From Rio + 20: The future we dread

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.

 

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

140 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
June 12, 2012 6:28 pm

markx says:
“But, they will NEVER give up, to much power and position at stake. They will regroup and do it all again.”
You’re correct. People’s careers, professional reputations, livelihoods, and (in all truthfulness) belief systems (i.e., faith) have been built around the false deity of “environmentalism.” Some know it’s a convenient excuse for something more (a concentration of power), but the majority have consumed the Flavor Aid and actually accept unreservedly that their “supportive and clearly sympathetic” actions are “saving the planet.” If such beliefs actually had merit, then these people would have been mythical with their ability to prevent Nature from allowing that K-T boundary… transgression from occurring about 65 ± 0.5 mya.
Humanity’s recent hubris before Earth’s humbling antiquity has never been so blatantly displayed as it is with the ironically entitled “Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development” or “The Future We Want.” In the timelessly-wise words of Lincoln, “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg.” Political correctness and its insensate need to re-purpose words has created a generation (or three now) of conveniently non-critical thinking, zealots (a/k/a non-governmental organizations) lead by Jim Jones-like religious figures, shamelessly masquerading as “friends” of the Earth and (on occasion) “climate scientists.”
I mean… I’m just saying… you know?

AJB
June 12, 2012 6:28 pm

DR says, June 12, 2012 at 5:53 pm

I think the financial meltdown looming will embolden the socialists for centralized planning in all areas of life.

Yep, stage management is a long drawn out process but timing is everything.

Louis Hooffstetter
June 12, 2012 6:30 pm

Let’s review: How well did the UN deal with Israel, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Bosnia, Rwanda, Somalia, Congo, East Timor, Sierra Leon, Darfur, Iran, & now Syria?
How well did they administer the Oil for Food program?
How’s the IPCC working out?
Any organization that has proven its incompetence as many times as the UN needs to be scrapped. Scrap the UN and start over.

June 12, 2012 6:32 pm

“Otherwise Rio+20 could easily trap them in a future we dread…”
There are reasons why ~ 80% of Republicans have balked at climate change. Here I report my comments at hotair that explained why, though, some Republican politicians, notably Chris Christie, have held to the leftist view. First:

Yes, and of all his RINOisms, the most disturbing is his aggressive pro-climate change stance, as late as just a few months ago.
In the face of polling that shows Republicans now reject the fear-mongering leftists on AGW (a Pew poll shows only 19% of Repubs believe in man-made global warming), it’s one thing to take a kind a non-committal stance, but Christie puts his nose up at his own party, not much different than Huntsman…

Mary of L.A. replied to me: “Bummer! I didn’t know that. 🙁 I wonder how he came to believe so steadfastly in global warming?” My reply:

A few years ago, more than half of the Repub politicians were apparently believers in global warming… I mean climate change.
But then the Climategate emails were exposed (with the likes of Hide the Decline), and key pillars of the warmist argument fell (the hockey stick, and the cause & effect CO2 / temperature correlation). Everyday Republican voters saw and were moved by these new developments, but many Republican politicians, stuck in perhaps formulaic ways of thinking or acting, or (too) involved in campaigns, haven’t paid attention, or at least, they haven’t followed suit.
BUT, -most- Republican politicians, if they were former warmists, -have- repudiated their previous view, or modified their view to be more centrist, or at least been very low key about their pro-warmist views. BUT BUT not Huntsman, not Christie. Maybe Christie really believes it. Yet there’s been plenty of time, and what makes him, then, like Hunstman, so much smarter than 80% of the Republican voters?
The thing that was instrumental in changing my view was this 3 minute 2007 excerpt from The Great Global Warming Swindle, which shows algor repeating the key ipcc deception on CO2, see it, share it, promote it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK_WyvfcJyg

kramer
June 12, 2012 7:12 pm

I’ve read countless times that wealth redistribution, resource allocation and management, and convergence of national standards of living are part of AGW solutions. Not surprised at all over what I just read here. The calls for many of these things can be traced back to the 1969 book “resources and man” by the National Academy of Sciences. It probably goes farther back, that’s as far as I’ve got…
Rockefeller funding and influence seems to be tied to this green utopian movement.

Aussie Luke Warm
June 12, 2012 7:24 pm

Can’t wait to see if Australia’s imbecilic Labor/Greens government will push back on this one.

NikFromNYC
June 12, 2012 7:28 pm

This cultural virus still wants to kill its host. It offers to tax us, merely, in unworkable ways, so indeed I detect the last great gasp of green financial speculation prior to the upcoming conservative landslide in both national and local US elections. Giving women the vote has permanently skewed politics to the idealistic left due to the foolhardy urge to ban abortion by the entire right wing machine, so there’s a whopping 50% of voters whose adult freedom to screw up is threatened enough to cause all of us progressive political disasters as backlashes against such Puritanism. So Romney gets eight years followed by another greenie fanatic, and the EPA and useless DEA are joined by new UN agendas. Imagine a world in which women scoff at fancy shoes, artificially scarce diamond rings and who study the Old Testement all weekend. Denial of human nature on both sides creates a culture war turns government into a cancer that keeps growing quite disastrously. Local tea party politics is more libertarian than Puritanical though, so the horizon is a bright one.

June 12, 2012 7:34 pm

Johanna-now that the schemers have been forced to acknowledge due to long term tragic experiments that central planned economies with a large govt presence are not as productive, the solution is apparently for all of us peons to get over that type of prosperity. Control is all.
Those were just a few of the charming Green Economy Principles being used.
Plus don’t forget the UN issued its first ever World Happiness Report in 2012. We should really beware of all Jeffrey Sachs initiatives. That pulls in Broadband too through UNESCO.

Darren Potter
June 12, 2012 7:45 pm

There is a very easy and simple way to solve United Nations’ Rio+20 Sustainable Development Conference agenda and any other United Nations’ agendas. Cut off all American support (funding, “peace” keeping, aid) and kick the United Nations out of the United States of America.
Send the U.N. packing!

neill
June 12, 2012 7:49 pm

You may think, in your WUWT cocoon, that you’re making a real difference. Easy to do.
On Yahoo (yahoo, not google), one has to fully spell out ‘churchil’, to get 1, yes just one, reference to Winston Churchill.
Get out there!!! Fight THE POWER!!!!!!!!!!!! Our history is being erased before our blinded eyes……

Mark Bofill
June 12, 2012 7:56 pm

The real hell of this is, it actually defeats its alleged purpose. I care about the environment. But I will be damned if I’m going to be taxed into oblivion so another parasitic bureaucracy can thrive, or permit my kids to have their money funneled away for god knows what purposes in third world countries. These guys are thieves, pure and simple, and people who really care about the environment should be up in arms that these thieves are hijacking their cause. I’ll have no part of it, except to fight it.

OssQss
June 12, 2012 7:59 pm

Hummm, seems some things never change over the years . . . . . . .

Chris Riley
June 12, 2012 8:12 pm

If I were the King of the World I would cancel the passport of every last attendee about mid-way through the conference. The attendees could then crawl into the rainforest and live out the rest of their lives in the style they have in mind for the rest of us.

Eric Gisin
June 12, 2012 8:14 pm

The proper response from western governments would be: “If this document is released, we will cut all UN funding”. Move the UN to Cuba and let the third world fund it.

timebandit
June 12, 2012 8:17 pm

One of the chief architects of all this is Helen Clark …ex P.M. of New Zealand and now boss of the United Nations Development Programmeand. She is well known for her belief in Fabian Socialism… thats socialism by stealth to you and me…Just remember, all the communists did not just disappear when the Berlin Wall came down… they morphed into melons…

OssQss
June 12, 2012 8:22 pm

Turn this boat around, , , Please !
Good night >

June 12, 2012 8:22 pm

Darren Potter says:
“Send the U.N. packing!”
THAT is the ONLY answer! Anything less, and those America-hating kleptocrats will rule us all.
Kick the bastards off our shores, dump our membership in the UN, and only deal with countries that appreciate our generosity.

Dreadnought
June 12, 2012 8:54 pm

Let’s hope that this whole Rio+20 shin-dig takes a long high dive into a small dry barrel.

DirkH
June 12, 2012 8:57 pm

Smokey says:
June 12, 2012 at 8:22 pm

Darren Potter says:
“Send the U.N. packing!”
THAT is the ONLY answer! Anything less, and those America-hating kleptocrats will rule us all.
Kick the bastards off our shores, dump our membership in the UN, and only deal with countries that appreciate our generosity.

It’s easier to bug the building when it’s on your territory. Who cares whether another 10,000 fruit loops run around in NYC? Would you prefer them to cook up their ridiculous schemes in Brussels?

rbateman
June 12, 2012 9:08 pm

Taxing and seizing funds?
Sounds like a plan to pick every pocket on a Global scale.
Only Russia, China, India, ME, BRIC are not going to play along.
The West is a different story, having already thrown itself on the Derivative Sword and outsourced itself to the 4 winds.

Merovign
June 12, 2012 9:27 pm

The same people (and their philosophical progeny) have had the same solution for every new problem since Plato, and they wouldn’t be so meek as to let the fact that it’s never once worked change their minds!
In other words, new battlefield, old battle.

Merovign
June 12, 2012 9:28 pm

DirkH: They won’t stay if we stop paying them. And we *should* stop paying them to steal from us, abuse us, and generally act like spoiled brats on our dime.

Richard Day
June 12, 2012 9:37 pm

All G20 countries should cut their UN funding to $1.00. Much hilarity ensues.

Joe Prins
June 12, 2012 9:48 pm

Page 269: 24. International Organization for the Protection and Welfare of Squirrels –
IOPWSquirrels
Chapter V paragraph 94
Mountains
We recognize that mountains are highly vulnerable to global changes such as climate
change [ changes that affect not only the human population, but the many Species
of wild animals that inhabit the mountains, some of them of a vital importance and
value for the life of mountains- such as Squirrels, which are credited with
maintaining and developing the forests for millions of years by burying the nuts
and planting the trees – International Organization for the protection and Welfare
of Squirrels] and are often home to communities including of indigenous people , who
have developed sustainable uses of their resources yet are often marginalized, sometimes”
Thought I would actually read this “future we want…” Being a bit of a sceptic….maybe someone exagerates? I am now convinced. Squirrels are vital to all. Please take my YEARLY contribution of $ 1,211.00 and help the squirrels./sarc