Connecting The Dots of Agenda 21
AGENDA 21: CONSPIRACY THEORY OR REAL CONCERN?Nancy Sarowski 12-4-13 Let’s connect a few dots. Then you decide if there’s anything to worry about in Agenda 21.
One goal of UN Resolution Agenda 21 is “Adopting innovative city planning strategies to address environmental and social issues by reducing subsidies on, and recovering the full costs of, environmental and other services … provided to higher income neighborhoods (e.g. roads & telecommunications).”
In other words, governments should no longer provide road repair, snow removal, and new roads to “higher income neighborhoods.” So not only would some taxpayers continue to pay the gasoline (road) tax but now they would also pay the full cost of their own roads as well. This is another way in which wealth is redistributed. Also, who defines “higher income neighborhoods?”
Another goal of Agenda 21 is to move citizens out of the suburbs and less populated areas and into more densely populated urban areas.
Two ways of accomplishing this are first, stop repairing their roads and second, stop improving their cell phone and broadband capabilities. When the roads fail, trucks can’t bring in necessary supplies and farmers/merchants can’t move their products out. When no one can access the internet, stores close, jobs disappear, families move to the cities, and the area dies a quiet death. Mission Accomplished.
The United Nations 1976 Vancouver Declaration, the first attempt at Agenda 21, stated, “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; therefore (it) contributes to social injustice.”
In 1992, Maurice Strong, as the U.N. Secretary-General and co-creator of Agenda 21, said, “The affluence of Americans is a threat to the planet, it’s unsustainable. Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.”
The global warming and Agenda 21 supporters are advocates for miles-traveled taxes, higher gasoline taxes, higher cost and limited parking as part of the solution to drastically reduce gas driven vehicles in an area. They want people to be able to walk to work, church, grocery stores, doctors, and retail shops.
In America, we resent being treated like animals needing to be herded.
Do you think it will never happen? There’s a project currently underway in the San Francisco Area called the “Planned Bay Area Project.” Its goal is to move people out of large, single family houses and into more dense developments near public transportation. One of the ways they will be able to accomplish this is by raising the taxes so high on single family dwellings that no one will be able to afford to stay or be able to sell.
Rewriting laws and raising taxes to force people into more dense living conditions, for instance, is objectionable to most of us. However, the weakening of private property rights is most egregious to conservatives and should be at least distressing to every American.
The Preamble to the Code of Ethics of the National Association of Realtors, states, “Under all is the land. Upon its wise utilization and widely allocated ownership depends the survival and growth of free institutions and of our civilization.”
Pay attention to what your city planners are doing. Question them about unintended, or intended, consequences such as loss of private property rights.
To read the entire UN Resolution, go to http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf
