Tuesday, December 15, 2015
Seduced by Sustainable Development
The Environmental Protection Agency is willing to break the law and circumvent the U.S. Constitution to push policies that indirectly and directly support Sustainable Development. The City of Murrieta is willing to attack their mayor and remove him from his position because he dares to vote against Sustainable Development. Riverside County's State Senator Jeff Stone hides and runs when asked about his abuse of government power in the name of Sustainable Development (and to line his own pocket). Cities are clamoring to abide by the concept, willing to whore out their cities for the promise of State and federal monies while convinced they have no legal choice. High density housing is going up in the name of Sustainable Development. Private Property is being seized in the name of Sustainable Development. And what is the worst thing about it all is not just that it is just another scheme of leveling (as Samuel Adams called it), or a redistribution of wealth (as socialists and communists call it), but that it all comes from a United Nations treaty that was never ratified by the U.S. Senate, and was written with the intent to create a system of global governance based on the very leftist ideology we fought against, and defeated, during the Cold War.
The United Nations introduced Agenda 21, which later became known as Sustainable Development, and now Agenda 2030, in 1992 at the Rio Earth Summit. The global plan of action was supposed to be voluntary and non-binding, and was heralded as a plan that is designed to save the Earth from the parasites it is infested with, called humanity.
Darkness always reveals itself as an angel of light.
As local governments pass bills implementing Sustainable Development, the people are left out of the equation, and fail to recognize the property-rights-eroding policies of the agenda. The reality is that the plan is to expand government control over private property use, to force government into the equation regarding humanity's interactions with society and the environment. Federal grant stipulations, comprehensive planning and regional Sustainable Development plans us being used to enforce the U.N.'s desires. Ultimately, in the end, Sustainable Development has nothing to do with the environment, and everything to do with control. The policy ultimately proposes massive wealth and property transfers as the solution to reducing poverty and environmental degradation, creating broad control over economic systems, in an attempt to create the very same social equity sought by communism over much of the last century.
Implementation is encouraged by grant money, non-governmental organizations, and various federal agencies connected to environmental lobbies and organizations. Policy is guided by bureaucratic consensus, rather than genuine community desires. Studies and surveys have been produced in a manner to be misleading, provide financial or ideological incentives, force the issue through zoning regulations, conservation easements, and environmental corridors.
Seizure of land control by government agencies, especially by federal agencies, is unconstitutional. Sustainable Development is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution, just as sharia law is incompatible with the U.S. Constitution. Private ownership of property is among the early central rights that were among the most treasured by early Americans. While those that support Sustainable Development claim they do so in order to protect the people, the economy, and the environment, the true nature of the concept is control. The central planners are using universally friendly terms, but the promises are empty, and the end-result can be nothing other than bondage for humanity at the hands of an elite few.
While "environmentally friendly" programs claim to be smart, open, safe, and sustainable, they are in truth land-grabs, and freedom killers.
-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary
Contribute to our efforts HERE