"I understand you've been going through a visioning process within your communities. We've been working closely with you in this."
-- Kent Womack, Executive Director, The Nature Conservancy, speaking at the Sno-Rovers Club in East Millinocket on September 13, 2003.
Imagine there's no heaven,
It's easy if you try,
No hell below us,
Above us only sky,
Imagine all the people
living for today ...
Imagine there's no countries,
It isn't hard to do,
Nothing to kill or die for,
No religion too,
Imagine all the people
living life in peace ...
Imagine no possessions,
I wonder if you can,
No need for greed or hunger,
A brotherhood of man,
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world ...
You may say I'm a dreamer,
but I'm not the only one,
I hope some day you'll join us,
And the world will live as one.
-- John Lennon
Agenda 21, the United Nations blueprint for global transformation, might sound good to some of you. Certainly it has been welcomed by nations all around the world. Political, cultural, and media leaders have embraced this global vision of sustainable communities, where people everywhere will be healthy and safe, where social justice will be the norm, where our environment is protected, and where our children are no longer robbed of their heritage.
What could be wrong with that? Why not preserve resources for the next generation? Why shouldn't we limit our own consumption and reduce our use of energy? Wouldn't it be nice if we could trade our cars in for bicycles? Shouldn't we be working toward abolishing poverty? What's wrong with establishing a global system that trains parents, monitors intolerance, and meets the needs of everyone? If it would help to save our planet, shouldn't we be willing to sacrifice an antiquated system of open markets for self-sustaining communities? If urban sprawl threatens the health of our planet, perhaps we should move out of our single-family homes and move into established human settlements, where our mark upon the earth can be limited?
So many smart people say that this is a good idea. How could they be wrong?
For one, it ain't gonna happen like that. The lies of sustainable development take advantage of some of the real problems we have in the world today, globally and on the local level, perhaps even bringing some of them about in order to advance their agenda. The proponents of smart growth hide behind doomsday scenarios and fraudulent science, and well-meaning people who are taken in by them seldom consider the costs.
For another, Marxist economics has never worked. Socialism has always produced poverty rather than prosperity. Collectivism creates oppression rather than freedom.
Putting our faith in environmental scientists, who themselves are dependent on government funding, is a recipe for economic and social disaster.
Nevertheless, national and local leaders throughout the world are following the U.N. blueprint for global management and sustainable communities. Our own government has led the way, undaunted by political party affiliations.
In most countries, Agenda 21 is being implemented under that name, often known as Local Agenda 21. Due to the distrust of the American people for the United Nations, it has been spreading through this country in disguise.
Some danger terms to look for are, but are not limited to the following:
Recognize the buzzwords. Learn to counter group manipulation tactics, and to resist the consensus process. Ask questions, but don't be too willing to believe the answers. Expediency means more to these people than integrity.
When people with close ties to outside environmental organizations are leading the process, don't be shocked to learn, too late, that the process has led to conditions that favor trees over humans, and where the only people who have access to anything are the elite.
Agenda 21 is a global contract that binds governments all around the world to the United Nations plan for changing the ways in which we live, eat, learn, and communicate with one another. U.N. regulations will severely limit the use of water, electricity, and transportation, denying access to our most treasured wilderness areas to all but the elite. If Agenda 21 is implemented, it will manage and monitor everyone and everything. No one will be free from an empowered United Nations global tracking and information system.
Agenda 21 was signed by 179 nations at the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, it called for a Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA) of the state of the planet. Prepared by the U.N. Environmental Programme (UNEP), this GBA armed U.N. leaders with "information" and "science" to validate their plans for a global management system. Its doomsday predictions were designed to justify the use of radical measures to reduce world population, impose oppressive lifestyle reductions, and to encourage a return to earth-centered religions as a basis for environmental values and sustainable human settlements.
The GBA concluded that "the root causes of the loss of biodiversity are embedded in the way societies use resources" and names "Judeo-Christian" values as the main culprit.
"This world view is characteristic of large scale societies, heavily dependent on resources brought from considerable distances. It is a world view that is characterized by the denial of sacred attributes in nature, a characteristic that became firmly established about 2000 years ago with the Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions."
"Eastern cultures with religious traditions such as Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism did not depart as drastically from the perspective of humans as members of a community of beings including other living and non-living elements."
-- Chapter 12.2.3
In the introduction to The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, leaders around the world are called upon to "undertake a consultative process with their populations and achieve a consensus on 'Local Agenda 21' for their communities."
Achieving this consensus required painting scary scenarios of a dying planet - frightening children, angering youth, and persuading adults to submit to things that they would never otherwise subjugate themselves to. It meant blaming climate change on human activities and ignoring the natural factors that have, throughout the history of the earth, resulted in cyclical changes in climate, storm patterns, wildlife migration, and changes in the ozone layer.
Local Agenda 21
Chapter 28 of the U.N. Agenda 21 agreement calls for the formation of Local Agenda 21 initiatives.
"Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations, and private enterprises and adopt 'a local Agenda 21.' Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies."
-- Chapter 28.1.3
This might sound reasonable until you realize that the dedicated "stakeholder group" that organizes and oversees local transformation is not elected by the public, and that they are not accountable to the public. The people who are chosen to represent the "citizens" of the community do not represent your interests. A professional staff, working with appointed (not elected) citizens, non-governmental agencies, and cooperating businesses are controlling what happens to your community. Here in the Katahdin area, the plan is moving rapidly forward.
The system that is being used by Advanced Management Catalyst, Inc (AMCi) is patterned on that which can be found in The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide: An Introduction to Sustainable Development, available from the United Nations and its partner organizations. It was not developed by AMCi, but was prepared by the International Council for Local Environment Initiatives (ICLEI) in partnership with the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), and the International Development Research Centre of Canada.
UNEP also prepared the GBA, which supposedly proves the environmental crisis. It sounds to me as if they are looking to themselves for consensus.
Stakeholders are told that they can broaden their working base, and still maintain the original consensus, by seeking partners who share their vision. Like everyone else involved in the process, these partners are selected, not elected. Partners who might challenge the stakeholder's ideology would slow progress, causing gridlock.
Elected public officials will be utilized only when their support is ensured.
Anyone who challenges the implementation of Local Agenda 21 will be brought under control by psychological or economical manipulation, if possible. Those who cannot be easily managed will be marginalized, using a cooperative media, when available, or through public condemnation, utilizing willing public officials or civic organizations.
The ICLEI Planning Guide suggests that stakeholders select two kinds of people to serve their agenda:
- Ordinary people who don't have "a stake" in the old system and might expect to gain power by establishing a new political system; and
- Media, business, political, church, and education leaders who must be wooed and persuaded to promote the transformation within their spheres of influence.
The Planning Guide suggests the following:
- Community Residents: women, youth, indigenous people, community leaders, teachers
- Community-Based Organizations: churches, formal women's groups, traditional social groups, special interest groups
- Independent Sector: Non-governmental organizations (NGO), academia, media
- Private/Entrepreneurial Sector: environmental service agencies, small business/cooperatives, banks
- Local Government and Associations: elected officials, management staff, regional associations
- National/Regional Government: planning commission, utilities, service agencies, financial agencies
All participants are required to embrace the collective vision of a sustainable community, committing to pursue the three E's of sustainable development: Environment, Economy, and Equity, which is the United Nations blueprint for environmental regulations, economic controls, and social equity.
The ICLEI Planning Guide says:
"Sustainable development is a process of bringing these three development processes into balance with one another. The implementation of a sustainable development strategy therefore involves negotiation among the primary interest groups (stakeholders) involved in these development processes. Once an Action Plan for balancing these development processes is established, these stakeholders must each take responsibility and leadership to implement the plan."
Only stakeholders have a voice in the future of the community. Opposing voices must be silenced. Implementing the sustainable agenda requires intimidating or marginalizing critics.
Early LA-21 efforts in this country were not afraid to use the name. Local Agenda 21-Santa Cruz began in 1993, sponsored by the local chapters of the United Nations Association and an organization formed for that purpose, called ACTION (Agenda 21 Community Team Work in Operation). The original stakeholders began to "envision a sustainable future," choose compatible "partners," and organize twelve Round Tables which evolved into twelve "special focus areas" (agriculture, biodiversity & ecosystem management, education, energy, housing, population, public health, resources and recycling, social justice, toxic technology & waste management, transportation, viable economy). Each item was linked to special interest groups, non-governmental organizations, and globalist advocates who were given authority to regulate the lives of the people who lived there.
For more about Local Agenda 21-Santa Cruz, see http://www.freedom21santacruz.net/.
In the fall of 1994, President Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development met at the Presidio, the former army base in San Francisco that now houses the Gorbachev Foundation USA and other globalist organizations. Here, they met with The National Forum on Partnerships supporting Education about the Environment.
As a result of this meeting, a report was issued - Education for Sustainability - which became a model for sustainable education. It focused on six themes:
1. Interdisciplinary approaches
2. Lifelong learning
3. Systems thinking
5. Multicultural perspectives
"Parents attitudes about what they want for their children represent one of the greatest barriers to successful implementation of school-to-work."
-- School-to-Work Transition: Genuine Reform or the Latest Fad?
by Ray D. Ryan and Susan Imel, The ERIC Review, Volume 4, Number 2, Spring 1996, p. 7. published by the U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Research and Improvement
Of course, this wasn't the beginning of change within our education system, but a reflection of it. Global ideology is hidden behind traditional words. Built on UNESCO goals that our government embraced with the introduction of America 2000, the adoption of Goals 2000, School-to-Work, and No Child Left Behind, the United Nations system of education has already transformed our schools, and to the benefit of neither our children or our bank accounts.
Learning that appears democratic (rather than authoritative) and cooperative (in contrast to individual) is a key to winning the consent of the masses. All ages must participate, and every group member is accountable to the group - and to the politically correct facilitator who is responsible for moving the dialogue toward the "right" choices and actions.
In the Soviet Union, the Hegelian dialectic (consensus) process was used to shift the loyalties of children from absolute truths to the evolving soviet ideology. In the United States, the same method is used to further the goals of Agenda 21.
These aren't new ideas.
When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side.' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already � What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.'"
-- Adolf Hitler
Confuse and Conquer
Have you ever wondered about all of the organizations, corporations, associations, committees, coalitions, agencies, non-profits and other groups that have suddenly made an appearance in the Katahdin area?
Someone said to me a few days ago that it is wonderful that so many people are coming together to help us in our time of need.
We wouldn't be in a time of need if some of these same people hadn't destroyed the paper industry in this state. And they did it with premeditation.
All of these organizations are linked. They are working toward the same end, lending to one another an illusion of consensus, their separate identities serving as funding streams.
The PCSD published a report, entitled, Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education, prepared by the PCSD Task Force on Public Linkage, Dialogue, and Education. Drawn up during a meeting at the Presidio, the draft called for a linkage between "job opportunities" and education standards for politically correct "understanding" of environmental, economic, and social issues from a global perspective.
"Develop essential learning standards on sustainable development for all students in order to promote a basic understanding of the interrelationship between environmental, economic and equity issues and a basic competency in sustainable living. Meeting learning performance standards will help ensure job opportunities in an emerging sustainable economy and promote responsible citizenry in a global, interdependent society."
Remember, always, that those who define the terms will write the rules. The ideologies behind those who educate the masses will control public beliefs and behavior.
Our greatest leaders understood this.
The values we teach to one generation of young Americans will become the principles of the next generation�s government.
-- Abraham Lincoln
The Katahdin Region Vision for 2050 is not our vision. It is the product of a group of individuals who were not elected, but who were chosen, either because they were already on board with Local Agenda 21, or for their willingess to be manipulated. The objective is to bypass our Republican form of government, placing policy-making authority in the hands of non-governmental agencies and professional bureaucrats.
Every elected body of government should retain absolute veto power over any or all decisions made by the vision committees or other NGOs currently feasting on the Katahdin region.
When AMCi was hired to facilitate the visioning process in the Katahdin area, they did not divulge facts that were known to them. If, as informed citizens, we were of a mind to implement Local Agenda 21 in the Katahdin Region, we did not need AMCi to do it.
AMCi should return all taxpayer funds collected, minus a few dollars for their time.
All non-local NGOs should be sent packing. Organizations headed by individuals with ties to outside environmental agencies can be thought of as working against the better interests of the majority of the people in this region. Or do you truly believe that The Nature Conservancy is here to help us?
No policy should be implemented in any community without, first, the authorization of that policy by elected officials who can be held accountable for their actions. As responsible citizens, we are obligated to hold them accountable.
Anything else is an erosion of our principles of freedom. Legitimate government is empowered by the consent of the governed - not by the recommendations of Agenda 21 or by the "visions" of any select group of individuals, however noble their intentions.
- The Government of South Australia has a wealth of information on its Local Agenda 21. If you have any doubt that the vision process in our area is indeed LA-21, this site should dispel them.
- Smart Growth is Agenda 21, by Henry Lamb
- Related Articles Published be Magic City Morning Star
- Interesting Google Searches