|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
On 8 August, the United Nations announced that 60 organisations have signed up to the ‘United Nations Open Source Principles’. The principles include supporting the development of solutions that meet the evolving needs of the UN system.
The agreement raises concerns about embedding discrimination into systems and the influence of the UN on open-source organisations, with some principles being code words for racist and discriminatory practices.
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
What is Open Source?
Open source refers to software whose source code is made freely available for anyone to view, use, modify, and distribute. Although the term originated in the context of software development, “open source” designates a broader set of values that is referred to as “the open-source way.”
Open-source intelligence (“OSINT”), for example, refers to collecting, analysing and disseminating information from publicly available sources. OSINT is used across various sectors – including national security, law enforcement, cybersecurity, business intelligence, market research, investigative journalism and academic research – to gather actionable insights for decision-making. It essentially means that an investigative journalist, for example, shares details of sources and, where possible, hyperlinks to sources and resources.
Open Source Orgs Pledge Fealty to United Nations
By Bryan Lunduke, 6 August 2025
“Who controls Open Source?” is a fascinating topic.
Some of the largest “Open Source” foundations are primarily funded by corporations which, by most estimations, have not historically been fans of “Open Source” or “Free Software.”
Case in point, The Linux Foundation – which brings in roughly a third of a billion US dollars per year – is heavily funded by corporate sponsors such as Microsoft, Hitachi, Meta and Tencent. All of which derive most of their revenue from proprietary systems. Likewise, Mozilla (bringing in over US$600 million annually) is almost entirely funded by Google.
As the saying goes, “He who controls the purse strings, controls how the money is spent.”
And, of course, we must consider the political control (and influence) over Open Source. Many large Open Source Foundations and organisations have deep, often financial, ties to political activist organisations – both Mozilla and Wikimedia being some of the more well-known examples.
Well. Buckle up, Buttercup. Because all of this is about to get a whole lot worse.
Enter the United Nations
Back in March, the United Nations announced that 16 organisations had signed up to the ‘United Nations Open Source Principles’, in addition to the founding signatory Open Source Initiative (“OSI”). [Note from The Exposé: On 8 August, the UN Office of Information and Communications Technology announced that a further 22 organisations had endorsed the UN Open Source Principles, bringing the total to 60.]
The UN Open Source Principles are a set of 8 core principles which Open Source organisations are vowing to adhere to. Five of those 8 principles are fairly obvious and, considering the topic, not at all surprising – expected things like “Make Open Source the standard approach” and “Encourage active participation in Open Source.” Oh, and “Make security a priority.”
Ok. Sure. Fine. I can understand why an Open Source organisation might choose to pledge to follow such ideals. In theory, they were possibly doing those things anyway. But three of the “UN Open Source Principles” raise significant red flags.
The Red Flag UN Open Source Principles
Let’s go over those three, red-flag-raising items. Which every signatory has agreed to.
1. “4. Foster inclusive participation and community building: Enabling and facilitating diverse and inclusive contributions.”
Inclusive. Diverse.
Over the last several years, these have become code words for “discriminate against people we don’t like.” We’ve seen this time and time again, with companies like Red Hat and IBM building entire corporate policies around what skin colour they want in their employees. All hidden behind words like “inclusive” and “diverse.” And the United Nations wants open-source organisations to commit to that form of systemic discrimination. Already, this is not great. But it gets far, far worse.
2. “7. RISE (recognise, incentivise, support and empower): Empowering individuals and communities to actively participate.”
If you don’t know what RISE is, that sentence reads like a bunch of corporate buzzword mumbo jumbo. But it has a very real, very sinister meaning.
What is “RISE”, you ask? It is a codified framework for encouraging exactly the type of discrimination we just talked about – it has become an increasingly widely used tactic among DEI advocates.
RISE is an acronym for:
- Recognise the contributions of “underrepresented or marginalised” groups. Highlight the achievements of “diverse” employees over “non-diverse” employees.
- Incentivise “underrepresented” groups (with internships, promotions, scholarships, bonuses, etc.) to encourage “diversity” (read: discrimination).
- Support “underrepresented or marginalised” groups with tailored resources to ensure “equitable” outcomes (read: no meritocracy).
- Empower “diverse” individuals with leadership roles to promote DEI.
Sometimes discussion around RISE specifically includes language regarding DEI and “diversity.” Other times that exact language is left out – but the core goals and motives remain consistently DEI focused. It is, in essence, a corporate-speak checklist for encouraging discrimination.
Which brings us to the last UN Open Source Principle. The one which, quite possibly, raises the largest red flag of all.
3. “8. Sustain and scale: Supporting the development of solutions that meet the evolving needs of the UN system and beyond.”
Did you catch that?
Open Source organisations, which sign on to this compact, are pledging to “support the development of solutions that meet the needs of the United Nations.” Or, put another way, endorsing organisations are pledging to do the bidding of the UN. Whatever that might be. The UN is asking these open-source organisations to pledge fealty to them.
The Open Source Organisations Pledging Fealty
Which Open Source organisations are we talking about? Quite a few of the big names – names which will be very familiar to Lunduke Journal readers – including:
- The Linux Foundation
- The GNOME Foundation
- Eclipse Foundation
- The Document Foundation (LibreOffice)
And so many others. Heck, even Nextcloud and Matrix have signed on.
[The Exposé has added the list below of the additional 22 organisations announced on 8 August.]
Many of these organisations (and others) recently met, in person, at the United Nations in New York to discuss, among other things, this formal agreement; this … compact.
The UN Global Digital Compact
In June of this year, the United Nations hosted the ‘UN Open Source Week’ and invited a who’s who of organisations which control Open Source in one form or another (along with a number of smaller organisations which are politically aligned with the UN).
This gathering was officially named ‘An Open Community for the Global Digital Compact’.
[Related: UN Pact for the Future on The Exposé and UN Pact for the Future: Who are the likely contenders to be appointed as the UN’s “special envoy for future generations”?]
Who did the United Nations make a point of inviting to speak to those in attendance? Let’s go down the list.
The Gates Foundation and Mozilla, of course.
Amazon and, I kid you not, the World Bank.
GitLab and Wikimedia Foundation.
I found the inclusion of Mastodon a fascinating one. While Mastodon is small (in most ways, even considering the size of their social media network), they align strongly with the political goals and views of the United Nations (promote leftist extremism, censor political opponents).
And, of course, GitHub (aka Microsoft).
In addition, representatives from most of the signatories of the United Nations Open Source Principles agreement were in attendance (including the GNOME Foundation).
Some of the presentations were about things like “ethical” software, interoperability with United Nations systems, “public infrastructure,” digital “cooperation” of governments, and (of course) “inclusion.”
Many presentations, by many organisations, which already raise significant concerns.
But – and this is important – what did they talk about behind closed doors? What was discussed out of the public eye at the (many) meetings and events where attendees were wined and dined? That remains unknown. The Lunduke Journal has asked. The UN isn’t talking. Neither are the attendees.
The Three Masters of Open Source
But we now know, with a high level of certainty, that many of the significant Open Source organisations and foundations now serve three masters:
- The corporations
- The political activists
- The United Nations
I don’t know about you, but I sure wouldn’t want to have those three masters.
As always, The Lunduke Journal encourages representatives and leadership from any organisation involved with this story to reach out – for any reason. Corrections, clarifications, or additional information. Considering the professed commitment to “openness” of every organisation mentioned in this story, there should be no reason to continue refusing to speak to journalists regarding it.
Likewise, if you would like to become a whistleblower, there are multiple ways to get hold of The Lunduke Journal.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. And this story needs a heck of a lot of sunlight.
About the Author
Bryan Lunduke is a technology journalist, podcaster and software developer known for his work in the Linux and open-source communities. He is Deputy Editor of Linux Journal and previously the Marketing Director for Purism.
In 2006, he founded the Linux Action Show, which grew into the largest Linux-centric podcast at the time. In 2021, he started The Lunduke Journal, where he publishes articles and commentary on technology, politics and culture, and his ‘Week in Tech’ podcast series.
He has gained recognition for his critical stance on “woke” software and the influence of politics within open-source communities. This has led to public disputes with figures and organisations such as GNOME, Red Hat and the Linux Foundation, with Lunduke accusing them of censorship and ideological bias. In response, he has created a non-DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) fork of the Xorg display server called XLibre, launched in June 2025, and he has announced plans to launch a new Linux distribution under The Lunduke Journal, emphasising a “No Politics” stance and the absence of discriminatory codes of conduct.
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Breaking News, US News, World News
Time for Americas to rise up and demand the UN pack it up and get the hell out of the USA .Remember we have been fighting the EVIL susatanabke develpment local in our county in florida .UN agenda 21 read Rosa Korie Behind the Green mask.Henery Lamb,Rose Martin,Phoebia Courtney,Dr.Michael Coffman,and many others went around the Country on there dime warning what was coming the UN plan.