Global Management: Agenda 21 (Part 1)
By Dave Hodges
â€œThe standard of living of the average American has to decline…â€
~ Paul Volcker (1979), Former Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
What does the North American Union, the European Union, IMF, World Bank, GATT, WTO, NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA, CANAMEX, NASCO, CODEX, the present state of American health care, The United States Conference of Mayors, The National Governorâ€™s Association, The American Legislative Exchange Council, The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, The Department of Education, No Child Left Behind legislation, the EPA, hate speech legislation, multiculturalism, Smart Growth, The FDA, The Federal Reserve, the global warming â€œcrisis,â€ amnesty legislation, the rise of the American corporatocracy, record numbers of eminent domain proceedings, genetically modified foods, the implementation of communitarian law, the Earth Charter, the declining standard of living of the American middle class, the draconian police state tactics of Patriot Acts I & II and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and the unrestricted use of highly volatile fiat money have to do with each other?
All of the abovementioned are inextricably interwoven into a United Nations program, known as Agenda 21. Agenda 21 is in nearly every country and in nearly every city and county in America (Soveriegnty.net, 2007; United Nations, 2007a).
Einstein died before he could discover his long sought after Unified Field Theory which, if successfully developed, would have been the â€œbe-all, end-allâ€ theory of quantum physics. Although Einstein fell short of his goal of discovering a unified field theory, the world does possess a Unified Field Theory, of sorts, in the realm of global and nation-state management. It is commonly called, Agenda 21. Agenda 21 was ratified by 179 nation-state signatories, along with the United States , 15 years ago, in 1992. There are no formal public opinion polls relating to the public awareness of Agenda 21. However, if there were, it would be a safe bet that most Americans have never heard of Agenda 21.
Agenda 21 contains 40 chapters of goals in which the United Nations is in the process of implementing, both globally and within the United States . Agenda 21 represents a way of living which will permanently alter the manner in which we Americans are governed, live, eat, learn, communicate, manage private property, consume resources such as electricity and water and are monitored without their consent. Additionally, Agenda 21 places almost all wilderness and remote areas to be out of bounds and subsequently off limits for all human development (Sovereignty.net 2007; United Nations, 2007a).
Agenda 21 is the global contract which binds governments around the world to the UN plan, all under the noble banner of saving the earth. Letâ€™s not fool ourselves; this is the creation of global government. Under Agenda 21, no one would be free from the watchful eye of the new global tracking and information system (Sovereignty. Net, 2007). In a dramatic case of truth being stranger than fiction, nearly 60 years later, George Orwellâ€™s predictions about the creation of such a far-reaching police state, are being realized in our time.
The existence of Agenda 21 (i.e., global management for the 21st century) was originally made public at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Among other things, Agenda 21 calls for a Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA) of the state of the planet. Prepared by the UN Environmental Program (UNEP), this GBA armed United Nations leaders with the “(pseudo) science” they needed to validate and implement the UN global management system.
Agenda 21 makes excellent use of doomsday earth change predictions, cataclysmic climatic predictions and true to the Hegelian Dialectic, a management program designed to meet the pseudo challenges of the 21st century which includes a detailed management plan of resource and property reallocation in what can best be described as an inverse Robin Hood approach in which the rich rob from the middle class and the poor.
Maurice Strong, in his opening speech at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development and Bio-diversity clearly unveiled the true agenda of Agenda 21 when he told attendees â€œ consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing, are not sustainable. A shift is necessary which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations…” In other words, all middle class Americans are having their earning power and consumption habits targeted for a dramatic and drastic reduction.
But wait, this is America . Would not our American system of 10th Amendment federalism protect us from such a global management scheme because of the power vested in local governments? Quite the contrary, with Bill Clintonâ€™s Executive Order 13132, then President Clinton turned American federalism on its ear by indicating that states would be accountable to the new international standards at both the state and federal level through the creation of the Presidential Council of Sustainable Development (PCSD); the American implementation arm for Agenda 21. The creation of Clinton â€™s PCSD was the central conduit from which United Nations policies become codified in United States federal and state statutes. This has resulted in the gradual loss of constitutional law in the United States and the implementation of United Nations socialist policies (e.g., open borders, free trade, environmentalism etc.); all of which is proving critical to the fulfillment of the United Nations demands for worldwide compliance in the evolving system which may be destined for global governance.
When Bill Clinton created the Presidentâ€™s Council for Sustainable Development (PCSD), he laid the foundation for a proliferation of intermediate and local councils (e.g., the use of non-governmental organizations) that would set out to radically alter the structure of government in the United States, thereby, sidestepping the protections afforded by American federalism. These councils operate under many different names which we will explore in later parts of this series. The major principles of Agenda 21 (e.g., Smart Growth, Sustainable Development, General Plan Amendment 2020, etc.) have made their way into nearly every city in the United States through three major quasi governmental/corporate organizations (i.e., The United States Conference of Mayors, The National Governorâ€™s Association and The American Legislative Exchange Council). These three organizations are all underwritten and supported by the behemoth global corporations who subsequently ghost-write the would-be legislation which is ushering in the tenets of Agenda 21 (This fact should provide the reader with a strong clue as to who and what is behind this sinister agenda). For example, the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conglomeration of 2400 local state legislators, from all 50 States, are wined and dined for select weekends by their omnipresent global corporate sponsors and are presented with â€œresearchedâ€ pieces of legislation which are to be introduced following the return trip home. In 2001, The American Legislative Exchange Council boasted that they were directly responsible for the passage of over 450 bills in local legislatures throughout the United States (Olsson, 2002).
When one considers that every state has political infighting, isnâ€™t it amazing that much of the legislation in one state uses almost the same language as similar legislation in the other 49 states? For example, Smart Growth is Smart Growth whether it is in Peoria , Arizona or Littleton , Colorado . And it likely that your mayor, county commissioner and local legislator are largely ignorant to the global end game represented by what they are signing their good names to. Does your senator know of this agenda? If their names are McCain, Kennedy, Kyl and Cornyn, they most certainly do. It is likely that most senators and congressman do have some knowledge of this agenda but are trapped in the money and peer pressure that is partisan politics as well as the corporate money needed to finance reelection or the procurement of higher office. Agenda 21 is also riding the coattails of political bribery. In the world of congressional politics, pork for oneâ€™s own district becomes the prize for support of some very questionable and decidedly un-American legislation. It is also very likely that your governor knows all to well which side of the corporate bread their future campaign donations are buttered on as they climb the political ladder of power. Have you taken note of the fertile breeding ground that governorships provide aspiring presidential candidates? Like yourself, your local mayor and state legislator only see disconnected tentacles of the same agenda and most do not see the integrated connectedness of the plethora of new environmental, land use and property management legislation and resource reallocation which is permeating our state houses and city council chambers as a result of the localization of Agenda 21.
It is noteworthy, that the overwhelming focus of the legislation, from these three groups concern land management modifications, property rights issues and resource protection and reallocation of the same. In a later part of this series, Local Agenda 21 and its implementation in Santa Cruz , California , will be examined so that the reader can clearly see what lies ahead in their community.
The Founding Fathers understood, all too well, the dangers of sacrificing American federalism to a centralized power and much of their past writings warned of sacrificing local control of government. For example, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay were three of the guiding forces behind the creation of the United States Constitution. Their uncompromising position stated that federalism and the subsequent 10th Amendment were put into place to protect the properties and liberties of all American citizens. They stated, “The powers delegated to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, [such] as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people (Hamilton, Madison & Jay, 1788).” And Thomas Jefferson (1788) emphasized that the states are not “subordinate” to the national government, but rather the two are “coordinate departments of one simple and integral whole. The one is the domestic, the other the foreign branch of the same government.”
The founding fathers were clear in their intent that local people remain sovereign in their affairs with regard to property and liberty. However, the PCSD is using the power of the federal government in order to usurp the sovereign decision making of all Americans at the local level. The sound you hear are the Founding Fathers rolling over in their graves.
For all intents and purposes, the protections of federalism are on life support. Every American community stands naked in the face of Agenda 21. The PCSD (1996) stated that “Federal and state governmentsâ€”in consultation with local government, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizationsâ€”should support local planning that integrates economic development, land use, and social equity concerns and engages significant public participationâ€¦.â€ The latter refers to the management of human resources through the consensus process (i.e., stakeholders) within the planned civil society. All Americans should take note that â€œconsultation,â€ by the federal government with local governments, is not the same as obtaining â€œconsent.â€ Further, the language in the abovementioned PCSD (e.g., stakeholders) quote are strikingly similar to the unelected decision-making councils called “Soviets” which was so prevalent in Communist nations from 1948-1988. And the term â€œsocial equityâ€ is a common euphemism for equality under the communist system of government. And, my good comrades, you thought communism died the day the Berlin Wall was toppled.
Today under George W. Bush, the sustainable development policies of Agenda 21 have overwhelmed and infiltrated every county in the country with the help of these three aforementioned legislative organizations. By now, you must be wondering what is the end game? What do the people behind the United Nations want for America and her citizens? The introductory quote from Paul Volcker and the following quote from Bush (41) tell us much of what we need to know about this agenda.
“We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a New World Order, a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations.” ~ President George H. W. Bush, 9/11/1990
Part two of this series will take a look at how the United Nations and its corporate and banking cronies are trying to privatize nearly everything, including the use and ownership of water, even rain water.
Hamilton , Alexander, Madison , James and Jay, John, The Federalist Papers (1788; New York : Mentor Books, 1961), No. 45, p. 292-93.
Madison, James (1824). Letter to Major John Cartwright, 5 June 1824; in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson , ed. Albert Ellery Bergh, 20 vols. (Washington: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association, 1907), 16:47. See also ibid., 15:328; The Federalist Papers, No. 39, p.245.
Olsson, Karen (2002). Ghostwriting the Law. Mother Jones Magazine. September/October 2002 Issue. http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2002/09/ma_95_01.html (retrieved March 1, 2007
Sovereignty.net (2007). http://www.sovereignty.net/p/sd/a21/. (retrieved June 13-17, 2007).
Sustainable America : A New Consensus (The President’s Council on Sustainable Development, 1996), p. 97
The United Nations (2007a). http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm (retrieved June 13-17, 2007).
The United Nations (2007b). www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/agenda21/index.htm (retrieved June 13-17, 2007.
Volcker, Paul (1979). New York Times, 18 October 1979, p.1, Volcker Asserts U.S. Must Trim Living Standard.
Yours in Freedom,
Constitution Party of Arizona