A Critical Analysis of Agenda 21 – United Nations Program of Action
To some people, Agenda 21 is an evil plan for the further creation, and control, of a world government, by the non-elected bureaucrats at the United Nations. To other people, Agenda 21 is a just well-meaning, harmless, non-binding set of recommendations, created by a group of men, and women, at the United Nations, that care about the preservation of the world’s environment. Before debating the true intentions, or effects, of Agenda 21, we must first understand the details of this document. In can be difficult, and confusing, for the average person who hears about Agenda 21, to really understand it, through a simple search. The program is hundreds of pages, and not too many people will take the time to read all of it. An internet search of UN Agenda 21 will lead to a lot of information, but much of it is without reference to the actual document, thus seemingly just an opinion. I have took the time to read the document myself, and will chronicle my findings, and thoughts, here. (It should be noted that I am not going into this examination completely ignorant of Agenda 21. I have, in the past, written critically about events taking place in my local community, that are connected to United Nations Agenda 21.) The full document is 351 pages, however Agenda 21 is much more complex than just what is written in this action plan, due to the fact that there are numerous other resolutions referenced, and recommended, for further implementation, such as the Healthy Cities Programme of WHO, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and many more.
Let us start with the front cover of the hard copy version of Agenda 21 (picture below), which reads:
“EARTH SUMMIT – AGENDA 21 – THE UNITED NATIONS PROGRAMME OF ACTION FROM RIO”.
|Agenda 21, Front Cover|
By using the words “programme of action”, the creators of this document are informing the reader that this is a plan, or program, that they intend to have performed, or put into action, and not just some ideas that they hope for people to consider.Agenda 21 is broken up into forty chapters, divided into three sections, and nearly every part of this document revolves around the idea of creating, what they refer to as, “a new global partnership for sustainable development.” (Chapter 1, Section 1). Though the adjective “sustainable” is used numerous times, and in conjunction with various other pleasant sounding nouns, to create ideas like “sustainable livelihood” (Ch. 3, Sec. 4-a), and “sustainable city networks” (Ch. 7, Sec. 20-d), throughout Agenda 21, what is meant by “sustainable” is never really made clear, or specifically defined.The opening preamble of Agenda 21 alludes to the idea that the term “sustainable development” means an “integration of environment and development concerns”, which, according to the United Nations, will lead to “the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future.” (Ch. 1, Sec. 1) This sounds nice, but again, is not specific, and could mean anything.As the reader progresses through the document, a more sinister, controlling, agenda seems to emerge, that is ingrained in this plan, but it is masked with nice sounding phrases, and friendly language. The United Nations claims to want to create a sort-of utopia, where the environment is clean, nobody is hungry, everyone has a home, etc., but to do this, they need to have the power to create laws, or recommendations, that effect changes in your local community.
Overcoming ConfrontationThe United Nations appears to view elected, local, public representatives, as a threat, because these representatives have the power to make, or change, laws, thus having the power to interrupt the Agenda. In Chapter 2, it is made clear “for the success of this new partnership, it is important to overcome confrontation and to foster a climate of genuine cooperation and solidarity.” [emphasis added]. In other words, for this plan to work, there can’t be any conflict of opposing ideas, or confrontation, and everyone must be in a state of undivided opinion, or solidarity. A critical thinker, at this point, may question why there ever would be “confrontation”, to such a wonderful plan to save the world. Who would oppose it, and why? Let’s move on.
The main goal of Agenda 21 is to completely change the way your local government operates, or in the words of the Agenda:
“The overall objective is to…restructure the decision-making process…” (Ch. 8, Sec. 3)
To further show the contempt that the authors of Agenda 21 have for local, elected government, they make the claim that “unilateral policy actions continue to endanger the functioning of an open multilateral trading system” (Ch 2. Sec. 8), which means that countries that make their own decisions, unilaterally, about trade, are dangerous, and interfere with the Agenda. Democracy, where people debate things back and forth, and get to vote, is too much of a hassle, and inefficient, when it comes to implementing a plan for world government. That is why Agenda 21 wants countries to “remove the barriers to progress caused by bureaucratic inefficiencies.” (Ch. 2, Sec. 37-a)
One way the Agenda plans on overriding, or limiting, the sovereignty of local democratic government, is to blur, or even erase, the existing boundaries that separate cities, municipalities, states, countries, etc., and create new, or strengthen existing, regional boundaries. These regions will have their own regional government, whose power will supersede that of your elected governments. And, of course, these regional governments are not, and will not be, democratically elected.
The reason given for creating, and empowering, these regional governments is explained in Chapter 7, Section 14:
“Some metropolitan areas extend over the boundaries of several political and/or administrative entities (counties and municipalities) even though they conform to a continuous urban system. In many cases this political heterogeneity hinders the implementation of comprehensive environmental management programmes”
Again, the creators of Agenda 21 emphasize their contempt for the differences of opinion, or “political heterogeneity”, functioning within the current forms of democratically elected “political entities”. They are looking to have regional governments make the decisions, to implement Agenda 21, without interference.
Encouraging the validity of these regional governments will be brought about through seminars, put on in your local community, sponsored by supporters of Agenda 21.
“Encouraging regional seminars and, possibly, the development of regional centres of expertise.” (Ch. 8, Sec. 34-b)
Already existing city, county, state, and country borders, will be ignored, and transcended, while new “transboundary areas” will be created:
“Adopting integrated approaches to sustainable development at the regional level, including transboundary areas” (Ch. 8, Sec. 5-e)
As witnessed in every form of democratic government, at every level, from local, state, to federal, to achieve full solidarity, democratically, where everyone gets a vote, is impossible. Naturally, every individual has their own idea of how things should work. This is why the United Nations is not a democratic organization, and does not plan on bringing in their plan for the 21st century, Agenda 21, democratically.
Decrease In Living Standard
Another idea that seems to emerge from this document is that the cause of the majority of the earth’s current economic, and environmental, problems is the high standard of living, referred to as an “unsustainable pattern of consumption and production”, currently enjoyed by the inhabitants of developed countries, such as America:
“the major cause of the continued deterioration of the global environment is the unsustainable pattern of consumption and production, particularly in industrialized countries, which is a matter of grave concern, aggravating poverty and imbalances.” (Ch. 4, Sec. 3)
“The current decline in biodiversity is largely the result of human activity and represents a serious threat to human development. ” (Ch. 15, Sec. 2)
To fix these problems, the United Nations plans to reduce the standard of living in the industrialized countries, by forcing a change in lifestyles of people living in these areas, through “environmental taxation” (Ch. 8, Sec. 36-a), and regulations, and by transferring wealth, resources, and technology, from these developed countries, to developing countries. In the agenda’s own words, the plan is to ensure the “building up of economic…capabilities for the efficient use and further development of
transferred technology” to developing countries.” (Ch. 34, Sec. 4) This build up of wealth will be taken from industrialized countries, lowering our standard of living, which will create, what the planners refer to as a “reorientation of existing…consumption patterns that have developed in industrial societies.” (Ch. 4, Sec. 15)
To ensure this reorientation of production, and consumption, Agenda 21 wants to control all trade barriers, and remove any restrictions, to give an advantage to poor countries exporting their goods. This “removal of existing distortions in international trade”, as it is referred to in the Agenda, as well as the strict environmental regulations that are to be placed on developed countries, will cause a decrease in wages, as well as a vast increase in prices, and thus a lower standard of living, on the inhabitants of these industrialized nations.
The Agenda’s planners make it clear that they are fully aware that there will be price increases, as a result of this plan being implemented, and are worried that individual democratically elected governments might try to protect themselves, and their constituents, from this increase in prices.
“Seek to avoid the use of trade restrictions or distortions as a means to offset differences in cost arising from differences in environmental standards and regulations” (Ch. 2, Sec. 22-e)
Important to note, the rules, and regulations, will be selectively enforced, and be used to bring about this lowering of the standard of living of industrialized countries. The same environmental regulations that the United Nations wants placed on industrialized nations, will not be placed on developing countries:
“…account should be taken of the fact that environmental standards valid for developed countries may have unwarranted social and economic costs in developing countries.” (Ch 2, Sec. 20)
The planners know that local elected politicians may feel pressure from their constituents to do something about the rising cost of living, as a result of compliance with Agenda 21’s new standards and regulations This is why, as previously discussed, the decision making power, or sovereignty, has to be removed from your local elected representatives, and given to governments, such as regional boards, that are selected by an elite group, instead of elected by the people, thus being “predictable”, and will, ultimately, move in “solidarity” with Agenda 21.
One goal of those implementing Agenda 21 is to convince you that these changes, including the lowering of your standard of living, is a great thing, and is being done for the benefit of the world.As they lower your standard of living, the planners intend to sell you on the idea that a decrease in your standard of living is good for you, by a clever technique of re-defining what it means to be wealthy, or prosperous:
“Consideration should also be given to the present concepts of economic growth and the need for new concepts of wealth and prosperity which allow higher standards of living through changed lifestyles and are less dependent on the Earth’s finite resources and more in harmony with the Earth’s carrying capacity.” [emphasis added] (Ch. 4, Sec. 11)
Governments will team up with corporations to propagandize these new concepts of wealth and prosperity, and environmentally-friendly lifestyle changes, through various forms of media.
“Governments, in cooperation with industry and other relevant groups, should encourage expansion of…environmentally related product information programmes designed to assist consumers to make informed choices.” (Ch. 4, Sec. 21)
The propaganda will also makes its way into schools, and universities:
“Emphasizing interdisciplinary and integrative approaches in the curricula of schools and
technical, vocational and university training” (Ch. 10, Sec. 16-a)
Rational Water Use
Propaganda, in the form of “public awareness” campaigns, and “educational programmes”, will be used to persuade people that having access to less of a resource, that they are normally used to having in abundance, like water, is good for the Earth. The planners believe that industrialized nations use too much water, and want government to work out “schemes” that will force people to use less water, like an increase in the cost of water use:
“Promotion of schemes for rational water use through public awareness-raising,
educational programmes and levying of water tariffs and other economic instruments” (Ch. 18, Sec. 12-g)
The endorsers of this plan believe that water should only be used in the “satisfaction of basic needs”, and “beyond these requirements…water users should be charged appropriately.” (Ch. 18, Sec. 8)
What does Agenda 21 consider to be the “satisfaction of basic needs”?
By using the phrase “Earth’s carrying capacity”, in Chapter Four, Section Eleven, the planners reveal their belief that there is a certain number of humans that this Earth can sustain, and express how they want to change society to be more in “harmony” with this arbitrary number they they have come up with, but do not actually reveal, in this particular document.
The Agenda also proclaims that there is a specific number of people, that can live on a specific size of land, to be in accordance with sustainable development. This theory is referred to as having a “sustainable man/land ratio”, in the Agenda. (Ch. 14, Sec. 3) Specific numbers, in regards to what a proper man to land ratio would entail, are not mentioned in Agenda 21.
All of Chapter Five, “Demographic Dynamics and Sustainability”, is about how the large number of humans, or “the growth of world population”, is effecting the planet, and what they think needs to be done about it. The planners want governments to include an agenda for human population control in all policies related to sustainable development, or a “full integration of population concerns into national planning, policy and decision-making processes” (Ch 5, Sec. 17):
“The human dimensions are key elements to consider in this intricate set of relationships and they should be adequately taken into consideration in comprehensive policies for sustainable development…Population policy should also recognize the role played by human beings in environmental and development concerns” (Ch. 5, Sec. 3)
If people could just pick up and leave the areas that are being effected by Agenda 21, it would hinder the ultimate plan, because of this, the United Nations sees the control of human movement, as an essential part of carrying out Agenda 21. The document urges countries to consider “population policies and programmes” (Ch. 5, Sec. 17) which should “address the consequences of population growth built into population momentum.” The United Nations feels that population momentum, or people having the ability to move, is hurting the earth, therefore they feel the need to create regulations to control this.
Agenda 21 wants to make us “less dependent on the Earth’s finite resources”. They will do this not by persuading us to buy hybrid vehicles, use less heat, or to walk more, but to increase the cost of energy, through fines and regulations, which will force us to change our lifestyles.
The planners believe that cars are hurting the Earth, and want to use propaganda techniques, similar to the ones previously discussed in the “Changed Lifestyles” section, to sell you on the idea that driving is bad, and taking public transportation is good:
“Raise public awareness of the environmental impacts of transport and travel behaviour through mass media campaigns and support for non-governmental and community initiatives promoting the use of non-motorized transport, shared driving and improved traffic safety measures;” (Ch. 7, Sec. 54-b)
Agenda 21 encourages countries to change laws, and regulations, in zoning, and development, to encourage public transportation use, thus discouraging private vehicle use. Walking, and bicycling will also be encouraged, through zoning, and development, changes, by the addition of special lanes on roadways. The Agenda uses pleasant sounding language to tell us how they would like to get us out of our vehicles, and into public transportation. Here are a few examples, all from Chapter 7, Section 52:
- “Integrate land-use and transportation planning to encourage development patterns that reduce transport demand;”
- “Adopt urban-transport programmes favouring high-occupancy public transport”
- “Encourage non-motorized modes of transport by providing safe cycleways and footways in urban and suburban centres in countries, as appropriate; “
All of this sounds nice, but you have to think about it logically. What will make someone give up the convenience of using their own vehicle, and use public transportation? This decision will surely entail a sacrifice of some sort. If taking a bus was better than taking a car, there would be much more people on the bus, and a lot less people in their cars, on the road, than there are now. Giving up your personal vehicle, and relying on public transportation, requires much inconvenience, and not many people are willing to make that sacrifice. This is why the Agenda plans to use laws, and regulations, that will force you out of your vehicle.
When the cost of owning a vehicle is too high, you are forced to use public transportation, which will limit you in your options of work, thus lowering your standard of living. This is just one example, of many that can be provided, of how regulations, and laws, that result from Agenda 21, will impact your everyday life.
Any movement of population that takes place will be highly controlled, and directed, by government regulations. These so-called population policies, and programs, encouraged by the United Nations, will be used “to bring about demographic transition” (Ch. 5, Sec. 16), as it is referred to in Agenda 21, to reflect more of what the planners have envisioned.
The agenda plans to “expand areas under forest and tree cover,” (Ch. 11, Sec. 12-a) by forcing people out of their quiet rural homes, and into crowded cities:
“As appropriate, they should also concentrate on activities aimed at facilitating the transition from rural to urban lifestyles and settlement patterns” (Ch. 7, Sec. 19)
This forced changed will be brought about by causing an increase in the cost of water, sanitation, and other essentials, to higher income neighborhoods, thus making it too expensive to live in these areas:
“Reducing subsidies on, and recovering the full costs of, environmental and other services of high standard (e.g. water supply, sanitation, waste collection, roads, telecommunications) provided to higher income neighbourhoods;” (Ch. 7, Sec. 16-ci)
People will be forced into, what the Agenda refers to as, “human settlement” areas, which will help transition these populations to new living areas, where your “resource needs, waste production, and ecosystem health” will be controlled by government:
“In formulating human settlements policies, account should be taken of resource needs, waste production and ecosystem health.” (Ch. 5, Sec. 29)
The eventual goal of this forced population movement into human settlement areas is to get rid of private property, and have all land accessible, and owned, collectively, by the community:
“ensure access to land to all households and, where appropriate, the encouragement of communally and collectively owned and managed land.” (Ch. 7, Sec. 28)
Even with a successful human settlement policy for the world, there would still be too many people on Earth for the United Nations to control, or to live under “sustainable development”, therefore Agenda 21 finds it necessary to reduce the world’s population. Reducing the number of people that are “dependency burdens”, or unable to sustain themselves, and no longer useful to society, such as babies, and the elderly, seems to be the targeted groups marked for culling, by the planners.
“An assessment should be made of the implications of the age structure of the population on resource demand and dependency burdens, ranging from educational expenses for the young to health care and support for the elderly, and on household income generation. ” (Ch. 5, Sec. 22)
One way that Agenda 21 looks to push their program for de-population, is under the guise of “women’s rights”:
“Population policies and programmes should be considered, with full recognition of women’s rights.” [emphasis added] (Ch. 5, Sec. 17)
Convincing women to have less children, or hopefully no children at all, is part of the grand plan of Agenda 21. Having all nations recognize a woman’s right to birth control, including abortion, is a main goal of Agenda 21, in terms of population control, though not explicitly stated in that manner. The terms “birth control”, and “abortion”, are not actually used, however these concepts are alluded to by recommendations that “reproductive health programmes and services, should…enable women and men to fulfil their personal aspirations in terms of family size”, (Ch. 5, Sec. 16) as well as other recommendations that:
- “ensure that women and men have the same right to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children” (Ch. 3, Sec. 8-j)
- “population/environment programmes must enable women to mobilize themselves to alleviate their burden.” [emphasis added] (Ch. 5, Sec. 48)
As previously stated, the elderly are considered “dependency burdens”, for the “resource demand” they require, due to their need for “health care and support”, according to Chapter 5, Section 22. Keeping the elderly alive requires resources, that the planners feel could be used for better purposes. The only thing that gets in the way of just letting the elderly die, and saving these resources, is the family members, who love their relative, and want everything to be done to keep them alive. This is why Agenda 21 purposes “institutional changes” that would strip the family from having the right to decide on their elderly relative’s fate:
“Proposals should be developed for local, national and international population/environment
programmes in line with specific needs for achieving sustainability. Where appropriate, institutional changes must be implemented so that old-age security does not entirely depend on input from family members.” [emphasis added] (Ch. 5, Sec. 56)
It will not only be the young, the elderly, and women, that will have the the United Nations involved with their health care, but Agenda 21 has a goal to achieve “Health For All” (Ch. 6, Sec 8). This is another pleasant sounding term, that is never really defined, but is alluded to in Chapter 6, Section 3, as the idea that the United Nations wants everyone to have:
“a safe water supply…sanitation…a safe food supply…proper nutrition…promotion of immunization and provision of essential drugs…responsible planning of family size”
Keep in mind that this is a group of un-elected politicians, at a global level, who think they know what the “responsible” number of people is, that you should have in your family.
Vaccinations, though held as controversial by many, will play a major role in this plan for “Health For All”, as Agenda 21 looks to “implement to the fullest extent possible the use of vaccines in the prevention of disease. ” (Ch 6., Sec. 12-l) The Agenda also looks to “develop and make widely available new and improved vaccines”, including “intensifying efforts directed at the vaccines needed to combat common diseases of children.”
Cholera is a disease that the United Nations singles out under their “control of communicable diseases” section. (Ch. 6, Sec. 10) Ironically, the United Nations is accused of actually bringing cholera to Haiti, effecting many Haitians, and is currently, at the time of this report being published, involved in a lawsuit, as a result of that incident.
The planners have an interesting way of expressing their belief that your opinion may be heard on matters, such as biotechnology application, but not necessary. Agenda 21 is being implemented with your tax money, and you don’t get to vote on it, however, to make you feel good, the planners will allow you to go to their controlled, scripted meetings, where you are able to make an “informed comment.”
“National mechanisms to allow for informed comment by the public with regard to biotechnology research and application should be part of the process.” (Ch. 16, Sec. 37)
The mass collection of data is an integral part of Agenda 21. The planners want to collect data on EVERY RESOURCE in the world, including water, land, forests, soil, energy, food, even humans, and much more. The reader will find that nearly every chapter of Agenda 21 has a section in it, that has something to do with data collection, such as Chapter 14 “Promoting Sustainable Agriculture and Rural Development”, which has a goal to “process, store and analyse animal genetic data at the global level.” (Ch. 14, Sec. 68-b)
Interestingly, nearly every section focuses on the role that woman need to play in the implementation of Agenda 21. Chapter 24, titled “Global Action for Women Towards Sustainable And Equitable Development”, is a whole chapter dedicated towards empowering women to implement Agenda 21.
The planners want to increase the number of women in positions of power, in government, and in the private sector. This focus on women is curiously added to various sections:
“…promote the development of the human resources that are required to plan and manage land and land resources sustainably. This should be done by providing incentives for local initiatives and by enhancing local management capacity, particularly of women…” (Ch. 10, Sec. 16)
“…assist the developing countries in their efforts to develop a participatory structure by mobilizing the human resources of the private sector, nongovernmental organizations and the poor, particularly women and the disadvantaged.” (Ch. 7, Sec. 26)
“Measures to review policies and establish plans to increase the proportion of women involved as decision makers, planners, managers, scientists and technical advisers in the design, development and implementation of policies and programmes for sustainable development;” (Ch. 24, Sec. 2-b)
The Agenda also wants to have influence in your life at home, by looking to “promote the reduction of the heavy workload of women and girl children at home”, and, somehow, influence “the sharing of household tasks by men and women on an equal basis.” (Ch. 24, Sec. 3-d)
As is the same with other sections of the Agenda, the planners will use propaganda through media to change belief systems:
“Programmes to eliminate persistent negative images, stereotypes, attitudes and prejudices against women through changes in socialization patterns, the media, advertising, and formal and non-formal education; ” (Ch. 24, Sec. 3-i)
Now that we have established the vision, and goals, of Agenda 21, we will explore how the United Nations plans on having these recommendations implemented. We are told that United Nations lacks any real power to directly effect changes in your country, therefore we need not worry about what is recommended in this action plan of Agenda 21. This is partially true. The United Nations is not passing bills that immediately effect your local community, yet anyway, however the means by which the UN is implementing Agenda 21, which IS effecting your local community, is by a clever, fairly-secretive, subversive tactic, which will be discussed here.
First, let us establish that the United Nations finds it “essential” to change your local laws, and regulations, to implement Agenda 21:
“The enactment and enforcement of laws and regulations (at the regional, national, state/provincial or local/municipal level) are also essential for the implementation of most international agreements in the field of environment and development” (Ch. 8, Sec. 15)
Your local, elected, legislators will receive pressure, as well as incentives, to push specific laws, and programs, in accordance with Agenda 21. This push will come from, what are referred to as, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs):
“Competent intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations could cooperate to provide Governments and legislators, upon request, with an integrated programme of environment and development law (sustainable development law) services, carefully adapted to the specific requirements of the recipient legal and administrative systems.” (Ch. 8, Sec. 19)
The goal of empowering NGOs to influence policy is not hidden, as a matter of fact, the title of Chapter 27 is “Strenghtening the Role of Non-Governmental Organizations: Partners for Sustainable Development.”
These NGOs are sent into your local community, and, in conjunction with the aforementioned regional governments, as well as other non-democratic organizations that are promoted through Agenda 21, will look to gain decision making authority, thus taking away your decision making ability:
“Empower community groups, non-governmental organizations and individuals to assume the authority and responsibility for managing and enhancing their immediate environment” [emphasis added] (Ch. 7, Sec. 20-g)
Your local elected legislators will be persuaded to give nongovernmental organizations decision making power to implement Agenda 21 at all levels:
“Governments and international bodies should promote and allow the participation of nongovernmental organizations in the conception, establishment and evaluation of official mechanisms and formal procedures designed to review the implementation of Agenda 21 at all levels” (Ch. 27, Sec. 8)
“Governments…should develop mechanisms to allow non-governmental organizations to play their partnership role responsibly and effectively” (Ch. 27, Sec. 5)
Non-governmental organizations will be used to prepare your local elected officials, through “practical training programmes”, for Agenda 21 implementation, and the “facilitation of behaviour change” that will be required:
“Intensive, short, practical training programmes with emphasis on skills in effective communication, community organization and facilitation of behaviour change should be developed in order to prepare the local personnel of all sectors involved in social development for carrying out their respective roles.” [emphasis added] (Ch. 6, Sec. 8)
To assist in this facilitation of behavior change, there are Agenda 21 associated “workshops”, and “seminars”, as well as “the establishment of professional associations” (Ch. 7, Sec. 34-d), to promote the goals of the Agenda.
There are three major non-governmental organizations specifically mentioned in Agenda 21, Chapter 7, Section 21:
- “International Union of Local Authorities (IULA)
- “International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)
- “World Federation of Twin Cities”
Though there are more than a million non-governmental organizations in operation, in America, many of the more active, and well-funded, NGOs, are associated with, or directly funded by, one of these three organizations. A more detailed examination of the influences of an organization like ICLEI, on your local community, will show the connections more clearly, and should be undertaken. As far as this particular report, I will try to stick strictly to the details outlined in Agenda 21.
Agenda 21 is most likely already in your community, as the agenda, which was drafted in 1992, states:
“By 1996, most local authorities in each country should have undertaken a consultative process with their populations and achieved a consensus on “a local Agenda 21″ for the community;” (Ch. 28, Sec. 2-a)
Private companies will also be used to push this “local Agenda 21” into your community:
“Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations and private enterprises and adopt “a local Agenda 21” [emphasis added] (Ch. 28, Sec. 3)
Upon a full detailed examination of United Nations Agenda 21, the reader comes to find this document to be a plan by the United Nations to gain more decision making power, or sovereignty, from countries, and create a world in which every resource, water, animals, food, etc., even human resources, and population size, is tracked, and controlled, by a group of non-elected bureaucrats at the UN, working in conjunction with big corporations, and non-governmental organizations (NGO’s).
It has been more than twenty years since this Agenda has been drafted, and as the effects of its implementation have been getting more obvious, public awareness, and resistance, to the Agenda has grown. There are probably people in your community, currently fighting Agenda 21. Many of these people may not even be aware that it is Agenda 21 they are fighting, when they are protesting the use of eminent domain to take property, higher taxes, or severe regulations. When the Agenda 21 orientated NGOs come into your town, they do not tend to reference Agenda 21 directly, however many of the terms, as well as the concepts, are an obvious reflection of Agenda 21. If you look into who is funding these NGOs that are operating in your community, you will most likely find these funders to be directly linked to the United Nations, or Agenda 21.
Aside from the outrageous details outlined in the Agenda, the whole idea of what the United Nations is attempting to do, should be cause for scrutiny. Why should these people, that we never elected, or met, be making decisions at a global level, that effect us, and our community? We have enough problems dealing with our own, elected, governments, can you imagine having to plead your case to some UN bureaucrat?
The flame of liberty is dying, as a collectivist world government is being set-up right in front of our eyes. Only an informed, and educated, public can prevent this.