So much talk about Agenda 21. Conspiracy theorists say it’s the end of the world as we know it, and yet, it’s not even a law! And even if it was – what’s wrong with living sustainably?!

Our answer:

Those among us who fear globalization are alarmed at the UN’s mission creep – and the apparently wholehearted endorsement of the various globalist policies by the governments of almost all the world’s countries, especially the West. But the public is greatly divided on this issue. Most simply don’t care, and accept anything their government tells them on face value. “United Nations” sounds good, because it’s so… UNITED! Others enthusiastically support initiatives like the Agenda 21, believing that it’s our best path towards “sustainable” growth and development. Others still – the “conspiracy theorists” – see Agenda 21 as an ultra-dangerous policy recommendation which will not merely speed up globalization (which in itself is seen as evil, under the current “bosses”), but will basically result in knocking the West back to the stone age, since “sustainable” equals “anti-business” and “anti-society” in their view. So, whose point of view is the most valid?

  1. Few among us, the indifferent ones and even the “pro big-government” ones, would disagree that the current state of the world economy is worrisome in the extreme. Of those who agree, at least half – broadly speaking – would blame the current governments for this situation, if they’d spend but a moment thinking about it. So the question really becomes: do you trust someone who has a consistent record of failures to deliver ANY policy to you and expect it to be beneficial?
  2. There are many things to be said FOR sustainability as a concept and an issue of vital importance to humankind. I doubt that many opponents of Agenda 21 (and indeed of globalization as a whole), would have major problems with the notion itself. But the otherwise clear-cut issue is clouded when seen from a broader perspective, both economical and historical. For one thing, much of the “unsustainable” exploitation of the world’s resources is driven by governments (especially the military), and not by business or consumers. And yet the very people who are responsible for these abuses intend to get the citizenry to pay for it. This should raise eyebrows and cause everyone to start asking questions. The frequent response from Agenda 21 proponents to the accusation that Agenda 21 will wind up abolishing private property and generally bankrupting the whole world is that “Agenda 21 is NOT LAW, but only policy recommendations.” This response is fallacious because not only does it not address the real concern, but also pretends that mere “recommendations” can not be implemented. They are – daily now – often with quite disastrous consequences, and usually without majority consent.
  3. Both the inherent quality of the various sustainability solutions as well as the rather “surreptitious” methods with which the Agenda 21 recommendations are frequently implemented in towns across the US and the (Western) world are questionable in the extreme. The heavy-handed, deceitful and dishonest bureaucracies – our governments – tend to implement this Agenda by hook or by crook, sometimes without explicitly telling their citizens that they’re doing it, and often creating new laws and regulations as “remedies” for sustainability which are anything but – and quite often are quite the opposite. In all these cases, there are also clear beneficiaries – and YOU ain’t one of them!

I agree that we need to manage our resources as prudently as possible. But I also know as well as you do that it’s the governments and not independent businesses which abuse those resources the most. I believe in peace and harmony and loving our neighbors and respecting their rights – but not under the barrel of a gun, aimed at us by our own governments, should we disagree.

I firmly believe in trade and cooperation between free and sovereign nations, “united” by their mutual respect and common interests, but I do not believe our current political solutions, including the likes of Agenda 21, address these issues correctly or with the appropriate respect for our rights and individual (and for that matter, national) sovereignty. I also believe that many of the implementation recommendations within Agenda 21 will have a negative effect on the environment, overall “sustainability” and global as well as regional economies. It’s because of that, that I must answer “IT IS VERY BAD” to the question posed. So bad, in fact, that it must be stopped, reversed and seriously revised.

Partial References:

Related posts: