From CFACT
Marked-up draft of UN Rio+20 agenda reveals shocking “sustainability” wish list.
An American family of four could owe the UN $1,325 per year.
The United Nations plans to make its Rio+20 Sustainable Development Conference “the most significant environmental conference in history.” A draft planning and agenda document, “The Future We Want,” marked-up by myriad ultra-liberal NGOs, provides an unvarnished look at what lurks behind Rio+20.
“Americans, their free world partners and people in developing nations who hope to lift themselves out of poverty should be on their guard. Otherwise Rio+20 could easily trap them in a future we dread,” said Craig Rucker, CEO of the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, a Washington, DC-based organization that advances the needs of people, while also protecting wildlife and environmental values.
The UN’s international NGO allies want to expand previous calls for a “green economy,” by including new demands for “resource justice” and new mechanisms to ensure “contraction and convergence for over- and under-consumers of natural resources.” People do not need advanced degrees to figure out whose economies and lifestyles the activists intend to “contract,” Rucker commented.
Another agenda item would have the world end “speculation” in energy, raw material and economic markets. However, history has taught that it is extremely difficult even to define “speculation,” and that attempts to control investment, development and resource allocation frequently end in disaster.
The international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) also advocate making national environmental policies subject to “international legal frameworks and regulations,” and “strengthening international environmental governance … within the institutional framework of sustainable development.” That would make national sovereignty “the most endangered species in Rio,” CFACT president David Rothbard stated.
The NGOs would place both nature and man in jeopardy, since they call for curbs on “any technologies that might imply a serious risk for the environment or human society, including in particular synthetic biology, geo-engineering, genetic modification, nuclear energy and nanotechnology,” Rothbard observed.
They would curtail the very technologies that allow us to provide for people’s needs in the most efficient, least intrusive manner. Few policies are more counterproductive than forcing people to grow low yield crops that are susceptible to insects and drought, or to rely on inefficient energy technologies, he said.
The document also seeks to impose staggering financial burdens on people in developed nations. It would give the UN 0.7% of a nation’s gross domestic product – some $1,325 per year for an American family of four. A Canadian family would pay $1,211, while their counterparts would be taxed $1,206 in Germany and $1,171 in Japan. Norwegian families would take dubious first place honors, paying a whopping $2,445 every year. Other countries’ obligations, based on World Bank 2010 data, can be found on CFACT.tv.
The NGOs most popular agenda item appears to be increased funding and powers for the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), which they want to turn into an international version of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “People concerned about the impacts that EPA has had on American energy prices and jobs – for minimal health or environmental benefits – should be especially wary of giving vast new powers and funding to the UNEP, which is completely unelected and unaccountable,” Rucker commented.
On climate and energy, activists claiming to be acting for “indigenous peoples” said the UN should insist that developed countries shift rapidly to low-carbon energy use. Not to be outdone, environmental NGOs are demanding that developed countries cut carbon dioxide emissions by 95% by 2050. That would take the United States back to what it emitted around the time of the Civil War, while accomplishing nothing for the climate.
To pay for this expansive eco-wish list, the United Nations and NGOs also want to give the UN authority to tax every currency conversion and financial transaction, fuel sales and air travel tickets – and seize all funds that currently provide subsidies and tax deductions for fossil fuel and nuclear power. These funds would be in addition to the extensive foreign aid already provided by taxpayers and treasuries of developed nations.
CFACT invites people to examine this remarkable document at CFACT.tv – and determine for themselves how much it actually represents “the future we want.”
The Committee is taking a delegation to Brazil to expose these potentially devastating policy proposals. “We also intend to inject some much needed common sense into the deliberations, and ensure that at least some consideration is given to the needs of real people, especially the world’s poor – and not just to the unreasonable and often outrageous demands of Deep Ecology, anti-development activists,” Rucker said.
“Instead of developed and developing economies, the world could end up getting split between the developed countries and the going backward fast countries (those that buy this ridiculous belief system).”
Sadly this statement is closer to the truth than I would like. Economists have recognised, although politicians and the public have not, that the difference between the world’s poorest economies and the world’s richest has been only a difference of a few % of GDP growth, compounded over many decades. When advocates argue that such policies will only affect 1% or 2% of GDP per year in their country, I don’t think they fully appreciate what that means in the long term.
Reds just re-branded as greens, and the politburos became NGO’s.
‘The Justice Principle” -it delivers equity between and within countries and between generations.
Well that’s impossible and trying will sink what does work.
Next?
“The Dignity Principle”-it creates genuine prosperity and wellbeing for all.
Because Africa has done so well under UN initiatives. And with development policies that encourage poverty continuing so that aid money just keeps coming. To then buy those Mercede
The socialist hordes are unemployed but their masters will meet in Rio In the grandest style. -Same as usual.
We need a revolution to sweep the UN and it’s nefarious assortment of crooks and high living scum bags to some god forsaken location like the melting Arctic in a leaky boat!
The United Nations has become irretrievably corrupted, by money. Like most human organisations, it has passed its use-by date.
Sounds like they admired Pol Pot and want to emulate him.
Time to de-fund the UN…
It would give the UN 0.7% of a nation’s gross domestic product – some $1,325 per year for an American family of four. A Canadian family would pay $1,211, while their counterparts would be taxed $1,206 in Germany and $1,171 in Japan. Norwegian families would take dubious first place honors, paying a whopping $2,445 every year.
I’ve been commenting on this proposed UN “World Tax” for the past several years. This is nothing new. A couple of points:
First, the UN has always rejected any suggestion of an independent, outside audit of its finances. Once money enters the opaque UN, it becomes completely untraceable. And…
Anyone who belives that a 0.7% World Tax will remain at 0.7% is dreaming. [When the 16th Amendment was being proposed, U.S. citizens were promised that the federal income tax would be capped at a maximum of 1%.]
Gov. Romney would get plenty of votes if he promised to evict the UN from our shores and withdraw from that America-hating, anti-West kleptocracy.
It´s too late to complain: All countries signed Agenda 21 binding agreements, these are as mandatory as the WHO Governance´s A1H1 vaccination orders. We´re done!. Perhaps with the exception of a few “third world” countries, where, it is a tradition that laws which do not obey “common sense” are simply ignored. (And if someone appears down there to enforce it, that someone will be invited to enjoy a tasteful local dinner……and the next thing the enforcer will remember-if he is lucky to survive- is a cataclysmic diarrhea 🙂 )
“gsonline2 says:
June 12, 2012 at 2:14 pm
(thanks to U.N.’s Agenda 21 plan to go around national governments and straight to the gullible citizens).
Ummmmmmmmm….no. The Useless Nations do not have to go around gubermints in the Western world,as they are just as corrupt,crooked,and venile(also a lot of gullible) as the UN.
Do you remember who donated the land for the UN´s building in New York? …Well, think it over.
beesaman says:
June 12, 2012 at 4:22 pm
Simple, just make it law that only democratically elected bodies can pass laws and that they can not delegate those law making powers to unelected institutions or individuals.
That should restrict the evolution of these quangos!
************
The USA has a constitutional clause requiring treaties to be ratified by our Senate before going into effect. That hasn’t prevented the uber-left from insinuating Agenda21 bullbleep into federal programs, which in turn put compliance requirements on states and municipalities.
Somehow the American Revolution’s rallying cry, “Taxation without representation is tyranny!”, has been diluted to the level of homeopathy.
The only solution is to defund the UN and give the location of its headquarters to whatever country wants it — suckers. Others have stated this necessity most eloquently. There is no other possibility. President Romney must begin the process.
gsonline2 says:
June 12, 2012 at 2:14 pm
This is the real fight, and it has been all along. CO2 is nothing now; it’s all about sustainability. And every single company in the U.S. is “doing” sustainability now, along with every city and county government (thanks to U.N.’s Agenda 21 plan to go around national governments and straight to the gullible citizens).
=================
All the links I gave here are now showing 404: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/16/weekly-climate-and-energy-news-roundup-47/#comment-958083
Several States fighting back against Agenda 21.
For example: http://thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/11488-texas-gop-blasts-united-nations-agenda-21
“As the United Nations prepares for its next global conference on “sustainable development” in June, the Texas state GOP recently followed in the footsteps of the Republican National Committee (RNC) by passing a resolution blasting the controversial UN sustainability scheme known as Agenda 21, as well as all of the entities working toward its implementation. Advocates of liberty and national sovereignty celebrated the move as yet another victory in a decades-old battle against the plan.
“According to experts and the state GOP’s resolution, the global scheme represents a significant threat to the U.S. Constitution, the individual rights of Americans, and the institution of private property. And despite never having been ratified by the U.S. Senate, it is being foisted on the people of every state through various organizations including an international non-profit group known as ICLEI, formerly called the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.
“The UN agenda, the Texas resolution states, is: “designed to destroy our fundamental rights and liberties as a people, hitherto enjoyed under our system of just government, in order to transform us from men made in the image of God to men re-made in the image of compelled beings, oppressed, having no acknowledged rights or liberties held inviolate; all designed by the enemies of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in order to reduce us to misery and bondage, without hope or God or natural moral absolutes.”
“As opposition to the UN plan escalates, however, lawmakers and officials across America are increasingly rejecting the highly controversial global program. Dozens of cities, counties, state legislatures, and even the national Republican Party have already started to fight back. …
“The state GOP supports the full restoration of constitutional justice, individual liberty, property rights, and limited government, according to the resolution. As such, “the people of Texas shall remain free religiously, socially, economically, and politically, according to our natural rights and liberties granted to us by God.”
“Those God-given rights, the resolution points out, are guaranteed by the Constitution. So the party resolves to protect them “in order that our fundamental rights and liberties shall be held inviolate forever, standing in opposition to all forms of religious, social, economic, and political globalism as set forth in the United Nations Agenda 21 Program.” As part of the Texas GOP’s official party platform, all Republicans are expected to work toward preserving those rights in the face of UN assaults.”
==========
p.s. I’ve just found it on a different page: http://www.thenewamerican.com/Tech/environment/item/11128texas-gop-blasts-united-nations-agenda-21
Here’s the list of related articles, several counties, if they can do it why not others?:
Related articles:
What are the UN’s Agenda 21 and ICLEI?
Irving, Texas, Becomes Latest City to Drop ICLEI & UN Agenda 21
Texas City Withdraws From ICLEI, UN “Agenda 21”
Tennessee Lawmakers Pass Resolution Blasting UN Agenda 21
Ocean County, New Jersey, Blasts UN Agenda 21 in Resolution
Your Hometown & the United Nations’ Agenda 21
Agenda 21 and the Movement Toward a One-World Govt
New Strategies in the Fight to Stop Agenda 21
2011 Was an Incredible Year as Agenda 21 Becomes a Major Issue
UN Demands $76 Trillion for “Green Technology”
Obama Signs Agenda 21-Related Executive Order
UN Bosses Secretly Plot Global Govt Through “Green Economy” for Rio+20
Oklahoma City Leaves ICLEI but Not Agenda 21
County in Washington Ditches Sustainable Development
Pennsylvania County Rejects Agenda 21
Edmond Oklahoma Dumps Agenda 21
Maryland County Cancels Agenda 21 Participation
UN’s Green Economy May Cost $2.5 Trillion a Year
Ambitious UN Sustainability Conference in Rio to Avoid Climate Talk
Exactly. We are watching for a treaty and tax. So they come in through ICLEI and education where the right to tax already exists. If the city and county and school district super are on board with implementing this agenda (and many are whether they get the broader implications or not), the power to tax is already in place. It’s in your monthly property taxes.
The Un has already announced that education will be their weapon of choice going forward. That’s why the UN makes such a point of emphasizing its local connections to put its agenda in place.
Aurrrrgh!
That being said, I don’t see what everyone is so upset about. These people’s you-know-what is not brown like ours is. /sarc
We are not worthy of licking the soles of their feet. /sarc
So what if they are not elected? We are pathetic fools, and they don’t need our stinking votes. /sarc
They don’t need our ideas, our insights, our hopes, our dreams, or even our lives. /sarc
We should spread their good news! Tell your neighbors! Tell your family! The vastly superior have arrived! /sarc.
We should spread the news like Paul Revere. Danger is coming. /No Sarc at all.
p.p.s. This site might have even more on what’s happening in different areas in the US, but I haven’t found their filing system yet, here’s another: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/11592-alabama-adopts-first-official-state-ban-on-un-agenda-21
From a news item: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/south-america/item/11676-media-hypes-un-fear-mongering-before-rio%2020-sustainability-summit
I think the financial meltdown looming will embolden the socialists for centralized planning in all areas of life.
This is so DOA that I am not in the least bit worried.
I mean really, if congress won’t pass Kyoto, what are the chances this would ever get through – absolutely zero.
But I do appreciate that CFACT is getting the message out there.
Globalism will soon be deader than a door nail. UN = League of Nations. Bye, bye!
Let’s see:
Desire to “contract” “over-consumption,” a.k.a. lower true incomes and wipe out prosperity among those they are jealous of and among who do not worship their BS (SUV drivers, etc). Check.
“Beyond GDP” so they can have a false pseudo-academic composite index from flexible fudge factors when implementing policies lowering GDP and harming the economy, to deny the harm. Check.
Desire to eliminate international competition which is the greatest barrier to the standard “frog in boiling water” trick of gradually expanding taxation and of building dominance of the political class over the economic class (reducing the number of individuals who move up by free enterprise and increasing the portion who must do so by sucking up in politically correct ways)? Check.
Desire to stop nuclear power (amongst the most hardcore not really because the long-term radioactivity of mere thousands of tons of manmade radioisotopes in waste compares to 40 trillion tons of uranium, etc. in Earth’s crust, nor the <=~ 0.002 mSv/yr from nuclear power to such as 5+ mSv/yr variation in natural background radiation between various countries, but because they fear its potential for massive industrial-scale energy supporting growth of human civilization). Check.
Desire to strangle the baby of new scientific and technological advancement, including biomedical and agricultural (even when opposition to advancing high-yield agriculture actually means more land requirements and less able to be spared for nature). Check.
In principle, someone being an opponent on one of these matters does not mean they have to be so on all. Amongst individuals, there are some exceptions, of course. But it is almost convenient how often the most hardcore activists fall into step as opponents with so little for redeeming features. There are two potential future paths for mankind: one favoring true science and its heritage for promoting material advancement, the other favoring a foundation of dishonesty to promote stagnation and decline.
Many of the modern watermelons would be worse than the old communists, if they ever gain full power over time: There would not be shortage of societal prosperity and material advancement by accident or incompetence but by direct intent, outright desiring to stop "over-consumption" as a direct ideological goal in and of itself, not only seeking to reslice and redistribute the pie of material wealth like energy generation but to make it smaller instead of larger (and what is defined as "over-consumption" can get increasingly more limited over time as ideological indoctrination progresses). If they wield power, their potential is more dangerous than political corruption centuries ago. Someone who abuses power and steals for personal gain is wrong in falling to such temptations, but worse is someone who will harm even beyond any such direct personal reasons. A thief is less evil than someone who would try to bring down prosperity as a goal in itself.
While mere casuals often just get duped, not meaning to support dishonesty and who they are truly supporting, the most hardcore activists of the CAGW movement are frequently essentially merely an outgrowth of a broader, more fundamental anti-growth ideological movement. If too many people lost belief in CAGW, they'd just look for another excuse to accomplish the same goals (although it would be a major setback).
Funny how no one calls for an army. Guess men today are just going to stand by and watch it happen to every person who helped build a great world.
Robin says:
June 12, 2012 at 2:47 pm
And then there’s the “Beyond-GDP Principle” being pushed by all these UN agencies and other groups.
Now how on earth can we afford all these bureaucrats in a world based on a global economy that “recognizes the inherent limits and distorting effects of using GDP as a measure of progress and welfare. Policy goals and monitoring need to be guided by integrated measures on environmental, social, human and economic well-being, taking into account diverse interpretations of human welfare.”
——————————————————————————————
What is revealing is that while these lobbyists deplore GDP as an inadequate measure of well-being, preferring ‘triple bottom lines’ and similar nonsense which elevates their preferences to a universal good, when it comes to cold hard cash they are on GDP like white on rice. So, they demand X% of a nation’s GDP be allocated to foreign aid, or saving the planet, or whatever they consider to be important.
This has a double-good result for them, as the ‘human development’ indices and the like that they promote so strongly often include quite poor countries as having a good quality of life (Cuba often pops up, for example). But, since that is not going to fund their extravagant lifestyles and projects, they seamlessly revert to GDP as a measure of national well-being (ie capacity to contribute) when it suits them.
Oh, and thanks for the Monckton clip posted above. It’s quite long (nearly an hour), but even if you only have time to listen to part of it, it’s well worth checking out. He summarises the issues around the growth of supra-national bodies like the EU and the UN with his usual clarity and compelling insight. And, he says he’s going to Rio and will be reporting back (hopefully a post here included) and gives WUWT a good plug as well.
@wayne says:
June 12, 2012 at 6:11 pm
Funny how no one calls for an army. Guess men today are just going to stand by and watch it happen to every person who helped build a great world.
*********************************************************************
People who have reasonably comfortable lives, rarely take up arms.