Liberal Progressive Disdain for America Rev7.0

8/13/2019 Liberal Progressive Disdain for America Rev7.0

1/23

1

ENERGY MODULE

Energy is the irreplaceable resource for a nations economic vitality, and therefore its national

security.

Reasonably priced energy essential for a strong and growing economy. The US has extensive

reserves of coal, shale oil, and nuclear fuel, and these can provide reasonably priced electricity

and liquid fuels for at least the next 2000 years; nuclear power even longer. Natural gas

reserves are once again rising because of new technologies in extraction.

The single most important source of strength and power of the United States is its economy.

Our economy is the engine that provides our high standard of living, the global reach of our

trade and industrial commerce to cooperate and compete, our influence upon other world

powers to promote stability, and the most powerful military in the world.

Our energy efficient economy ensures the American way of life. The US economy is currently

based on fossil fuels, oil, coal, and natural gas.

The ability to produce these valuable resources is clearly a matter of choice as expressed

through government policy. It is not a matter of geology. The contention that the US is running

out of fossil fuels is false.

As a matter of reference, all the oil consumed in the World since the discovery in 1859 by

Colonel Drake in Titusville, Pennsylvania is about one trillion barrels.

American energy resources:

Conventional oil: The United States has about 3.75 trillion barrels (3750 billion) of

conventional oil. Of this, current technology can recover 1.4 trillion barrels, enough to

last two hundred years at current consumption rate of 6.7 billion barrels per year.

But this is not all, a US Geological Survey study quoted by the Task Force for

Unconventional Fuels estimates that the 48 contiguous states have about 12 trillion

barrels of kerogen, also known as oil shale. Kerogen can be refined into diesel and other

hydrocarbon byproducts. This is equal to 1700 years reserve at current consumption

rates. Of these resources, three trillion barrels of high density oil shale are located in a

small are between Colorado and Utah.

The amount of natural gas that is recoverable in North America is approximately 4.2quadrillion (4,244 trillion) cubic feet, equivalent to 728 billion barrels of oil. This is enoughgas to provide the United States with 175 years of natural gas at current rates of

consumption. But this is only the tip of the iceberg. It is estimateby several sourcesthat the US has over 676,110 trillion cubic feet of Methyl hydrates -natural gastrapped in ice. This is over 28,000years worth at current usage. Technology torelease this energy has already been successfully tested.


2/23

2

The United States has the largest coal reserves of any country in the world. The UnitedStates has more than 10,320 billion short tons of in-place resources. Of which 486 billionshort tons, equivalent to 1663 billion barrels (1.663 trillion), of oil are recoverableprofitably with current technology , enough domestic coal to use for the next 485 years at

current rates of consumption.

In addition to these sources of energy the USA has access to hydroelectric power and nuclear

power.

The much maligned nuclear power is undergoing a renaissance with, small modular reactors,

the size of a large minivan thorium cycle reactors, . These reactors are inherently safer, the

byproducts cannot be easily manufactured into bombs. Furthermore and is plentiful in the

USA. Development of these resources could remove by mid century one of the traditional

causes of warthe need for energy

This massive supply of available resources means that the USA access to affordable energy is

limited only by the government policies.

Congress was advised of our energy wealth when the Congressional Research Service of the

Library of Congress released a report showing that the United States combined recoverable oil,

natural gas, and coal endowment is the largest on Earth

Despite these clear benefits, expanded or even continued energy production in the UnitedStates faces major challenges. These challenges come primarily from progressives, by

denying access to federal lands, over-regulation and increasing federal taxes

The recent development of shale gas is a boon to the Americas economy. The countrys

industry uses around a third of its gas output. The biggest winner might be the petrochemicals

industry. It gobbles up gas as feedstock to make chemicals such as methanol and ammonia, a

vital ingredient of fertilizer. Switching feedstock from naphtha, derived from oil, to ethane,

derived from gas, has kept petrochemicals cheap even as oil prices have peaked. These

chemicals in turn providecheaper raw materials for carmakers, agriculture, household goods

and builders, or go for export at prices to compete with the worlds lowest-cost producers, the

state-owned petrochemicals firms in the Middle East.

McKinsey Global Institute is estimating that the shale industry alone will generate $700 billion for the US

economy by 2020, as it transforms related industries, such as manufacturing, trade and infrastructure

demands


3/23


4/23

4

DEMOGRAPHIC MODULE

The twenty first century, according to most demographic forecast, will the century of populationimplosion. Over the next two decades major developed and developing countries and regions

of the world with have population decreases because of low birth rates and a growing older

population due to increasing life expectancies.

A growing labor force, capital investments and productivity improvements are the three

economic factors that drive economic growth. A decreasing labour force is a strong indicator of

sluggish rates of economic growth.

A shrinking working age population also raises the question of the financial burden on theworkers to pay for the pensions and the cost government. Also who is going to be the care giver

to the elders. These factors will be a drag on the economies of the aging countries.

Japan and Europe as a whole are both on course for significant absolute declines in the

population between 15-64, the prime working age, over the next 20 years with prospective

drops of almost 25%

China is about to experience a massive falloff in young manpower. Over the next 20 years, by

the Census Bureaus projections, the working age group will be falling in China by fully 100

million personsor over 30 percent. China can expect a dramatic demographic transformation

with a massive shift in age structure. China's population is projected to start declining around

2030 and the working age population, which currently provides one of the biggest drivers of

economic growth, will decline rapidly both in absolute terms and as a proportion of the total

population.

The great demographic exception is the United States. In contrast to the demographic

stagnation or decline that faces most of the rest of the developed countries and China over the

next two decades, demographers project that the USA is set to grow by 18 %, or over 58

million people, between now and 2012 to 2030, to 370 million. The US will maintain its share ofworld population.


5/23

5

Progressive module

Progressives reject the principles and policies on which the American Republic was founded.

The core principles on which the founders based the constitution of the American Revolution and the

Constitution were outlined by John Locke. These are that humans have certain inherent rights: life,

liberty and property acquired by his own effort, including the right to disposed of said property has one

sees fit. The proper role of government is to safe guard these rights.

The Founders recognized that Government can be a threat to these rights, however it may be necessary

in order to protect the weaker individuals from violence of the stronger. As Madison said If man were

angels, no government would be necessary.

Government was to be in service to the people, not the other way around.

The purpose of government is to protect our natural, human rights. Government is not instituted to

guaranteed freedom from , want, necessity or poverty.

The primary concern of the Founding Fathers was the threat to the citizens freedoms from an

authoritarian government and predatory actions of human being against other people.

Progressives reject the notion of natural rights. To them freedom is defined as fulfillment of human

wants which becomes the primary task of the government.

The Founders thought that a political society was a social compact between individuals that they shall be

governed by certain laws for the common good. The parameters within which the government should

operate are specified in the Constitution.

On the other hand, the progressives treat the concept of social compact with contempt and the written

constitution as a nuisance to be circumvented. For the progressives humans must be remoulded in

such a away to bring out their real aspirations. Whether there is consent on part of the individuals is

immaterial, because people dont really know what they want. The end justifies the means in the

progressives eyes, because they are operating for the greater good.

The founders thught that the government had to be constrained because of the danger it posed if it

became to powerful, hence the enumerated poer of the federal government and the bill of rights.

By contrast, the progressives exault the State as the dispenser of all rights and freedoms. Progressives

view the private sphere as one of selfishness and oppression. Private property is especially singled outfor criticism . Progressivism in the USA is a code nome for socialism.

The views of the progressives is that government should have absolute, unlimited power over the

individual, according to the progressive John Burgess.

The American Republic was founded on the principle the government was instated to protect the

individual through the institution of criminal and civil law. And that civil law had to provide for the poor


6/23

6

to have the opportunity to acquire property by allowing the buying and selling of labor through

voluntary contracts and legal means of establishing ownership of property.

But for the progressives the domestic policy of the government has two concerns:

First , the government must protect the poor and other victims of capitalism by redistribution of wealth

and control over the economy abd contractual agreements between independent entities.

Second, government must become involved in the development of a new person through education,

environment, arts and culture.

The Founders believed that laws should be made by elected officials with contacts with the local

communities. There should not be experts but have, as Madison says so eloquently Wisdom to

discern and virtue to pursue, the common good of society

The progressives want to sweep away this amateurish way of law making. For them, educated

specialist social scientist should replace the elected officials . Government agencies staffed with experts

can manage the task better than the private sector. Government needs to be led by people with the

intellectual skills to see the trends of history. These intellectual superiors should not be encumbered

by the will of less educated masses. Power should be taken away from the local officials and placed into

the central government that will establish administrative agencies, run by neutral experts. Politics

should be replaced by universal rule of enlightened bureaucrats.

Liberals/progressives detest the USA and its capitalist economy. They believe the USA is a

great source of evil in the world. They believe that the USA is taking natural resources from the

Third World and enriching itself whilst keeping the population in those countries impoverished.

This ignores the fact that it is the political left and the environmentalist that have blocked the

development of American resources for the last half century In their view the world would be a

better place if the USA was constrained and the United Nations empowered.

Liberal/progressives are fond of the idea of a global government, similar to the European Union.

A United States with a strong growing economy will make the task of transferring power to the

UN practically impossible. A United States in decline will make the task easier. (Energyconstraint on our economy will achieve this objective)

It is the gap between the haves and have not that is the crucial issue for the progressives. If

have not do not improve rapidly enough, then the haves must be impoverished to close the

gap.


7/23

7

Liberals/progressives are anti-capitalists, anti free markets and against individual freedom.

They are collectivists; they believe that the collective good is paramount. The government,

through its bureaucracy, determines what is the collective good.

Progressives repudiate individualism and the family. The State is greater that the sum of its

parts and the individual has a moral obligation to serve the State.

The core constituency of the progressives is the class of people who are motivated in their day

to day lives by envy, resentment and hatred. Such people always blame others for their

conditions and plight. Progressivism gives people an escape for their failures.

Liberal/progressives, Socialists, and other collectivist view capitalism as a viable economicmechanism whose reins must simply be transferred from the currently dominant greedy classthat exploits workers, into the hands of the bureaucratic/professional intellectual class whichwould use the system for laudable ends.

Collectivist of all types advocate public control of the means of production, either through direct

ownership or through regulations, centralized economic planning, and the widespreadredistribution of wealth.

Socialist and progressives are different sides of the same coin. Any doubt to the accuracy of such

statement can be removed by examining the DSA website.

As one might expect, the liberal/progressives and the Democrat socialists of America (DSA)

and similar agendas, interests and objective. The DSA website explains their objectives:

Although capitalism will be with us for a long time, reforms we win nowraising the

minimum wage, securing a national health plan, and demanding passage of right-to-

strike legislationcan bring us closer to socialism. Many democratic socialists actively

work in the single-issue organizations that advocate for those reforms. We are visible in

the reproductive freedom movement, the fight for student aid, gay, lesbian, bisexual and

transgendered organizations, anti-racist groups, and the labor movement. It is precisely

our socialist vision that informs and inspires our day-to-day activism for social justice.

According to the Democratic Socialist of America (DSA) website the works through the progressive

Caucus of the U.S. Congress to push the socialist agenda forward. Progressives and socialist are not in

competition, they are different faces of the same coin.

The Obama administration is staffed with people who openly admit that they are socialist. For example,

Carol Browner, former VP of socialist international, was the czar for the environment and energy; Anita

Dunn, director of communications for the White House, is an admirer Mao Tse Dung; Van Jones, is a

proud Marxists by his own admission, was the White House green technologies czar. There are many

more but the list is too long to be included here.


8/23

8

Progressives, socialist, Marxist, Fabians, fascist, national socialist, statist come under the generic

description of collectivist. That political philosophy going back to antiquity that maintains that the

individual is to serve the state and not the other was around. The collective is what is important. The

individual is subservient to the group

Progressives, like their fellow socialist travelers, talk a lot about social justice. But what exactly is social

justice?

Social justice is based on the concept of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of

economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution and even property

redistribution. The aim is to achieve more than equality of opportunity but to achieve equality of

outcome.

By equal outcome, the proponents of social justice mean a state in which people have

approximately the same material wealth or in which the general economic conditions of theirlives are similar. Drab sameness throughout the world. Except for the ruling elite, of course.

Progressivism is but another version of big government rule by the elites that has vexedhumanity since antiquity.

Progressives are against private property of land and means of production, because there areeither unfair, exploitive or both. For the common good comes before private good.

Under this variant of collectivism, government rule is by a class of intellectual, bureaucrats andsocial planners. They decide is what good for society and what people want and then use the power of persuasion or the persuasion of power, as the socialist president ofthe SIEU put it,of the State to regulate, tax, and redistribute the wealth of those who work and produce wealthso that equality, or sameness, in society is achieved.

Collectivist believe that global peace and social justice will be achieved with some type ofsocialist global government. It is one ofenduring the tenants of most socialist that socialism canonly succeed if and when it is global. At that time wealth will be distributed fairly and there willbe no more conflicts over resources.

America today is ruled by an Imperial State Bureaucracy headed by an Imperial

President.

Progressivesagenda can be summarized in three major themes:

1 the diminution of American power;


9/23

9

2 the subjugation of American sovereignty to global governance;

3 redistribution of wealth both nationally and globally.

Progressive and their socialist allies believe in global governance as a first step to global government.

Workers of the world unite uses to be one of their mottos. This vision of"global governance" includes

a set of rules administered by the UN. Global governance sounds less threatening to the Americans than

global government, but it is a difference in phraseology and timing only.

As a strep towards global governance, the American collectivist and their European counterparts are

pushing to give the authority to the UN to raise revenues independently from the member nations. The

idea of a carbon tax, financial transaction tax and global income tax have been floated.

The liberals/progressives understand global governance has to be forced on the Americans stealthily.

Working with the United Nations environmental program the liberals/progressives are using climate

change, sustainable growth, and trans-nationalism as their tools to achieve the goal.

Climate change.

The objective is global governance. The strategy is to utilize the hyped global warming/climate

change narrative. The tactics are to use flawed temperature data and computer models to

stampede Americans into surrendering sovereignty.

The theory of man-made global warming has been falsifies. Data indicates that warming has not

occurred over the past 17 years (surface instruments) or 30 years satellite and balloon instruments).

Historical and sunspot data indicatetemperatures will decline over the next decades.

Faced with mounting opposition from thousands of scientists citing fact-based research, global warmingadvocates are now adopting the term climate change.

Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental protection, says the German

economist and IPCC official Ottmar Edenhofer, the co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on

Climate Change (IPCC t) . The next world climate summit in Cancun is actually an economy summit

during which the distribution of the worlds resources will be negotiated. Ottmar Edenhofer

II. GLOBAL WARMING

The progressives have linked the issue of Global Warming to fossil fuel energy use. Advocates of the

man-made global warming conjecture have proposed that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from burning

fossil fuels produce a dangerous increase in the earths temperature. Because of the abundance of fossil


10/23

10

fuels in the U.S., any long-term energy policy must thoroughly evaluate the validity of this theory

through solid scientific inquiryand enact policy that ensures U.S. energy security.

Three Questions

When addressing the issue of Global Warming, aka Climate Change, there are three questionsthat should be answered:

1. Is Global Warming actually occurring? See above

2. If so, is the warming primarily due to the activities of mankind?

3. Assuming the answers to questions 1 and 2 are yes, are the scientifically predicted

consequences of Global Warming severe enough to warrant drastic and costly changes in the

behavior of mankind?

1. Is Global Warming actually occurring?

Today, with no warming in the last 17to 30 years, depending on the data sets use, many

experts are questioning the anthropogenic global warming theory Historically, the earth is

nearing the end of the most recent (Holocene) interglacial warm period, and may again be

trending towards a cooling period. Sunspot data indicate that the next 20 years will be of lower

solar intensity, producing cooler global temperatures.

2. If there is Global Warming, is mankind the cause?

Numerous respected scientists are on both sides of this issue. But because of the failure of

predicted outcomes by global warming advocates to match observed conditions, the role of

CO2 in warming now appears to be insignificant. About 90% of co2 released annually to the in

the atmosphere is from natural causes. Also, analysis of temperature variations over long

historical periods indicate that natural causes, and not man-made CO2 increases, dominate

global climate changes.

Contrary to the IPCCs predictions of continued warming, historical data and analysis of current

solar activity indicate the earth is due instead for a multi-decadal cycle of global cooling.

The earth has gone through repeated warming and cooling for millions of years, with solar

cycles being the driver.


11/23

11

Roman Warming: 200 BC500 AD

Dark Ages Cooling: 500900 AD

Medieval Warming: 9001300 AD

Little Ice Age: 13001800 AD

Modern Warming: 1800present

The most recent warming trend, at the end of the 500-year-long Little Ice Age, began in the

early-1800s. Contrary to media hype, temperatures have not been recently accelerating.

There are many potential causes for global temperature change, including solar cycles that vary

over tens of thousands of years, the earths orbital dynamics, andocean temperaturepatterns

that oscillate over decades. The causal factors for some of these changes are not yet well

understood; periodic temperature cycles have been the norm throughout the earths history.

Scientific data supports a pattern of large glacial cycles over a period of approximately 100,000

years, with cycles of lesser magnitude every 800-1500 years and smaller multi-decadal

oscillations of 25-30 year durations. The Ice Age, when ice sheets several thousand feet in

depth covered Canada and the northern tier of the United States some 25,000 years ago, was

near the end of a major glacial cycle.

Alarmists who point to shrinking glaciers fail to note that glaciers have shrunk, disappeared and

reappeared for the last ten thousand years, in response to normal fluctuations in the earths

temperature.

3. If Global Warming exists, and is predominantly caused by mankind, are the consequencessevere enough to warrant changes in how we behave?

The costs of implementing treaties or programs to control CO2emissions are astronomical and

produce little improvement. The Kyoto Protocolsa treaty to impose severe penalties upon

carbon dioxide emissionswere predicted to only postpone the same level of global warming

by a few years, at a cost of trillions of dollars and considerable hardship on mankind.


12/23

12

The U.S., which has not signed on to the Kyoto Protocols, is actually reducing CO2emissions

more effectively than any of the European nations.

Real Climate Change

Man-made global warming theory is based upon projections and assumptions.

The projections are based upon short-term temperature records (less than 100

years) and with no warming in the fifteen years, many scientists have changed

their previous position. Historical data and current solar measurements actually

indicate a period of long-term global cooling.

it should not be surprising to see hordes of former Reds, or of those who otherwisewould have become Reds, turning from Marxism and becoming the Greens of the

ecology movement. It is the same fundamental philosophy in a different guise, ready as

ever to wage war on the freedom and well-being of the individual.

In December 2009 the world leaders met in Copenhagen to sign a new climate treaty.

This treaty would have established a new UN bureaucracy with the power to regulate carbon dioxide

emissions and force sovereign governments to obey its dictates, or face crippling fines and /or sanctions.

There were provisions to give authority to this bureaucracy to tax incomes in individual countries!

The power to regulate carbon emissions, gives the power to regulate modern economies. This is the

back door to global governance and socialism: central planning and the power to redistribute wealth on

a global scale.

However, the effort to imposed these UN controls on the world was thwarted when confidential emails

exchanged between climate scientist collaborating with the UN IPCC were leaked. These emails, fromthe Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Great Britain, showed politically

motivated researchers gloating over how they had manipulated data to justify their alarmism over

human caused global warming. The emails reveal that many of them were far from believing what they

were representing to the public.

The Obama administration pushed for the Copenhagen agreement. Fortunately, the Americans where

saved by the Chinese and Indian governments stead fast refusal to accept these agreements. In any

Insert info


13/23

13

event, the treaty would not have been ratified in the US Senate. This was a stinging defeat for the global

collectivist.

In addition to global warming and cooling, the Democratic party has a long history of supporting the

radical the environmental movement and the UN Environmental program.

The progressives have been pushing environmentalism for 50 years. This is not because these elites

want to save the world, that is a diversion. The real purpose is to shift power away from individuals to a

centralized authority.

Insert idea of pew family and banking interest inpreventing tar sands and carbon tax

Environmentalism.

Most people support conservation and good stewardship of the environment, and supportadequate rules for pollution control based upon real scientific data. Bur for the last several

decades a political agenda has been the driving force behind the environmental movement,

not dispassionate science.

When this happens, it is harmful to the prosperity and welfare of American citizens and does

nothing to truly help the environment.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Sustainable development is development that integrates environmental, economic and social policies in

order to reduce human consumption of natural resources, achieve social justice and the preservation of

the ecosystem.

By Social justice the progressives mean the right and opportunity of all people "to benefit equallyfrom the resources afforded us by society and the environment."in other words, theredistribution of wealth. This will be achieved through government controls of land use;

government control of energy and energy production; government control of transportation;

government control of industry; government control of food production; government control ofdevelopment; government control of water availability; and government control of populationsize and growth. And all of this will be decreed under the guise of environmental protection.

In other words, this is a political movement led by those who seek to control the worldeconomy, dictate development and redistribute the worlds wealth.


14/23

14

The precursor to the concepts of Sustainability and the United Nations Agenda for the 21st

Century (aka: Agenda 21) were introduced as early as 1976 in the United Nations document:

The Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlementsand the Vancouver Action Plan, as seen fromthe following quote:

Land cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject tothe pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principle

instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore, contributes to social

injustice.

The radical agenda of sustainability, which calls for governmental and, international control of

land, natural resources, food, water, energy, cars, housing and more, in America, was drawn up

many years before global warming/climate change became the convenient rationale for

Sustainable growth. And now Americans are asked to believe that the falsified and highly

controversial hypothesis of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is the compelling reason

for Americans to sacrifice their homes, lands, property rights, way of life, and the country.

Where did it originate?

The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our

Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and

Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first

offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21,

issued at the UNs EarthSummit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.

Sustainable development is a political ideology. It is a collectivist ideology that ends private property,

suppresses individualism and transfer wealth of the developed countries, mainly the USA, to developing

nations, using the UN as the intermediary and the arbiter of what each recipient nation will receive.

The Bruntland report led to the Rio de Janeiro Earth conference in 1993. At that conference a detailed

plan to achieve sustainable growth was introduced: it was called Agenda 21.

Equity

Agenda 21

Revealing the real objectives of agenda 21 is the following statement by Maurice Strong at the 1992 Rio

Summit:

"Current lifestyle and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class are not sustainable!"

Collectivist in the US know that Agenda 21 tactics and objectives are unpopular with the US electorate.


15/23

15

Global Governance

The idea of global government goes back to ancient times. Over the last three hundred year the Abbe of

St Pierre in the late 1600S introduced the idea. The idea has since been modified and amplified by a

series of thinkers, mainly of the collectivist school. Modern proponents of world government seek to

impose it in order to eliminate wars, poverty and inequality globally.

In the United States the idea of global government goes back to Woodrow Wilson and his advisers.

Wilson introduced the idea of world governance in his fourteen points discussed at the Versailles peace

treaty to end World War I. This was the birth of the League of Nations. Wisely the U.S. Senate did not

ratify treaty.

The dream of world government , however, did not die. When 1941,the USA entered WWII, the

progressives realized that the war provided an excellent opportunity try once again to create a global

institution that could prevent war. Two weeks after Pearl Harbor the Presidential Advisory Committee

on Post War Foreign was impaneled . The committee was the planning commission for the United

Nations.

The proponents seek to empower the UN and other global institutions that will gradually move towards

world federalism.

This institution was to make war impossible in the future because all military capabilities of the nation

states were to be eliminated and the UN Security council, in case of need , would be able to call upon

the member states to supply the resources necessary to equip an army to repel any aggressionanywhere in the world. When the liberal progressives took over the reins of government during the

Kennedy administration in 1961 the United States proposed forall member nations of the United

Nations to transfer all military equipment to the United Nations and to retain only a police power for

national needs. The Cuban missile crisis killed the idea!

Having failed at the United Nations to control the USA military might and independence, the collectivist

are using environmentalism and manufacturing crisis such as global warming to undermine the USA.

Starting with the Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" there has been a series of anti capitalist, anti-freemarket and anti-individual freedom books that advocate heavy-handed government intervention to

solve highly exaggerated environmental issues.

The collectivist in the USA rallied around the environmental banner has a means to gain power.

This is the old Marxists notion that the government should control all land. On command, The EPA has

been working for several decades now to restrict land usage by the owner of the property via


16/23

16

regulations. This of course is diametrically opposite to the U.S. Constitution guarantee of private

property.

The UN EP was instrumental in a series of other conferences and commissions throughout the 70s 80s

and 90s that pushed the collectivist agenda. These conferences culminated in the Rio Conference. Rio

lead to the Kyoto conference. And its Protocols Protocols

.

Following the Kyoto agreement, never ratified by the US Senate, the UN funded the commission on

global governance.

Using the results of that commissions work, the United Nations development report defines global

governance as "the framework, rules, institutions that said limits on global area of individuals"

In other words, it controls peopleit governs!

Transnationalism /Global Governance

Global governance, as conceived, by the progressives and other collectivist, cannot tolerate individual

freedom or private property rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Look at the Fabians in the 1890s in Fabian Freeway

The Progressive utilize the EPA and over 15,000 Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) in support ofthe UN organizations and agencies, in propagating the false notion of pending environmental

catastrophes that can be solved only through remedies offered by and imposed through the massive UN

system.

The ink on the UN Charter had not yet dried when the Charter for UNESCO (United Nations Educational,

Scientific, and Cultural Organization) was presented in London, November, 1945

UNESCO's primary function is set forth in its Charter. "Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the

minds of men that the defenses of peace must be constructed." UNESCO was created to construct a

world-wide education program to prepare the world for global governance.

The socialist Bertrand Russell, a UNESCO adviser, writing for the UNESCO Journal, "The Impact of Science

on Society", said "Every government that has been in control of education for a generation will be able

to control its subjects securely without the need of armies or policemen . The American National

Education Association was a major advocate for UNESCO. In an article in the NEA Journal, written by Joy

move


17/23

17

Elmer Morgan, the NEA called for " . . . certain world agencies of administration such as a police force; a

board of education. "

Another American lefty, William Benton, Assistant U.S. Secretary of State, told a UNESCO meeting in

1946

"As long as the child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness

can produce only precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family that

infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means

described earlier to combat family attitudes that favor jingoism . . . . We shall presently

recognize in nationalism the major obstacle to development of world-mindedness. We are at

the beginning of a long process of breaking down the walls of national sovereignty. UNESCO

must be the pioneer."

Julian Huxley, a socialist and eugenicist, was the first Director-General of UNESCO. He realized that in

order for the movement toward global governance to be successful over the long term, a world-wide

constituency would have to be developed. So in 1948, he and a colleague created the International

Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). This important organization (NGO) was instrumental in the

formation of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) in 1961 and the World Resources Institute (WRI) in

1982.These three NGOs have become the driving force behind the rise of global governance.

In 1964, shortly after the committed leftist Rachel Carsons book A silent spring was published,Congress passed the Wilderness Act. The new law signaled the radicalization of the environmental

movement, away from conservation towards preservation. The environmental preservation movement

is characterized by the notion that the government should enforce conservation measures through

extensive regulations.

The EPA formed in 1970 with the radical enviromenalist Donald Ruckelhouse

The foot soldiers of the environmental movement followed blindly its leadership, which gave a

rhetoric of a cleaner environment but the real agenda was a massive program to shift power to

the central government.

Check IUCN and fascism


18/23

18

In 1980, UNEP published World Conservation Strategy jointly with the IUCN and the WWF.

The DOEM is an organizational structure that requires every UN agency and organization to

designate an official to UNEP in order to coordinate all UN activity with the UNEP agenda.

Through DOEM, Maurice Strong, positioned the UNEP well to interject the environment into

the argument for global governance.

In the 1980s American advocates of global governance continued to push their agenda at the

UN, since there was not much hope in the USA as Regan was the president.

The MacBride ( a socialist) Commission established the principle of information

management as a legitimate responsibility of the United Nations.

The Brandt (Socialist Chancellor of West Germany) Commission linked development

with peace, and the Palme (socialist Prime Minister of Sweden) Commission linked development with peace

and disarmament as a way to shift military power to the UN and money to the third

world.

The Brundtland (Vice president of Socialist international and former Prime Minister of

Norway) Commission linked development to the environment and "sustainability."

The NGOs, coordinated by the IUCN/WWF/WRI triumvirate launched a world-wide campaign

to convince the world that the planet stood at the brink of environmental disaster. It could be

averted only by a massive transformation of human societies which would require all people to

accept their common global heritage and conform to a system of international law that integrates

environmental, economic, and equity issues under the watchful, regulatory authority of a new

system of global governance.

The stage was set for the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), held in

Rio de Janeiro in 1992. No previous UN conference had ever received such planning and

promotion. Maurice Strong was named to head the conference, which was dubbed "Earth

Summit II."UNCED was to be the watershed event that was the final march to global

governance.

The main document of the conference was Agenda 21, a distillation of the environmental activist

organizations ( UNEP/IUCN/WWF/WRI) documents. Agenda 21 was further distilled into another

document called The Rio Declaration which was a succinct statement of 27 points which would guide the

global environmental agenda. Two major international treaties had also been prepared for presentation

Expand

on NGO


19/23

19

at UNCED: The Framework Convention on Climate Change (FCCC) and The Convention on Biological

Diversity.

These treaties , unlike other UN treaties, do not allow any reservations or exceptions. The

Framework Convention on Climate Change treaty required all-or-nothing participation. The

UNCED created a "Conference of the Parties" (COP) which is a permanent body of delegateswith has the authority to adopt "protocols," or regulations, through which to implement and

administer the treaty. The Climate Change treaty was non-specific. The treaty was actually a

list of goals and objectives; the COP was created to develop the protocols necessary to achieve

the objectives after the treaties had been ratified.

The Framework Convention on Climate Change treaty is written in language that appears to

pursue environmental objectives however, the principles upon which the treaty is based (The

Rio Declaration) are in fact a refined re-statement of the principles for social change developed

by the various socialist-dominated commission of the 1980s.

The objective, of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent

nations by shifting more policy making to the UN bureaucracy. Hyped environmental crises --

whether real or not -- is the tool used to reach the objective.

In his opening remarks at the ceremonies at the Earth Summit, Maurice Strong stated:

The concept of national sovereignty has been an immutable, indeed sacred,principle of international relations. It is a principle which will yield only slowlyand reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental cooperation. It is

simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individualnation states, however powerful. The global community must be assured ofenvironmental security.

Shirdath Ramphal, the IUCN president, said "Rio, for all its disappointments, set the seal on a new

agenda for the world the agenda of sustainable development In the final analysis, it is a matter of

equity. There are also other aspects to the claims of equity. If there are limits to the use of some

resources, they must be fairly shared. Early users, who have prospered, must not pre-empt them butmust begin to use less so that others may also progress. The rich must moderate their demands on

resources so that the poor may raise theirs to levels that allow them a decent standard of living. Equity

calls for no less. We need . . . to persuade others that, for the Earths sake consumption, must be better

balanced between rich and poor


20/23

20

This is a result of the steady drum beat that the Earth is running out of resources and that the US, having

consumed its resources, must moderate its importation of oil and other raw materials so others can

benefit. This of course is predicated on the assumption that the world is running out of resources.

Nothing could be farther from the truth!!!!!

In order to circumvent the Senate and implement Agenda 21, President Bill Clinton issued Executive

Order No. 12852, June 29, 1993, which created the PresidentsCouncil on Sustainable Development

(PCS). The president appointed eight environmental NGO leaders a to the Council and eleven

government officials. These nineteen appointees easily dominated the discussions and produced a

predictable report from the 28-member Council. Not surprisingly, the final report, Sustainable America a

New Consensus, that are precisely the recommendations called for in Agenda 21.

The UNCED and Agenda 21 array of policy recommendations are a faade to protect the planet from

inevitable destruction at the hands of selfish (i.e. Americans), indifferent , or unaware people . At the

core, however, the policies recommended are socialist policies, built on the assumption that

government bureaucrats know what best for i citizens.

To facilitate the coordination between the Presidents Council and the International Union for the

Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12986, which

says

I hereby extend to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural

Resources the privileges and immunities that provide or pertain to immunity from suit."

The IUCN is the driving force behind UNEP and the global environmental agenda.

Following the Framework Convention on Climate Change the Kyoto Conference was held. The

objective of the conference was to set concrete targets for each country as to the maximum allowable

annual co2 emission by 2012. The targets were set so that 80% of the cost to be borne by the USA and20% by Japan. The rest of the world would have had a free ride! The reduction in CO2, according to the

IPCC itself, would have had negligible effect on the global temperature by the year 2100, but it would

have severely crippled the US economy, slowing its growth rate to the anemic European levels. As a

result the d the American consumers would have been impoverished but would have and facilitated the

rest of the world to catch up with the constrained USA. There would be a convergence toward global


21/23

21

equality, everybody would be the same, the fundamental objective of the socialist. Well, not everybody,

the ruling class is not to be constrained. Treaty was not ratified by the Senate.

Today, an intricate maze of international, enforceable laws is encircling the planet in the form of

Conventions, Treaties, and Executive Agreements. The US senate has not ratified most of them, but the

progressives, are pushing for senate approval. Many of these treaties have innocuous sounding names,

but they all have in common the property of slowly shifting authority away from our elected officials to

the unelected bureaucrats of the UN.

What is Transnational?

Transnational is an ideology that is opposed to traditional liberal democratic nation-states and in

particular, the American republican form of government.

In the philosophical and constitutional perspectives of the United States, the key in determiningwhether a government is a democracy or not, is whether the governed choose their governors.Transnational-progressives however, believe they've found a democracy deficit,and thus are

working to establish new democracies.And the European Union (EU) is the perfect example

to show us how this new democracyworks.

The EU is a large supranational government with a post-democratic structure. It is composed of 3governing bodies: the Council of the EU, made up of one cabinet-level representative from each

member state; the European Parliament, which is elected by the citizens of each member state;

and the European Commission (EC), the EU's executive body.

In theory, the European Commission is accountable to both the council and EuropeanParliament. However, neither the council nor the European Parliament initiate policymaking.

Their power is mostly a negative one, the ability to withhold approval of policies formulated andadopted by the European Commission, and even this checking function is exercised infrequently.

Without doubt, the European Commission is the most powerful EU institution [and] the truesource of its policy and legislative initiatives. In other words, the unelected and unaccountable

EC, runs the whole show.

Transnational is a direct threat to our traditional concepts of citizenship, patriotism, assimilation,

and even the meaning of democracyitself. It's an ideology that denies individual rights,

promoting group rights in their place.

Transnational is post-liberal, post-democratic, post-constitutional, post-American, and

demands the dissolution of nation-states, to be replaced by global governance.


22/23

22

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

It is the end of private property, the elevation of the collective over the individual. It is

the redistribution of Americas wealth to the global elite,

In 1992 Agenda 21/Sustainable Development was unveiled to the world at the UNsEarth Summit in Rio.

That protecting the environment would be used as the basis for controlling all humanactivity and redistributing our wealth.

Every societal decision must be based on environmental considerations such as the

impact on land use, education on the global commons, population control andreduction, and social justice.

Agenda 21 in nothing more that a modern version of corporatism, is the ruling

philosophy of the liberal progressives

This was 30 years prior to the global warming hysteria

Local Sustainable Development policies

Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR

Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, Going Green, AlternativeEnergy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation

easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth

management, consensus.


23/23

23

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Unfortunately, the dangers to our free America do not reside in the remote caves of Afghanistan,but exist within our own borders and within our own government. Unlike any other time in our

history, the sovereignty of the United States of America is in serious jeopardy.

Liberal Progressive Disdain for America Rev7.0

Documents

Transcript of Liberal Progressive Disdain for America Rev7.0