At Rio+20 next month, the world’s elites will meet in Brazil with the aim of holding back human progress.

Ben Pile - Thursday 17 May 2012

Forty years ago, two ideas about humanity’s relationship with the natural world caught the imagination of the richest and most influential people. The first was that the demands of a growing population were taking more from the planet than could be replaced by natural processes. The second, related idea was that there exist natural ‘limits to growth’. These two reinventions of Malthusianism became the basis of a new form of global politics, which has sought to contain human industrial and economic development ever since.

Fears about the possibility of global environmental catastrophe and its human consequences, as depicted by neo-Malthusians like Paul Ehrlich - author of the 1968 prophecy, The Population Bomb - and the Club of Rome - a talking shop for high-level politicians, diplomats and researchers - became the ground on which a number of organisations established under the United Nations were formed. In 1972, the UN held its Conference on the Human Environment, and began its environment programme, UNEP. In 1983, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, aka The Brundtland Commission, after its chair, Norwegian politician Gro Harlem Brundtland) was formed, leading to the publication of its findings in 1987 in Our Common Future. Also known as the Brundtland Report, it became the bible of ‘sustainable development’.

Having established sustainable development as an imperative of global politics, more organisations and programmes under the UN were formed to deliver it. In 1992, the UN Conference on Environment and Development, the first ‘Earth Summit’, was held in Rio, leading to the Agenda 21 ‘blueprint for a sustainable planet’, UN conventions on climate change and biodiversity, and the creation of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development (UNSCD). Since then, an entire ecosystem of global, national, governmental and non-governmental organisations has emerged, to advocate and implement the closer integration of human productive life with knowledge about the environment: to observe the ‘limits to growth’. The most notable of these is the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), under which a global agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions is being sought.

Full story

Jim Fetzer (Kristi Rosenquist with Mary Hartman) - June 29 2011

It was my pleasure to interview Mary Hartman and Kristi Rosenquist on “The Real Deal”, an internet radio program I host on M/W/F from 5-7 PM/CT, which took place on 17 June 2011 and has been archived at http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com. I was taken aback to discover that the sustainable energy program in Minnesota is by and large a scam designed to enrich the Texas billionaire, T. Boone Pickins.

I learned from them that a program being sold to the residents of Minnesota as an “environmentally friendly” enterprise actually appears to conceal a major rip-off of the public, where the purchase of land for wind mills is being use as a front to conceal taking control of mineral and water rights. The scam is so bad that the utility monitoring the production of energy has been derelict.

Full story

Rebecca Capuano - 2011 06 22

Queen Beatrix and Maurice Strong at the EC+5 Earth Charter Conference, in Amsterdam, Netherlands, 5 - 9 November 2005

Freedom of choice and basic individual rights are being sacrificed in the interest of the common good, under the United Nations’ agenda for the 21st century, called Agenda 21. Under the veil of feel-good terms like “sustainable development” and “social equity”, a self-described “new world order” is being systematically implemented around the globe, that is organized around the principle that nature is the most fundamental truth, and which requires all spheres of society to conform to that principle, under the government of a ruling elite (the United Nations and the organizations that support it). When faced with evidence of this unbelievable agenda, the natural question that comes to mind is “Why?”

Two Major Forces
There are really two major engines driving the new world agenda: a quest for control, and fundamental religious belief. What makes this paradigm so dangerous, and effective, is that it merges both forces together under the stated goal of taking care of the environment. The religious background to this environmental agenda is called Gaia, or the worship of the earth. Based on the gaia hypothesis, originally proposed by James Lovelock, this new age religious movement, cosmology, is woven throughout all of the major initiatives, forums, and organizations of the sustainable development agenda. To begin to understand the reasons behind the agenda for a new world order, it is critical to investigate the religious beliefs of the organizations and individuals behind it, and how those convictions undergird an agenda of control.

Full story

Ashley Thorne: Sustainability as Staff and Rod for the New Elite

• Sterilizing Those Pesky Humans: Earth Day with Paul Ehrlich
• The Sustainable Development Hoax
• Fixing Sustainability and Sustaining Liberal Education
• Sustainability’s Third Circle
• The Sustainability Movement in the American University
• University of Delaware Requires Students to Undergo Ideological Reeducation
• Sustainable Development: A Global Agenda Structured On Population Control
• Environmentalism: The Religion for an Eco-theocratic Superstate?
• The Earth Charter & the Ark of the Gaia Covenant

Expansion of the Public-Private Fascist State

Tom DeWeese, May 11, 2010

Randall O’Toole Misses the Fine Print

At a recent property rights conference in Bozeman, Montana, anti-Smart Growth spokesman Randall O’Toole was taking part in a panel discussion when he was asked a question concerning my opposition to Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development. Said the questioner, “DeWeese calls the sustainability doctrine ‘a complete agenda of control,’ that has been largely embraced by most aspects of the government.” O’Toole was asked to comment on that.

O’Toole responded by downplaying the significance of the UN and Agenda 21. Whether it is true or not, he said, it is not relevant in the process of addressing the issues, and in fact, will most likely diminish credibility because it starts sounding like a “black helicopter” conspiracy. Instead, O’Toole said, the focus should be that “they are taking away our rights.” He then said, “it really isn’t the UN. It is our own urban planning profession and the American Planning Association.”

O’Toole’s comments have actually enlightened me to an issue that has been a puzzle for years. Why do so many in the Washington, D.C. conservative/libertarian movement ignore Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development? I’ve witnessed their passion to oppose the combined scams dealing with global warming and Cap and Trade. Sustainable Development is totally based on the premise that global warming is destroying the earth and that reducing green house gases through sustainable policy is the only way to prevent it.

Full story

So-called “global warming” has been replaced with “climate change,” while “population control” and “population reduction” received a similar makeover - “population restraint.” However, the misanthropic goal remains the same; and the ruse is - as it has been for some time - ostensibly saving the environment.

“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill … All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”

- Alexander King, Bertrand Schneider - founder and secretary, respectively, of the Club of Rome - The First Global Revolution, p. 115

—-

NEWS RELEASE

August 17 2009
TACKLE POPULATION GROWTH TO BEAT CLIMATE CHANGE – OPT

Leading figures from science and environmentalism have backed a call for population restraint policies to be adopted by every state worldwide as part of the battle against climate change.

The Optimum Population Trust says today (August 17, 2009) that the climate change talks which will culminate at Copenhagen in December must ensure that all countries adopt non-coercive policies to limit and stabilise population growth. Family planning programmes in poorer countries should be treated as “legitimate candidates for climate change funding”. Empowering women to control their own fertility would also have major humanitarian benefits for the poorest women and children in the world.

Successful population policies, which answered the unmet need for family planning, could mean nearly three billion fewer people in 2050, a difference equivalent to 44 per cent of current world population (6.8 billion), OPT says. “All environmental problems, and notably those arising from climate change, would be easier to solve with a smaller future population.”

(more…)

by Michael Barker

(Swans - May 4, 2009)   In March 2008, Sustainable Population Australia celebrated their 20th anniversary by organizing a two-day conference titled “Population, Peak Oil, Climate Change: their impact on the Millennium Development Goals.” For most concerned citizens it is commonsensical that all three of the issues examined at this conference — population, peak oil, and climate change — are intimately linked: however, as I demonstrated within a recent Monthly Review Zine article, the longstanding focus on the population question by leading environmentalists is severely problematic.

To summarize my argument: simply put the modern-day birth of the environmental movement in the United States (and elsewhere) evolved in large part from the success of an increasingly powerful population control movement. With massive financial and technical support from ostensibly progressive liberal philanthropists, like the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, by the late 1950s the population issue was adopted by the military-industrial complex, creating what has been referred to as the population-national security theory, a dubious theory that Professor Eric Ross notes, causally linked “overpopulation, resource exhaustion, hunger, political instability, communist insurrection, and danger to vital American interests.” Here it is noteworthy that these same liberal philanthropists also played a key role in promoting the population control movements’ predecessor; that is, eugenics.

Full story

Jack H. Swift, Esq. - January 11, 2009

What is Sustainability?

The recent election focused upon the American voter’s dis-satisfaction with the state of our government and the state of our economy. Each campaign played upon this angst by pitching “change” but neither candidate articulated a vision of what is wrong or what might be an effective cure. The national change required is far more fundamental than anything suggested by the politicians. The problem is one of sustainability.

“Sustainability” is the great buzz word of the day. It describes a concept. In an economic context, the concept is to provide for the reliable funding of our social and economic well-being both now and in the future. In political thinking, it is a plan to provide for the continuation of our economy and government which will sustain those activities forever.

Sustainability is not a new concept. It is what conservation is all about. It first appeared in Washington politics during FDR’s administration as the concept of “sustained-yield” and was applied by law to the management of our publicly owned natural resources, most notably timber. Economically, it is a mandate that one not use more assets than one can replace and do not use at a rate faster than one can replace. It is a logical and practical approach, reflecting the essential elements of good stewardship.

Full story

Michael Shaw - December 7, 2008

The issue is Liberty

Congressman Ron Paul, a constitutionalist said “This is not a conservative problem nor is it a liberal problem. It’s a government intrusion problem that comes from both groups albeit for different reasons. The problems emanate from both camps that champion different programs for different reasons. The solution will come,” he says, “when both groups realize that it is not merely a single party problem or just a liberal or a conservative problem.” The problem is the abandonment of the principles of limited government. The issue is liberty.

I created a pictorial that illustrates the dialectic tactic used to subvert the vision of the American experience. An artificial dialectic is a form of psychological manipulation that involves the creation of a ‘thesis’ and a corresponding “anti thesis” each with different apparent purposes. The thesis and the anti thesis are chosen and pursued to combine and achieve a predetermined “synthesis” - the real objective of the sponsors. In evaluating how a global green cartel came to America, I applied this long-known concept to the contemporary political situation.

The ‘thesis’ comes from ‘right wing’ state collectivists. That is those who seek to combine the force of government with the power of business. This is accomplished through public/private partnerships.

Full story

Michael Shaw - November 9, 2008

Directing Local Action - Globalist Organizations

Researchers at Freedom Advocates and others can take any area in America and show you the nationalized soviet structure that has begun to take control of your local government apparatus.

You ask, “How does this happen? How is it coordinated?” It happens and is coordinated through a soviet-style tiered system of councils. One such council is the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives or ICLEI. ICLEI is a United Nations NGO located in Toronto Canada. As early as 1997 Santa Cruz County was listed by ICLEI as an ICLEI participant. It has become one of the premier implementers of Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.

Full story

Michael Shaw - October 26, 2008

Reinvention of Government - Part 1

I want you to know that the hard effort made by my fellow Local Santa Cruz Agenda 21 collaborators was noticed by important people in important places. Here is a letter on US Congressional letterhead from my local Congressman Sam Farr. Farr is Leon Panetta’s successor representing a district on the central coast of California. The letter was written to the Local Agenda 21 Committee.

Full story

Michael Shaw - October 12, 2008

[...] The Precautionary Principle underlies Sustainable Development environmental policy. It is a hoax.

The Precautionary Principle premise is the notion that people are a cancer on the earth. Therefore, if people undertake any action it must cause no “harm” to species or inanimate natural objects. In other words; if your cows walk on the ‘wrong spot’ on your property you may have criminally violated Sustainable Development’s ‘environmental justice’ rules. The Precautionary Principle turns the concept of equal justice on its head. Guilt is presumed and innocence must be proved. The Los Angeles City School District requires that all public schools teach the Precautionary Principle as the Law of the Land. [...]

Full story

Michael Shaw - October 5, 2008

Rooting Sustainable Development in the USA

Allow me to introduce you to father of American Sustainable Development, George Bush the Elder.

We need to remember that the ideas the United States was founded on and the ideas the United Nations was founded on are antithetical to each other. One recognizes that our rights as human beings are inherent. The other seeks to make our rights the subject and object of political grant.

So how is the United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development being implemented in the United States? First; all federal agencies are openly committed to Sustainable Development policies. The State Department reports our “progress” to the United Nations. Our tax dollars are being used to implement Sustainable development in order to steal our freedom!

In addition, 2,000 NGO’s in the United States are accredited by the United Nations. The purpose of accreditation is to implement Sustainable Development policy. The list of NGOs who implement Sustainable Development policies include…

Full story

Michael Shaw - September 20, 2008

It is important to know that the land use element of Sustainable Development has two action plans:

1. First is the Wildlands Project which seeks to eliminate human presence on over 50% of the American landscape while imposing massive controls on activity on the rest of American land.
2. Second is the Smart Growth action plan. This promotes dense “human settlements”. This leads to increased central controls on how we live and increased restrictions on our mobility.

Full story

———-

Michael Shaw speaking at Brave New Books