EVER HEARD OF AGENDA 21? IT'S A BIG ISSUE WITH THE GOP

September 4, 2012

With the Democratic National Convention underway I thought I would devote some time watching the speeches and hearing the pundits talk about it through the eyes, ears and brains of MSNBC. Call me a masochist, but I love the comedy.

I warned my readers, though, that unless you have a cast-iron stomach, don't watch it. Don't even tune in to FOX News! Judging from the list of speakers, well over three-fourths of the time will be devoted to bashing George Bush (probably without mentioning his name a single time) and demagoguing the GOP as an early 19th century version of the "old" pro-slavery Democratic Party. By the way, they won't mention the word "Democratic" in that context.

Reflecting back over last week's GOP convention in Tampa, I found it interesting that not a single news outlet or network commented on one part of the Republican platform this year which definitely caught my eye.

In its section on leadership in international organizations was included an interesting statement which now reads: "We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty, and we oppose any form of U.N. Global Tax.”

Well now, this will stand out to those who regard American sovereignty and exceptionalism as paramount. In fact, this may be used by Democrats as propaganda to tell voters that Republicans want to get out of the United Nations.

It should be noted here that only Libertarians and Constitutionalists are talking about getting the US out of the UN. Republicans won't go for it. But the inclusion of this language in the GOP platform is noteworthy.

Agenda 21 is a plan put forth by the United Nations that seeks to implement “sustainable development.” Nebulous government-speak terms like “smart meters,” “smart growth,” “sustainable communities,” “greenways,” and my personal favorite, “social justice” all have to do with the U.N.’s Agenda 21. On the surface, sure they sound good. Why would we not be in favor of “smart” things and “sustainability?” Why would we not be in favor of “social justice?” They sound like things we could be in favor of, but what do they mean by them?

At the U.N.’s “Earth Summit” in 1992, George H. W. Bush was one of 178 world leaders who signed the Agenda 21 protocol and agreed with its goals. Maurice Strong was the Secretary General at this conference. He stated that “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.”

Agenda 21 is all about environmental control. It seeks to ration natural resources in the same way that Obamacare will ration healthcare. Energy will be rationed based on the assumption that our government owns all resources including food, water and land. Local Agenda 21 initiatives will mandate certain appliances and outlaw others based on energy consumption, and your energy consumption will be monitored so that you don’t “go over your limit.” Homes and buildings will have to be built or rebuilt to meet new “green” building codes or else face hefty fines. It seeks to transition citizens away from rural areas and into cities. It wants to “wean” people off private vehicles (because of “dirty” fossil fuels) and have them start using public transportation like high-speed rail. Outdoor recreational activities will be restricted because those practices are not “sustainable.”

“Social justice” means the abolition of private property. Here’s an excerpt from a report published at the U.N.’s Habitat I Conference in 1976:

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 interest of society as a whole.

It’s not fair that individuals own land or property. What will make it fair is if it is collectively owned. The United Nations wants to mandate global communism. They just don’t call it that. They call it “social justice.” And they’re going to execute “social justice” through “sustainable development.”

These things are already happening in our own country. Over 600 cities and counties across the U.S. have become members of ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives), “an international association of local governments as well as national and regional local government organizations who have made a commitment to sustainable development.” Check here to see if your town, city or county is a member.

In 1993, a year after Bush Sr. signed the Agenda 21 protocol, President Clinton issued an executive order that created the PCSD (President’s Council on Sustainable Development). This group made Agenda 21 public policy and sought to implement its goals at the local level through ICLEI. J. Gary Lawrence was an adviser to this council. He advised that people should not know about Agenda 21 because if they knew about it, they would be opposed to it:

Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society….This segment of our society who fear ‘one-world government’ and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined ‘the conspiracy’ by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.

And this is why we don’t ever hear about it. They control the language in media. Their agenda is shrouded in vague terms that could mean anything, and people are naïve enough to give them the benefit of the doubt. Since the creation of Clinton’s PCSD, Obama has issued executive orders creating similar and more expansive “councils” that work to further the U.N.’s agenda.

Tom Madrecki is a spokesman for Smart Growth America, another one of those Agenda 21 type organizations. He doesn’t like the fact that Agenda 21 is in the new Republican platform. He said, “The fact that it’s in the platform gives credence to something that just shouldn’t get any.” He’s concerned that such a mainstream position opposing Agenda 21 will only serve to stir dissent and will “continue halting beneficial conversations about community planning.” There’s another one of those buzz phrases…”community planning.”

It’s great that the Republican Party has officially taken a stand against the United Nations and its global communist agenda. I hope it stays in their platform, and I hope Romney and other elected republicans will work tirelessly to expose the U.N. for what they really are and to extricate the U.S. from the organization itself, thus restoring our national sovereignty.

By the way, this was one of Ron Paul's main goals. However, the GOP isn't going for Paul's ultimate goal: Getting out of the U.N. altogether. But it's a start.


We believe that the Constitution of the United States speaks for itself. There is no need to rewrite, change or reinterpret it to suit the fancies of special interest groups or protected classes.