A recent editorial questioned the threat posed to individual liberty and property rights by the United Nations Agenda 21.
A wolf is a wolf regardless of what guise it assumes. In California, we are inundated by a tsunami of regulations imposed by unaccountable agencies all acting under the premise of working for the “greater good.” The problem comes from who defines “what is the greater good.”
The first half of the 20th century was dominated by “progressive” schemes to serve the greater good of humanity. Some involved the involuntary sterilization of “undesirable populations,” such as the very poor and minorities in the United States. Virtually anyone who was a self-described community leader fell in line and supported such reprehensible policies. Today, most decent people feel shame that such policies were implemented in their name, “for the greater good.”
Agenda 21 policies manifest themselves primarily through the myriad government agencies which vary in their level of authority and lack of direct accountability to voters.
The Local Government Council out of Sacramento has an agenda, as does the local county version, to promote various environmental programs designed to restrict your ability to use your property. Included are restrictions on your ability to subdivide your farm or ranch, water usage, transportation (cars are bad as are single family homes, air conditioning, barbecues, fireplaces, etc.) or to generate pollution as they define pollution (operating a lawn mower).
It promotes walking, living in tiny apartments in crowded neighborhoods (you and I, not “them”) and being forced to ride a bus or a bike whether you like it or not. The weapons of choice are city and county planning documents and regional agencies that regulate human activity, such as the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Air Pollution Control District or the Integrated Waste Management Authority. All propose regulations with force of law (like banning plastic bags without a vote of the people); none of their board members are directly accountable to voters in a specific jurisdiction.
Its mission statements include provisions for promoting “social equity,” code for wealth redistribution, as it determines, not you or I. Mostly it involves denying Americans the ability to maintain their quality of life by forced implementation of what they describe as “sustainable living” policies. The friction occurs when its utopian vision intrudes on your personal choice on how to live your life, denying you choices even if you are willing to pay for them.
How serious is the threat to liberty? The State of Alabama, as reported in Investors Business Daily (June 8, 2012), passed legislation prohibiting implementation of policies that “infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in or traceable to Agenda 21.”
California has more than 300 regulatory agencies, boards and commissions that make rules, impose fees, fines and taxes with little or no public accountability.
Agenda 21 is well under way here, but at least other parts of America are beginning to awaken to the threat to their liberty.
Al Fonzi is a retired Army Lt. Colonel and career intelligence officer with more than 30 years of service. He is a self-described conservative and active in several political organizations. Fonzi first moved to Atascadero in 1972.For the complete article see the 10-03-2012 issue.
Click here to purchase an electronic version of the 10-03-2012 paper.