majority is the political standard of right and wrong. Taking the word “interest” as synonymous with “ultimate happiness,” in which sense it is qualified with every necessary moral ingredient , the proposition is no doubt true. But taking it in its popular sense, as referring to the immediate augmentation of property and wealth, nothing can be more false.”[/i]

    Our founders created a frame of governance that is ill suited to an immoral society.

    [i]”Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”[/i]
    -John Adams

Comments are closed