Greenprint4LIFE VISION

LIFE (capitalized) ~ “An ever-evolving process encompassing the ALL THAT IS, including the physical/non-physical; the visible/invisible and the known/unknown that serve to support all things, not only on Earth, but also beyond.”

Peace ~ “An internal knowing and feeling of unconditional love for, and service to LIFE, relative to one’s uniquely different, yet equally beautiful relation with LIFE, in each moment of ‘now’.”

By the time I attended UPEACE in 2005, my understanding of ‘peace’ was beginning to change, and I realized that changing the world was going to be much harder, as I was also starting to see the multitude of areas that were corrupt in the world.  I was also beginning to see just how deeply rooted in our global institutions these entities had become.

The G4L shifted its focus to work at the community level, more specifically small towns and villages with less than 75,000 people.

It is a FOUNDATIONAL vision that does not seek to dictate what a community should or should not do.

Rather, it aims to inform a community about all the possible ways the community could rebuild and re-create itself to be healthy, clean, green and self-sustaining.  Various ideas and practices are offered to invite and empower community residents to participate more actively in the community they are claiming to want for themselves and their families.

While it is, perhaps arguably, one of the best visions, PUBLICLY offering solutions, it is also very unique in several ways:

1.  It considers that people are uniquely different; they learn differently and they have different passions that would give them the greatest satisfaction and fulfillment, serving in the world.

2. It considers multiple different factors that make each community different, and thus there would be some solutions that that are better for some communities, than they are for others.

3. The G4L has incorporated a series of primary, economic drivers, that allow a community to begin its shift towards becoming healthier, cleaner, greener and more self-sustaining:

4. The G4L has created an incentive model, that seeks to offer different levels of benefits or awards, depending upon how much a business, a company or even a resident, puts into the vision.

5. The G4L has already conceptualized two, organizational models: one for the global foundation, and one geared for community use as a starting guideline.

As well, the G4L has also taken into account one possible way to get community involvement in the vision:

6. The G4L, by itself, has the potential to BECOME the platform that could be voted on by a community, and elected officials would either have to support/endorse the vision, or present something else that is as good, if not better, than the G4L.=========================================================================As a side note:  The G4L was introduced to the people of Parry Sound, Ontario, Canada between 2021-2022. This town is extremely corrupt, and the local governance was neither interested in learning more about it, nor were they actively trying to involve the community in positive change. Rather, they were busy enforcing unlawful rules relating to the covid con job.Attempts were made to introduce the G4L vision to two projects:  Liberland (https://liberland.org/), and Asgardia Space Nation (https://asgardia.space/en/).  I even attempted to get elected to the parliament of Asgardia, but was rejected.I admit, I was finding it frustratingly odd, that these two groups were attempting to create communities outside of the controls of the globalist enslavers, and yet they were not interested in hearing about holistic ideas as to how to design and create their communities to be healthy, clean, green and self-sustaining.  The G4L could potentially have saved both groups a LOT of time, energy and resources, as a foundational template had already been created and was available.From what I have seen, both groups are attempting to create something ‘different’, but they are still doing it from within a dysfunctional paradigm.  As long as the current paradigm remains, I see it being quite challenging for these groups to show how they are really different.As one of the guiding quotations of the G4L goes:  “Don’t try to fix a broken system.  Create a NEW system, that makes the old one obsolete.”  While I believe that each of these groups would CLAIM that this is what they are doing, they are also missing key elements that will ultimately make their plans challenging and possibly unsustainable.