All Your CT in one Basket

[Tiktaalik]

Wow, this group seems to kind of consolidate all sorts of CT into one package:

www.Freedom21.org

with Southern Poverty Law Center's review of the Ninth Annual Freedom 21 Conference at

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=968

(featuring a picture of Phyllis Schlafly).

Apparently, Freedom 21 was formed in response to Agenda 21, a UN Commission on Sustainable Development "blueprint of action" regarding actions to be taken in areas where humans impact the environment.

Michael Coffman, ED of Sovereignity International, says it is "an anti-human document, which takes aim at Western Culture, the Judeo-Christian and Islamic religions," and calls it "usufructural", which he says means governments would own everything.

At the 9th conference, founder of Freedom Advocates Michael Shaw told the audience that environmentalism is actually a revolutionary coup intended to establish global governence (from SPLC).

These folks also linked in the North American Union; sustainable development ("sustainable development can only exist when people are controlled by the government"); earth/nature worship ("pantheism"), which is apparently out to get your kids; environmentalism out to get your guns; the Trans-Texas Corridor; feminism/anti-feminism; activist judges; diversity being a code to teach your kids about homosexuality; prayer in the schools (for it); and "lawful" ways to avoid taxes.

About the only thing they apparently didn't talk about at this conference was 9/11.

I'd never heard abou the whole "sustainable development is an NWO plot to take your guns/make your children gay/destroy Christianity" thing. But since this is the 9th Annual Conference, they've been around since...uh, the turn of the millenium.

Interestingly, Bob Barr was appaently dis-invited because he had the gall to discuss global warming with Al Gore.

 

[ParrotPirate]

Round them up,put a fence around them,call it an idiot reservation.

 

[PixyMisa]

Apparently, Freedom 21 was formed in response to Agenda 21, a UN Commission on Sustainable Development "blueprint of action" regarding actions to be taken in areas where humans impact the environment.

Michael Coffman, ED of Sovereignity International, says it is "an anti-human document, which takes aim at Western Culture, the Judeo-Christian and Islamic religions," and calls it "usufructural", which he says means governments would own everything.

Browsing through Agenda 21, it looks like two parts wishful thinking, one part money grab, and one part power grab - pretty typical UN fare in other words. So, while these people are certainly crazy, they're not wrong to object to it.

 

[Spud1k]

It's not difficult to see why libertarians have so little truck with sustainable development; their beef with a whole number of environmental controls over the years is already well documented. Coming up with sensible counterarguments to particular policies is one thing, but coming up with excuses as to why people shouldn't even be thinking about it is real head-in-the-sand thinking.

 

[varwoche]

Browsing through Agenda 21, it looks like two parts wishful thinking, one part money grab, and one part power grab

For instance?

pretty typical UN fare in other words.

Examples?

 

[INRM]

PixyMisa,

So, while these people are certainly crazy, they're not wrong to object to it.

Agreed

 

[PixyMisa]

For instance? Examples?

For which part? The wishful thinking is self-evident, I would think. The money grab, well, if you read through it a bit you'll find that they are saying that the programs they outline will need $600 billion a year in funding. And the power grab is implicit in the setting up of a vast UN-controlled program. (While that aspect is tempered by the advice that the program should be structured as many smaller, local organisations, this ain't no free market, and there's still a central organising body. That's why I set out the proportions as I did, where, say, the food-for-oil program was one part good intentions, one part power grab, and seven parts money grab.)

There are some good parts to it, and it's mostly well-intentioned, but that certainly doesn't imply that the agenda as a whole is a good idea.

 

[John Albert]

So this "Agenda 21" CT appears to be making the news lately:

http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-washington-dc/maryland-county-charts-a-path-out-of-agenda-21

http://www.gastongazette.com/articles/agenda-64765-rfid-chips.html

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_215825.asp


Alternet posted this description of it:

"Agenda 21" is one of a number of silly but dangerous conspiracy theories sweeping through the fever swamps of the right. Although admittedly sinister-sounding, Agenda 21 is just a blueprint for sustainable development, especially in emerging economies. It outlines how wealthier countries can contribute to smarter growth through technology transfers and public education. It stresses the importance of fighting deforestation and conserving bio-diversity -- all things that normal people would consider wise.

The important thing to understand about Agenda 21 is that there is absolutely nothing binding or compelling member countries to implement any part of it. It's not a treaty -- it is entirely voluntary and certainly doesn't have any connection to local governments. Yet for the right, with its long John Birch Society undercurrent of paranoia about international institutions, Agenda 21 represents some kind of dark UN conspiracy to impose socialism on the "free world."

http://www.alternet.org/story/15355..._to_humanity?akid=8053.257963.RKSbf5&rd=1&t=2

Apparently something called "Agenda 21" does actually exist, but from what I've read, it just looks like a UN plan for global sustainability that originated at a conference back in 1992. So they've outlined ways for governments to implement smart growth to maximize resources and limit damage from natural disasters. Pretty boring, actually.

But of course, the CTers are going all Chicken Little on this, alleging everything from a flimsy excuse for an eminent domain land-grab, to a UN-FEMA joint program to poison our food and roll out the plastic coffins and internment camps for "population reduction."

I have to admit I'm having a hard time understanding this one. How can a collection of common sense civic planning policies be so effectively spun into some grand conspiracy? Have the Tea Partiers really gotten to the point of blaming every single non-isolationist, non-xenophobic political initiative as the end of the world as we know it, or is it just more of the same old, familiar CT pareidolia at work?

The UN's Agenda 21 has been around for almost 20 years now. How long has the conspiracy theory been around? About half that long?

 

[tsig]

Wow, this group seems to kind of consolidate all sorts of CT into one package:

www.Freedom21.org

with Southern Poverty Law Center's review of the Ninth Annual Freedom 21 Conference at

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=968

(featuring a picture of Phyllis Schlafly).

Apparently, Freedom 21 was formed in response to Agenda 21, a UN Commission on Sustainable Development "blueprint of action" regarding actions to be taken in areas where humans impact the environment.

Michael Coffman, ED of Sovereignity International, says it is "an anti-human document, which takes aim at Western Culture, the Judeo-Christian and Islamic religions," and calls it "usufructural", which he says means governments would own everything.

At the 9th conference, founder of Freedom Advocates Michael Shaw told the audience that environmentalism is actually a revolutionary coup intended to establish global governence (from SPLC).

These folks also linked in the North American Union; sustainable development ("sustainable development can only exist when people are controlled by the government"); earth/nature worship ("pantheism"), which is apparently out to get your kids; environmentalism out to get your guns; the Trans-Texas Corridor; feminism/anti-feminism; activist judges; diversity being a code to teach your kids about homosexuality; prayer in the schools (for it); and "lawful" ways to avoid taxes.

About the only thing they apparently didn't talk about at this conference was 9/11.

I'd never heard abou the whole "sustainable development is an NWO plot to take your guns/make your children gay/destroy Christianity" thing. But since this is the 9th Annual Conference, they've been around since...uh, the turn of the millenium.

Interestingly, Bob Barr was appaently dis-invited because he had the gall to discuss global warming with Al Gore.

"This is not some nice little debate," DeWeese said he told someone in Barr's office. "This is war."

Nice see that they're keeping an open mind about it.