1. Socialists, Communists, Liberals, environmentalists
all the same in the belief that only big, intrusive government can save us from imminent devastation! And the crises that they uncover are merely an extension of its not the nature of the evidence (real or fake) that is relevant. Its the seriousness of the charges! Unasked Questions at Herman Cain's Press Conference
2. In 1992, the U.N.-variety socialist, Maurice Strong, announced: Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable. (Maurice Strong, opening speech at the 1992 UN Rio Earth Summit)
3. And, right on cue the usual suspects, hand-wringing and eyes cast heavenward, announced that wrenching changes were necessary!!
a. Al Gore: "Minor shifts in policy, marginal adjustments in ongoing programs, moderate improvements in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change wouldnt work! Faux Candor | The Weekly Standard
4. As a rule, Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the evils that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman. There should be a balance between permanence and change, while Liberals see progress as some mythical direction for society. Uncovering of imaginary crises is the method that Liberals use to justify the destruction of custom and convention.
a. The activists behind the Sustainable Development movement include the UN, Clinton and every Democrat administration, the Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund and lots of major polluting corporations, who envisioned new regulatory schemes that would hurt their competitors more than it would hurt them.
5. Reams of Sustainable Development literature, mountains of verbiage, which boil down to hewing to fairness, care for the future, and inclusion. And the claim that this was a new value system. Apparently the founding values of America, Judeo-Christian values, didnt include fairness, inclusion, and care for the future. Old values bad! New values coming up!
Nickson, Eco-Fascists, p.101.
6. Clintons President's Council on Sustainable Development did what they do best: create task forces: one on climate change, one on environmental management (write regulations), an international one encouraging sustainable development around the world, and the metropolitan-rural task force (Im from the government, here to solve your problems). Funding came from taxpayers: DOC, DOE, EPA, and USDA.
7. The result, the Global Biodiversity Assessment Report, listed the following as unsustainable: private property, single-family homes, paved roads, ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment, hunting, fertilizer, cemeteries, sewers..... UN Agenda 21 and ICLEI: Is "sustainable development" something the American people want?
and Nickson, Eco-Fascists, chapter five.
8. The EPA circulated a detailed action plan on how the US environmental regulations would conform to those of the UN. Believe in their plans? Then know this:
Their "science" is based not on facts, but on "ecospiritual" theories of pantheism (nature is God) expressed in the "biocentric" (earth centered) philosophy that all species have equal intrinsic value--humans are merely one strand in natures fragile web.
The IUCN has advanced these ecospiritual principles into the pseudoscience of "conservation biology." Conservation biology holds that "natural" systems are best because they are the result of a millennia of fine-tuning by mother earth. Therefore, the only acceptable management practices for earth's fragile ecosystems are those that follow "natural" patterns.
Likewise, biodiversity can only be fully protected by setting aside entire ecosystems in wilderness preserves.
The IUCN
2. In 1992, the U.N.-variety socialist, Maurice Strong, announced: Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake, the use of fossil fuels, electrical appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable. (Maurice Strong, opening speech at the 1992 UN Rio Earth Summit)
3. And, right on cue the usual suspects, hand-wringing and eyes cast heavenward, announced that wrenching changes were necessary!!
a. Al Gore: "Minor shifts in policy, marginal adjustments in ongoing programs, moderate improvements in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change wouldnt work! Faux Candor | The Weekly Standard
4. As a rule, Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the evils that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman. There should be a balance between permanence and change, while Liberals see progress as some mythical direction for society. Uncovering of imaginary crises is the method that Liberals use to justify the destruction of custom and convention.
a. The activists behind the Sustainable Development movement include the UN, Clinton and every Democrat administration, the Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund and lots of major polluting corporations, who envisioned new regulatory schemes that would hurt their competitors more than it would hurt them.
5. Reams of Sustainable Development literature, mountains of verbiage, which boil down to hewing to fairness, care for the future, and inclusion. And the claim that this was a new value system. Apparently the founding values of America, Judeo-Christian values, didnt include fairness, inclusion, and care for the future. Old values bad! New values coming up!
Nickson, Eco-Fascists, p.101.
6. Clintons President's Council on Sustainable Development did what they do best: create task forces: one on climate change, one on environmental management (write regulations), an international one encouraging sustainable development around the world, and the metropolitan-rural task force (Im from the government, here to solve your problems). Funding came from taxpayers: DOC, DOE, EPA, and USDA.
7. The result, the Global Biodiversity Assessment Report, listed the following as unsustainable: private property, single-family homes, paved roads, ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment, hunting, fertilizer, cemeteries, sewers..... UN Agenda 21 and ICLEI: Is "sustainable development" something the American people want?
and Nickson, Eco-Fascists, chapter five.
8. The EPA circulated a detailed action plan on how the US environmental regulations would conform to those of the UN. Believe in their plans? Then know this:
Their "science" is based not on facts, but on "ecospiritual" theories of pantheism (nature is God) expressed in the "biocentric" (earth centered) philosophy that all species have equal intrinsic value--humans are merely one strand in natures fragile web.
The IUCN has advanced these ecospiritual principles into the pseudoscience of "conservation biology." Conservation biology holds that "natural" systems are best because they are the result of a millennia of fine-tuning by mother earth. Therefore, the only acceptable management practices for earth's fragile ecosystems are those that follow "natural" patterns.
Likewise, biodiversity can only be fully protected by setting aside entire ecosystems in wilderness preserves.
The IUCN
