Global Governance, The UN, Sustainable Development, Soros & You (Repost)

0
Share
Collectivism

A year ago I would have said this is nuts. Unfortunately, it is not nuts and we are faced with threats to our individual liberties like never before. Take George Soros for example. On April 11th of this year, the rabid anti-capitalist said, “The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States. The time has come for a very serious adjustment.” He actively and openly supports a one world government. He puts his money where his mouth is and financially supports the United Nation’s Agenda 21 projects in our country through ICLEI(local governments for sustainability). The main goal of Agenda 21 is a one world government.

Agenda 21 began in 1987 with the writings of Gro Harlem Brundtland, Vice President of the World Socialist Party. It is being spread throughout the United States by an organization known as ICLEI, a movement which is ripping across our country at breakneck speed.  Read here: What is Agenda 21 in the U.S. At its heart is sustainable development.

Sustainable development sounds okay on the face of things. Wiki defines it as a pattern of resource use, that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met not only in the present, but also for generations to come (sometimes taught as ELF-Environment, Local people, Future). If one looks deeper, one finds that it puts the environment over people as part of their environmental social justice.

Several years back, ELF members were burning down new homes on Long Island because the homes intruded on the natural environment. I know one of the young people who was arrested and convicted. He was lucky that no one was in the home when he burned it down or he would have gotten more than the three year jail term he received. He has turned his life around and describes himself at that time as brainwashed.

Agenda 21, the Big Daddy of sustainable development, prefers Private Public Partnerships (PPP), which means the government decides which companies receive tax breaks and are permitted to stay in business. You can see this taking place now in the disallowing of Boeing from doing business in South Carolina and the excessive funding of GE.

Where I live, on Long Island, the Brookhaven Town Board is headed up by a Mark Lesko. I sat in the Middle Island Fire House as Mark Lesko spoke to the fact that he, Mark Lesko, would pick private properties to be taken over by his government (eminent domain). He would only take over property he believed was not being kept up and would then turn them over to developers he chose (no chance of corruption here – there I go being cynical). My guess is the developers he picks are also his supporters (oh boy, I sound cynical again).

Also on Long Island, we have our first pack ’em and stack ’em housing developments in Gordon Heights which are backed by people such as Congressman Tim Bishop. While Tim Bishop luxuriates on spacious, private property, he puts the people in Gordon Heights in a box. That’s social justice for you.

In Austin, Texas, a similar philosophy is beginning to permeate their government. A young man, John Bush, tied a new local law to the UN’s Agenda 21 at a townhall meeting. He can be seen at the meeting pointing out the connections between Agenda 21 and local politics in the following video.

Read about it here: Agenda 21

Let’s go back to the UN and property rights for a minute. Karl Marx believed private property was the bane of man’s existence. In his Utopia, no one owned private property. Agenda 21 and its United States offspring, ICLEI, do not support private property. The UN believes in this Marxist Utopia (as exemplified by Agenda 21). The following information is taken from the archives of the UN library.

The land policy of the United Nations was first officially articulated at the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I), held in Vancouver, May 31 – June 11, 1976. Agenda Item 10 of the Conference Report sets forth the UN’s official policy on land. The Preamble says:

“Land…cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable….”

The Preamble is followed by nine pages of specific policy recommendations endorsed by the participating nations, including the United States. Simply stated, all land is considered part of the public domain. It would mean that the land of the United States belongs to everyone if we follow their logic. The UN commission on global governance considers the environment as global commons.

The preamble states that, as matter of immediate urgency, governments must redistribute the population to “…accord with the availability of resources.”  It further states that “…public ownership or effective control of land in the public interest is the single most important means of…achieving a more equitable distribution of the benefits of development whilst assuring that environmental impacts are considered.” It encourages strong compulsory government intervention and disallows profit they deem excessive. Additionally, “…past patterns of ownership rights should be transformed to match the changing needs of society and be collectively beneficial.” In other words, property owners have no rights, only the government has rights over land as the government redistributes it. View UN recommendations and analysis here: UN & Global Governance

The UN’s plan came to the United States in the 1970’s as the Federal Land Use Planning Act but was rejected by Congress twice. The UN toned down their act and pushed the same philosophy through complex and varied environmental and organizational groups (such as Sierra Club, WWF et al). Earth Summit II in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 produced Agenda 21 with its ultimate plan to save the earth from human activity.

“Land is normally defined as a physical entity in terms of its topography and spatial nature; a broader integrative view also includes natural resources: the solid, minerals, water and biota that the land comprises. Expanding human requirements and economic activities are placing ever increasing pressures on land resources, creating competition and conflicts and resulting in suboptimal use of both land and land resources. It is now essential to resolve these conflicts and move towards more effective and efficient use of land and its natural resources. Opportunities to allocate land to different uses arise in the course of major settlement or development projects or in a sequential fashion as land becomes available on the market. This provides opportunities…to assign protected status for conservation of biological diversity or critical ecological services.”

Even more sinister is its recommended means of encroachment on society through the lowest levels of government: –

Encourage the principle of delegating policy-making to the lowest level of public authority consistent with effective action and a locally driven approach.” The reference to “public authority” here is not to elected city councils or county commissions.

This brings me back to my prior examples in Long Island, New York and Austin, Texas. Those are only two examples where ICLEI and its parent, Agenda 21, are spreading its tentacles insidiously and without restraint. They use the greed of power brokers and the naivety of an environmentally conscious society to invade and entrap a free nation. Our Founding Fathers valued the importance of private property writing it into our Constitution – private property is sacred. If the collectivists, the usurpers of property rights, were to destroy these principles outright, they would fail; the subtle approach they are taking is successful. If people try to bring it up, they are deemed conspiracy theorists – how clever is the nature of their collectivism.

These clips, entitled “Agenda 21 for Dummies” is a good primer.

Share