Agenda 21 and How It Plays Out

 

New Zealand is in the process of introducing a raft of measures to implement Agenda 21 by undermining traditional private property rights – these include legislation to enable the control or requisition of private land for the purposes of rewilding or for urban development.  Here is some background to Agenda 21 and a look at the American experience, particularly with regard to the way the concept of ‘biodiversity’ is used to negate property rights.

What is Agenda 21?

Agenda 21 is a non-binding UN-drafted agreement accepted by consensus by participants at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, which calls on governments to intervene and regulate nearly every potential impact that human activity could have on the environment.  The report Agenda 21 is the core publication for the UN Division for Sustainable Development.

‘Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of action to be taken globally, nationally, and locally by organizations of the United Nations System, Governments, and Major Groups in every area in which human impacts on the environment.’ (UN Sustainable Development Goals)

Or to put it another way:

‘The UN’s Agenda 21 outlines the globalist plan for a completely managed global society, all under the auspices of the UN.’  (video, NWO Depopulation Plans 5:44min)

Or:

It’s all happy, feely, smiling faces and rhetoric about “how we care”, when the truth is that Agenda 21 is a vicious, brutal, heartless strategy to impose a global Orwellian state and forcibly depopulate humanity. (Julian Websdale, Agenda 21: the Plan for a Global, Fascist Dictatorship) .

Major goals of Agenda 21 include:

  • the abolition of private property
  • the demise of rural living
  • exclusion of humans from ‘wild areas’
  • the abolition of single family homes
  • Government control of food supply
  • mandatory birth (population) control

See Daisy Luther, What Exactly Is Agenda 21? and North Country Farmer, Agenda 21 and Rural Depopulation.

Like all similar UN documents, Agenda 21 is full of positive values that nobody seriously disagrees with in principle, such as care of the environment and adequate housing for all.  Like similar documents, Agenda 21:

  1.  assumes the anthropogenic global warming narrative as a non-negotiable premise;
  2. assumes biodiversity as having a value that supersedes human rights;
  3. asks for greater roles for the United Nations and the corporate-owned NGOs.

The two planks of environmentalism, climate and biodiversity, are used to justify interference in the lives of people that can only be describes as totalitarian

Agenda 21 encapsulates and refines the policies of the UN bureaucracy as developed and flagged over several decades, such as those relating to private land ownership. According to the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements 1976 (Habitat 1), Official Report:

‘Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlements, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.’

Under the Vancouver Declaration, the section of the Official Report of Habitat 1 that was available for formal signature, states commit themselves to the following position:

‘Land is one of the fundamental elements in human settlements. Every State has the right to take the necessary steps to maintain under public control the use, possession, disposal and reservation of land. Every State has the right to plan and regulate use of land, which is one of its most important resources, in such a way that the growth of population centres both urban and rural are based on a comprehensive land use plan.’

In Agenda 21, this becomes:

‘15.5.i. Develop policies to encourage the conservation of biodiversity and the sustainable use of biological and genetic resources on private lands

It is clear from the way Agenda 21 is being implemented that ‘encourage’ means compulsion through legislation, taxation and local authority zoning.

The United Nations view of private property is that the state has the right, and should be exercising this right, to take land for environmental reasons, in order to fulfill an environmental agenda.  This is in conflict with the culture of countries like New Zealand which assumes that:

  • universal private home ownership is the best way to achieve equal opportunity,  security and happiness for all, and thus
  • private property rights should only be interfered with for the purpose of essential public works, such as motorways

Agenda 21 was theoretically succeeded by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development but both ‘Agenda 2030’ and especially ‘Agenda 21’ have largely been abandoned by the United Nations and its proponents because of the negative connotations, and replaced with terms like ‘sustainability’ and ‘resilience’.  Thus while the EU produced a progress report in 1997 termed Agenda 21: the First 5 Years, it now refers to ‘Sustainable Development in the European Union.

Think Global, Act Local

‘In our urban era, cities are a driving force for global sustainable development’ (ICLEI)

A number of local body networking platforms have been established in order to promote Agenda 21. Their function is to ‘inform’ local authorities and turn them into activists for the globalist cause, by prioritising ‘climate’, ‘biodiversity’ and ‘sustainability”.  The most prominent is ICLEI (Local Governments for Sustainability): ‘a global network of more than 1,750 local and regional governments committed to sustainable urban development’ (including New Zealand’s major cities).  The ICLEI vision ‘orients [the path of urban and regional leaders] towards urban transformation and sets a course for delivering on the global sustainable development agenda’.

‘By committing to this vision, local and regional governments are leading the way towards a fossil fuel free era, stimulating the green economy through sustainable public procurement, developing urban low emission, climate-resilient, mobility-friendly development strategies – and more.’

ICLEI has just launched ‘Daring Cities2020: a radical action-oriented forum to showcase and empower urban leaders’ bold responses to the climate emergency’.

Other local body networks include David  Rockefeller’s 100 Resilient Cities, now replaced by the Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience CenterC40 Cities which aims to galvanise cities into ‘bold climate action’, and the new Cities with Nature.  (Most or all of the networks designed to promote Agenda 21 have been founded or funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.)

See also: Democrats Against Agenda 21: When They Say Local They Mean It which spells out the ICLEI goals and their implications.

The US Experience: Agenda 21 and the Wildlands Project

The Wildlands Project proposes that 50 % of American territory be wilderness reserves largely no-go for humans, surrounded by buffer areas and joined by wilderness corridors, with human beings largely confined to urban areas (smart cities).   Publicity of the scope of the project led to the US Senate failing to ratify the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

‘One hour before the U.S. Senate was to adopt the United Nations Treaty on Biodiversity, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX) went to the floor with a 300-plus-page draft copy of Chapter 10 of the United Nations Global Biodiversity Assessment and a 4 ́x6 ́ poster.

‘The poster showed the lower 48 states overlaid with hundreds of red islands representing wilderness areas interconnected by thousands of red ribbons called corridors, all surrounded by yellow buffer zones. Small green patches were “human occupation zones.” The agenda was so outrageous it would have been discounted, except that Sen. Hutchinson had the proof in her hands. The date was Sept. 29, 1994, and the agenda was called the Wildlands Project.’  (Coffman, How Private Property In America Is Being Abolished – The Wildlands Project)

Ratification of the Biodiversity Treaty may have failed, but the goals of Agenda 21 and the Wildlands Project are being implemented throughout the United States.  The result is the purchase or confiscation of, or other interference in, farms and other private land by the government,  state or local  authorities. See Agenda 21: Land Grab in Florida State and Beyond and Federal Government’s Land Grab Faces Growing Resistance, or:

‘A family in Colorado is being told they can’t use a motorized vehicle to get to their home in the mountains and when they prepared a legal case, their home was seized by the local government. Property owners in California are being told they can’t plant on their farms and all water, including ditches, is being put under the control of the EPA. [Environmental Protection Agency]. One Wyoming man can’t have a pond on his property because of the new rules.

‘Chickens are restricting land use in 11 western states—California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The Dusky Gopher Frog is being used as a reason to target private land owners in several southern states. Toads are consuming more and more land in Texas at the expense of private land owners. The open range is a government ATM when they let cattle graze at all.’

(S. Noble, Agenda 21, a Plan to Take Your Land and Give it to Tortoises and Pagosa Skyrockets).

Meanwhile, Back in Town

It is not just farmers and rural dwellings that are effected by Agenda 21 policies. The UN strategy for high density urbanisation and reduced property rights is playing out in towns and cities as well.

In 2005 the Supreme Court Kelo v. New London decision allowed a Connecticut town to seize private property not just for public use, but also for private development, thus paving the way for councils to do deals with developers at the expense of the property rights of homeowners.   (The Urban Development Bill currently before the New Zealand parliament is similarly designed to legalise the forced acquisition of private property for commercial development)

California lawmakers are taking steps to eliminate single-family zoning, by enabling all residential lots or properties in California to be legally converted into multiplexes.  It is inevitable that stand-alone dwellings in the state of California will ultimately be a thing of the past.

The Planning Department of Carroll County, Maryland, drafted a ‘smart growth’ plan which proposed what has been termed a ‘breathtaking reshuffling of land rights‘, and which clearly serves the UN agenda of using ‘biodiversity’ to eliminate single-family homes with gardens. The plan includes:

  • Down-zoning of agriculture land to prevent future subdivision by farmers;
  • Up-zoning of low-density residential land around small towns into higher density zoning to permit construction of hundreds or possibly thousands of inclusive housing units, including apartments and condominiums.    (Strzelczyk, Rothschild, UN Agenda 21: Coming to a Neighborhood Near You)

In New Zealand, the principles of the Wildlands Project are being implemented in major cities, in that city councils are claiming suburban property for ‘rewilding’, see Significant Natural Areas (SNAs): How NZ Cities Are Implementing Agenda 21 and the American Wildlands Project.

Moves to Ban Agenda 21 in America

Numerous American states have moved to ban activities based on Agenda 21, or ICLEI itself, or to delegitimise the UN as an authority, or to abolish the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (see e.g. More States and Counties Now Opposing Agenda 21 – August 30, 2012).  An early success was in Alabama, which passed a law:

‘The State of Alabama and all political subdivisions may not adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to “Agenda 21″‘

And in order to confront the issue of networks such as ICLEI:

‘the State of Alabama and all political subdivisions may not enter into any agreement, expend any sum of money, or receive funds contracting services, or giving financial aid to or from any such entities, as defined in Agenda 21 documents.’

In 2015 a bill intended to nullify Agenda 21 was unsuccessfully introduced in Maine, being an Act:

Prohibiting the state and its political subdivisions from recognizing the United Nations or any of its declarations as legal authority in this state’.

This map from a pro-Agenda 21 website shows that more than half of American states have tried to ban Agenda 21. Anti agenda21-map US

Petition to Stop Agenda 21

In 2017 a petition was organised in the US to:

  1. Abolish the State Department bureau which coordinates with the Agenda 21 ‘focal point’,
  2. Abolish the Environmental Protection Agency, and
  3. Prohibit all Federal agencies from carrying out activities intended to comply with Agenda 21 directives. (‘Sign Here To Stop Agenda 21’)

See also:

The Globalism of Climate: How Faux Environmental Concern Hides Desire to Rule the World – the history of Agenda 21, ‘global warming’ and ‘biodiversity’

@JWSpry, UN Agenda 21 Links – Many links relating to Agenda 21

Various (pessimistic) interpretations of the UN Sustainable Development Goals include: Ryan Cristian, Agenda 2030 (aka New World Order) Decrypted;  Frances Leader, Agenda 2030 – No Escape; Mike Adams, The United Nations 2030 Agenda decoded: It’s a Blueprint for the Global Enslavement of Humanity Under the Boot of Corporate Masters

 

13 thoughts on “Agenda 21 and How It Plays Out

    1. Yes, the plandemic serves the depopulation agenda, both directly and indirectly.

      The stated goals of the globalist include global governance and depopulation. The crisis is being used to argue for global governance or at least more more power to the UN. Crashing the world economy will mean even more power concentrated in the hands of the global elite.

      In any case: the vaccine will almost certainly reduce health and fertility, likewise the veto on natural immunity; impoverishment will mean fewer people starting families; and the tremendous abuse experienced by children, especially psychological, reduces their chance of growing into healthy adults able to rear healthy families.

      Like

  1. Covid’s hardly doing a great job then, it takes out the already elderly and compromised.
    At least Spanish ‘Flu targeted young and robust adults – precisely those more likely to breed and multiply.
    Paranoid bull!
    World leaders and global elites? Awesome maestros like Trump or Johnson, maybe? Unlikely to orchestrate a successful bun fight in proverbial bakery, zero chance with a global conspiracy.
    And no thanks, please do not notify me of further comments, life is just too short.

    Like

  2. Could it be that the elderly and compromised were targeted to test the viability of a manufactured virus? Can a pandemic be engineered to target age groups, nationalities, and or pin pointed locations? Think Agent Orange for humans.

    Like

Leave a Reply to Edward Young Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s