a hidden threat or an acceptable loss of freedoms to protect the environment?
https://townhall.com/columnists/rach...reat/page/full
Printable View
a hidden threat or an acceptable loss of freedoms to protect the environment?
https://townhall.com/columnists/rach...reat/page/full
If you source an article from an extreme right-wing website (originally owned by the Heritage Foundation), of course it will support an extreme-right wing view of the topic. The point of the article seems to be that citizens should not work together to come up with thoughtful solutions to the problems of the day. I guess that would interfere with the "freedoms" of the mega-wealthy.
Ron
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:
hmmm ... I no longer subscribe to party politics so those kind of distinctions and arguments are lost on me ... are you saying that anyone that expresses concern about a socialist doctrine is extreme right wing?
and this article doesn't really talk about citizens working together towards anything, rather an agenda handed down by the UN without the involvement of citizens ...
am I missing something?
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rekarp:
You should rest assured about Agenda 21. It’s been on the books for 20+ years, it’s an open text, it’s a non-binding agreement, and it’s been signed by representatives of 180 countries -- not all “democratic,” to be sure, but hardly a secretive, “fast-track” negotiation. I'm not sure what constitutes "involvement of citizens" in international agreements; I think that would be a question that comes up in implemenation on any national, state, or local level.Quote:
>>>hmmm ... I no longer subscribe to party politics so those kind of distinctions and arguments are lost on me ...
It may be “socialistic,” as you say, in the sense that up at least through the 1950’s any movement toward civil rights, alleviation of poverty, world peace, or lessening the power of devouring capital was labeled “socialistic.” But how are we to address problems that can only be addressed worldwide -- poverty, environment, sustainability, all that -- except through an international forum, and with concrete recommendations developed through negotiations?
I’m quite sure there are instances aplenty where some implementation of one of these principles has had a negative effect on someone’s enterprise, small business, or geranium pot: there is no law or public policy anywhere, unless it’s utterly toothless, that hasn’t. Individually or locally, there’s no perfect one-size-fits-all, but if we keep our focus on the hedgehog while the tyrannosaurus runs rampant, eventually the hedgehog too will suffer.
You eschew political labels, but the fact is that US opposition to Agenda 21 as a dark conspiracy against our freedom is pure Tea-Party bubble, supported at one end by corporate interests who want nothing whatever in the way of their all-consuming maw, at the other by people who fear the UN will stop them watering their lawns, and a copious sprinkling of others who see family planning programs as genocidal, gun control as a communist plot, climate change as a fantasy, and feminists as sociopaths. Glad you don’t want to wear the T-shirt, but I fear that in this case it would fit.
Now, I have to admit that it’d be unique stratagem to launch world tyranny by producing a 300 pp document that’s open to the public, that’s been repeatedly addressed and reaffirmed by 180 nations over a 20-year span, that is legally non-binding -- that’s very deep conspiracy, definitely calculated to take us off guard.
So on this issue, I’m one of those blue-pill, no-sweat kinda guys. Have to admit, when I saw The Matrix I thought it was a movie.
Peace & joy, socialistic though they may be--
Conrad
Thanks Conrad ...
that's a great response and I value your opinion ...
yes, I long ago gave up on the two party system and if you watched the two videos in my "Unity Needed" thread you'll know why ... I think that an awful lot of energy goes into bashing each other's political party, with not enough energy and focus on the corporate powers that we're up against ...
There were two bits of info that caused me to be alarmed by Agenda 21 ... one is the realization that 9 states have outlawed it due to concerns over property rights ... the other is the scathing information put out by Santa Rosa resident Rosa Koire ...
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by theindependenteye:
quote from rosa koire:
". We are making common cause with others to end UN social engineering and communitarianism." --not exactly unbiased.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:
Yes, she has very strong opinions about all of this ...
https://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by kpage9:
There are a lot of real wing nuts in power in various state governments in the U.S. In Kansas the legislator who led the effort to condemn Agenda 21 now wants to ban sustainability. The Missouri house voted to ban Agenda 21 shortly after considering outlawing space aliens. Add Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Alabama to the list and you begin to see the connection to the ultra-conservative, John Birch Society, tea party types who are alligned with this idealogical-based movement to ban Agenda 21.
Many of these nut jobs are also sponsoring bills to outlaw Sharia law, as if there was any danger of that gaining hold in the U.S.! These are scary, fear-mongering people who are often aligned with racist, anti-women, anti-immigrant, anti-progress, and authoritarian groups.
You post a lot of articles that criticise government actions like CIA torture, police miltarization, GMO foods, TPP, corporate power, etc. These are mostly progressive opinions, yet you also seem to align yourself with the elements of our society that support violence, oppression, imperialism, anti-democracy..
It doesn't make sense to me.
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:
So let me get this straight ... anyone who expresses concern about Agenda 21 is a "racist, anti-woman, anti-immigrant, anti-progess authoritarian wing nut" supporting "violence, oppression, imperialism, and anti-democracy"... really? ... geez, I'm really missing a lot by adopting a non-partisan stance ... and here I thought that they were just concerned citizens wanting to keep power over land rights in their communities instead of in global hands ....
I stand corrected ... thank you for your post ...
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rekarp:
and I'm not aligned with anyone ... I am merely questioning this ...
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rekarp:
I appreciate ALL of your view points on this , I am uneducated in the topic but alerted to PAY attention
If you are not outraged,you are not paying attention
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by arthunter:
So I was responding to your post to Conrad in which you said that there were two reasons why you are alarmed by Agenda 21, one of which is that nine states have outlawed it due to concerns over property rights. I'm pointing out to you that these states are quite partison and reactionary. It's not at all to say that expressing concern about Agenda 21 by itself identifies a person.
However, when one continues to support their positions with references to ultra right-wing blogs, tea-party legislatures, and other reactionary sources, others may wonder if that defines the person's politics. In other words, "You are known by the company you keep."
I see .... thank you for explaining ...
The last link that I posted is from "Democrats Against UN Agenda 21" ... you will find the opinions on this site to be just as strong if not stronger then the "right wing" site .... this is NOT a partisan issue ... and I refuse to align with either major political party .... and, once again, this is why ...
I see people, just people, and I listen to everyone ... and I don't label ....
Our country is in major trouble ... we have lost a lot of our constitutional rights and the value of our dollar is changing in the world ... our streets are battlefields .... we have been and are being lied to by the very people who we elected to protect us .... this is NOT a time to fight among ourselves ....
Quote:
Posted in reply to the post by rekarp: