Sustainable Development:
Creating Crisis, Shortage,
and a Police State
From Freedom 21 Santa Cruz
Abundance Ecology
Achieving Abundance Ecology requires a direct relationship between
man and the land, Abundance Ecologist Michael Shaw said in a
presentation to the Davis Mountains Trans-Pecos Heritage
Association annual meeting and conference in Alpine, Texas, in May
2003. Shaw speaks from experience. Shaw has received acclaim for
creating an ecological oasis from a weedy 75 acre parcel on the
central coast of California - what he calls "Liberty Garden."
Said Shaw:
"To release the potential productivity and diversity of a landscape,
an owner must be free to engage in rigorous disturbance, and free to
pursue a reasoned and creative process of trial and error. This
process would be suited to the choice of each individual and the
uniqueness of each property."
Shortage Ecology
"Sustainable Development" is the current buzz term that represents
the efforts to eliminate private property in America, and to control
and limit human action. Sustainable Development is a synonym for
"shortage ecology." The philosophy behind the creation of shortage
ecology underlies the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Endangered
Species Act is the foundation of the land use element of Sustainable
Development.
The ESA is based on international treaties, and is rooted in the
Precautionary Principle, which abandons the legal standard that
presumes innocence. Since the ESA puts the government in control of
plants and animals, the ideals of private property are destroyed,
natural resource shortages arise, and natural calamities - such
as devastating forest fires - increase.
Political Theory
George Washington was right when he said:
"Private property and freedom are inseparable."
Private property, after all, begins with our physical person,
extends to our thoughts, proceeds as our expression, becomes our
action, and results in something we create or obtain. If an agent of
force denies an individual the use of property, including land, that
individual is also denied the liberty necessary to advance his or her
own life. When the use of one's property and one's liberty has been
squelched by big government, human life has been trampled.
Political theory probes the question: "Who decides?" To answer this
question, it is helpful to examine the philosophy underlying the
treatment of property. Immediately, a contrast is seen between the
Declaration of Independence of the United States of America, and the
Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations (U.N.).
Unalienable Rights
Under the American system, individuals decide and direct the terms
of their lives. The application of political theory that respects each
individual is premised on the idea that man's rights are unalienable,
that each person is independent, and that justice must be dispensed
equally. The political theory of Liberty presupposes that an
individual's rights are inherent to, or imbued within, an individual's
nature; from this, it follows that the individual has a natural right
to his or her life, liberty, and property.
Granted Rights
The political theory behind contemporary political globalism
answers the question quite differently. Under the Declaration of Human
Rights, the permission to have and use property is obtained by way of
government grant. This is because people grant "human rights," and as
such, people can take them away.
This idea can be illustrated using the so-called "fish land"
ordinance that has been adopted by central California coastal
counties. Under this ordinance, much of the coastal mountain ranges
are dedicated as fish-land. This land, by decree of ecology planners,
is to be set aside to meet the interests of fish. It extends the
fish-land zone from the streamline halfway to the ridge-top. The
ordinance states: "Inappropriate development [within the zone] shall
be de-commissioned."
The U.N. Declaration of Human Rights states: "Property shall not be
arbitrarily taken." However, since a central authority has already
decided that human relocation is not "arbitrary" under the fish-land
set of circumstances, then no violation can be claimed. By contrast,
the standards of the American Constitution strictly limit government
taking of property, requiring both a public use and just
compensation. In 2005, the United States Supreme Court, in several key
decisions, dramatically undermined the American ideal of an unalienable
right to the use and enjoyment of one's property.
Social Justice
A system of human rights operates in concert with the pursuit of
"social justice," which can be defined as law formulated to obtain
government's social objectives, often coming at the expense of
individual liberty. The California fish-land ordinance exemplifies the
application of social justice.
Equal Justice
The Judicial system that protects individual rights is based on the
principle of freedom called "equal justice." Equal justice supports
true diversity - a respect for the independence and unalienable
rights of the individual, and genuine tolerance for
individuality. Equal justice puts a checkmate on mob rule.
The Nature of Sustainable Development
Sustainable Development has three components: global land use,
global education, and global population control and reduction.
The international focus for Sustainable Development is the United
States. This is because America is the only country in the world based
on the ideals of private property. Private property is incompatible
with the collectivist premise of Sustainable Development.
United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda 21
The United Nations website verifies that the U.N. Agenda 21
action plan is Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development works
to abolish private property, in order to manufacture natural resource
shortages and other alarms, in order to facilitate governmental
control over all resources, and ultimately, over all human action.
So-called public/private partnerships are the major tool used to
accomplish this objective.
What makes the United States of America unique, is that this is the
only country in the history of the world where management of the
natural resources is under citizen control. Everything that city
residents obtain originates from the natural resources that come from
rural lands. If public/private partnerships achieve control over
natural resources, urban citizens are doomed to manipulated crises and
shortages.
Canadian oil billionaire Maurice Strong, Secretary General at the
Rio de Janeiro United Nations 1992 Conference on Environment and
Development, expressed the goal of Sustainable Development by
declaring a partial list of what is not sustainable:
"... current life-styles and consumption patterns of the
affluent middle-class [e.g. Americans] - involving high meat
intake [e.g. cattle production], use of fossil fuels [e.g. air and
auto travel], industrial and consumer products, appliances
[e.g. refrigeration], home and work air-conditioning, and
suburban housing are not sustainable."
Sustainable Development is Non-Partisan
The implementation of Sustainable Development is not a dynamic of
Republican versus Democrat, liberal versus conservative, or left
versus right. Rather, it is completely nonpartisan. The looming
battle of ideas should be recognized as the classic - and perhaps
ultimate - battle between Liberty and Tyranny.
When George H.W. Bush signed the Rio Accords at the Earth Summit in
Rio de Janeiro in 1992, he opened the path for the United States to
implement U.N. Sustainable Development Agenda 21. When Bill
Clinton created the President's Council for Sustainable Development by
Executive Order in 1993, he laid the foundation for a proliferation of
intermediate and local councils that would set out to alter, radically,
the structure of government in the United States. These councils
operate under many different names.
Today, under George W. Bush, Sustainable Development policy has
swarmed every county in the country.
Funding Agenda 21
The list of money sources paying for the implementation of
U.N. Sustainable Development Agenda 21 is impressive. American
taxes fund the federal agencies' present focus: Implementing
Sustainable Development. Over two thousand Non-Governmental
Organizations (NGOs) are accredited by the United Nations; most exist
for the purpose of implementing Sustainable Development in
America. They receive massive tax advantages under the IRS code. Some
of these NGOs include: The Nature Conservancy, the Sierra Club, the
National Audubon Society, the American Planning Association, and the
National Teachers Association.
The third leg of the Sustainable Development money-power elite
are certain aristocratic tax-advantaged foundations. These
include the Rockefeller Foundation, Pew Charitable Trusts, the Turner
Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the James Irvine
Foundation, the Carnegie Foundation, the McArthur Foundation, and
numerous local Community Foundations and Land Trusts.
The Wildlands Project
Sustainable Development addresses land use through two action
plans. The first is the Wildlands Project. The Wildlands Project is
the plan to eliminate human presence on over 50 percent of the
American landscape, and to heavily control human activity on most of
the rest of American land. Examples of the piece-by-piece
implementation of the Wildlands Project include road closings,
dam-busting, water grabbing policies, and the adoption of
United Nations Biosphere Reserves and World Heritage Sites -
which are systematically being closed to recreational use. The most
significant tools of the Wildlands Project are the rapidly expanding
impositions of habitat "protection" provisions in the Endangered
Species Act, various "conservation easements," and direct land
acquisitions from battered "willing sellers."
Smart Growth
The second action plan is called Smart Growth. Smart Growth will
increasingly herd Americans into regimented and dense urban
communities. Smart Growth is Sustainable Development's ultimate
solution, as it will create dense human settlements subject to
increasing controls on how residents live, and increased restriction on
mobility. In the words of one smart growth activist: "It will be the
humans in cages, with the animals looking in."
Stakeholder Consensus Councils
Agenda 21 is being implemented through the use of
facilitated stakeholder consensus councils, not by vote. These
councils fit, almost perfectly, the definition of a state Soviet: A
system of councils that report to an apex council, and that implement a
predetermined outcome affecting a region or a neighborhood. Members of
a Soviet council are chosen by virtue of their willingness to comply
with that outcome, and their one-mindedness with the group. State
Soviets are the operating mechanism of a government-controlled
economy, whether it be socialism, or government-business
(public-private) partnerships.
Initially, state Soviets, public/private partnerships, seem
innocuous. The police state that associates with state Soviets arises
when the Soviet web is sufficiently in place.
Michael Shaw is a founder and director of Freedom 21 Santa
Cruz, and is a frequent host of the nationally syndicated Freedom
21 Santa Cruz Radio Show. He holds degrees in Political Science and
Law, and has practiced as an attorney and as a Certified Public
Accountant
|
