Skip to comments.United Nations wages war on capitalism (Global Compact)
Posted on 08/12/2004 8:32:46 PM PDT by take
United Nations wages war on capitalism
As if our nation's free-market ideal isn't damaged enough -- witness, if you will, the generally lengthy permitting process for businesses and the prevalence of zoning laws, environmental mandates, eminent domain abuses and hefty tax burdens that plague our would-be entrepreneurs and developers in nearly every county, city and state across America.
Now comes the United Nations, with its Global Compact Center and its Responsible Investment Initiative. Announced in July at the four-month-long "Universal Forum of Cultures in Barcelona 2004," both these programs are thinly veiled attacks against capitalism that, left unchecked, will result in a ceding of private and sovereign national oversight and regulatory powers to the global government.
The Global Compact Center is the physical manifestation of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's five-year brainchild, the Global Compact, that he touted as a voluntary commitment on the part of businesses to honor 10 principles "in the areas of human rights, labor and the environment." The principles are derived from such notable U.N. documents as the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and include business practice suggestions that range from the "surely, you jest" category -- as with Number Four, thou shalt not practice slavery, and with the recently added Number 10, thou shalt not be corrupt -- to the seemingly more agenda-driven, evidenced in numbers seven, eight and nine that demand strict regard for the environment.
The utter nonsensical notion of American businesses pledging to the corruptible United Nations to abstain from corruption aside, these environmental provisions reek of hidden agenda. They mirror the basic tenets captured within the Kyoto Protocol, a controversial document that has failed to achieve U.S. ratification because prevailing congressional and White House wisdom have so far agreed with some in the science field that these environmental restrictions will not markedly improve air or water quality but rather result in a damaged economy.
This mirroring reveals a begrudging genius that permeates the Global Compact: It takes the idea behind Kyoto Protocol out of the hands of America's duly elected, who have so far resisted ratification, and brings it instead to the doors of the individual corporations. And even though the compact is presented as only a harmless, voluntary commitment, the present culture is such that extreme environmentalism and well-funded Greens lobbyists will eventually drive the consumer market to demand corporate capitulation to these global principles.
Spearheading this drive for corporate acceptance is now the Global Compact Center, the creation of which allows the plan -- the compact -- a home, an organized headquarters staffed by those committed to use "the power of collective action" to "advance responsible corporate citizenship so that business can be part of the solution to the challenges of globalization," the United Nations reports.
Do we really want to push our free-market economy, or at least, what's left of it, down this path toward U.N. oversight? The center promises to develop into a clearinghouse agency of sorts, ultimately taking charge of dictating which businesses can produce and in what amounts and basing those assessments on environmental factors that have not even been fully recognized by the U.S. government as needful of strict regulation.
The situation seems lose-lose for American corporations and for Americans, as the business world conforms to global environmental guidelines that hold the good of the world above the good of our nation, and the American people, in the process, suffer less production, lost jobs and higher prices.
But wait -- this center represents only one prong of the on-going attack against capitalism. The other facet affects investors.
"In an effort to safeguard the ecological futures of the planet, the United Nations environmental agency today launched a new Responsible Investment Initiative aimed at collaborating with major institutional investors to develop a set of globally recognized principles by September 2005," says a July 15 U.N. news release. This initiative, the release continues, is "framed in support of the Global Compact."
Here's the ominous part, though, and the one statement that should squash all doubts as to the level of risk the United Nations is willing to accept in pursuit of global compliance to its environmental agenda.
The Responsible Investment Initiative "also builds on a (U.N. Environmental Program) study that warned of a threat to stock markets if environmental, social and governance issues are ignored by financial analysts and the broader investment community."
It really doesn't get any clearer than that.
Bump this for an indepth
I need a picture of the Blue UN Brain Bucket with the used ammo holes in it. It was on a thread that was pulled last night.
F--- the UN.
U.N. At War With U.S.
The greatest threat to the United States is not Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden, or any of the thousands of terrorists throughout the world.
The No. 1 Enemy of the United States is the United Nations.
Because the United Nations is now dictating foreign policy for the United States.
America is a sovereign State. We have our own Constitutional government based on freedom and liberty.
As a result, America has become the most prosperous and powerful society in the history of civilization.
And the reason can be found in one word: Freedom.
America does not use its power and money to declare war on other countries. America uses its great resources and technology to liberate nations from murderous dictators and tyrants who enslave and exploit their citizens.
And these same dictators and tyrants destroying their countries are now members of the United Nations. And they have finally taken over the United Nations with their singular voices. Yes, a single veto by any one of these corrupt nations on the United Nations Security Council can stop America from using its immense resources to help liberate millions of people throughout the world seeking freedom, peace and opportunity.
Ironically, two countries that the United States liberated from the tyranny of Germany in World Wars I and II have now declared diplomatic war against the United States for seeking to liberate millions of Iraqi citizens from Saddam Hussein, the mass murderer who today ranks right up there with Hitler, Stalin and other bloody dictators of the 20th Century.
Why does the United Nations tolerate the actions of todays Hitlers and Stalins?
Just look at the make-up of the United Nations, which is headquartered in the United States and heavily financed by the United States. The majority of the United Nations member-states are countries that believe in socialism, Marxism and Communism.
America believes in economic freedom and liberty for all its 300 million U.S. citizens.
Why do millions of people around the world want to live in the United States?
Why have some 10 to 12 million illegal aliens sought refuge in the United States?
Because they know this is the greatest place on Earth that allows them to be the best they can be.
We dont see people fleeing to Cuba, China or Africas many dictatorial regimes.
Socialism is spreading like a cancer throughout the world. Socialism is all about big government, big taxes and big spending.
Individual freedom is secondary to the socialists political agenda. The politicians and bureaucrats come first.
The hard-working taxpayers are simply there for exploitation the means to grow socialism and restrain liberty and freedom.
You dont see Americas population shrinking from U.S. citizens seeking to live in France, Germany, China and other socialist/communist regimes.
No, people are coming to America, not leaving America.
I think its time the United Nations should be leaving America and setting up shop in one of their favored socialist or communist societies.
Why not locate the United Nations in Paris, or Berlin, or Beijing, or Havana the dysfunctional leaders of socialism and communism?
The United States Congress should give the United Nations one year to find another home for their socialist/communist propaganda machine a machine as fine-tuned as Hitlers or Castros.
America doesnt need the United Nations.
The United Nations and its impoverished socialist states need America and our bountiful resources and abililty to change the face of the world from terror to freedom for all.
The UN is exploiting the US and the taxpayers of America have had it.
Out with the UN, and in with world freedom and peace via the Capital of the United States, which is the worlds Capital of hope and freedom for all peoples, regardless of race, color or creed.
Didn't it used to be on a book cover??
Its time to end the UN
More firms join UN push to be good corporate citizens
By Alexandra MacRae | Contributor to The Christian Science Monitor
UNITED NATIONS, N.Y. It started with a vision of what business could be. At the urging of United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan, 38 companies, including Nike and Volvo, embraced nine principles ranging from not hiring child workers to cutting down greenhouse gas emissions.
Now, five years later, some 1,500 firms have signed on to what has become the world's largest corporate citizenship initiative, the United Nations Global Compact, which held its first summit here last month. That explosive growth illustrates what many business leaders already believe: Corporate social responsibility is entering the mainstream.
Membership ranges wildly, from financial powerhouse Goldman Sachs to Amazon Caribbean Guyana Ltd., which employs 200 Amerindians who can hearts of palm in the jungle.
While the compact has no policing powers, it can point to some success stories. For example: William E. Connor & Associates, a product sourcing company headquartered in Hong Kong, reports that an underage girl employed in a supplier's factory was dismissed, provided with an educational stipend, and rehired when she reached legal age. Lafarge, a French construction materials firm, boasts plans to reduce its carbon-dioxide emissions to 85 percent of 1990 emissions by 2010. And Banco Itau, a Brazilian bank, touts its healthcare plan and exercise facilities.
Of the compact's nearly 1,700 signatories - a list that not only includes companies, but nongovernmental organizations, unions, and other groups - only 61 are American. US companies are similarly underrepresented in two other United Nations-endorsed efforts, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the World Economic Council for Sustainable Development, says Georg Kell, who heads the compact. The reason? The compact asks companies to embrace principles, rather than meet explicit standards - an approach "not easily understood in [America's] litigious culture," he says.
But US firms are showing more interest. Nearly a quarter of American signatories - including Starbucks Coffee Co. and Newmount Mining Corp. - have signed since March.
With no authority to enforce its dictates, the compact has merely "delisted" companies that refuse to report their social progress. Some signatories want more stringent measures. "It's easy to sustain [the compact's] principles when you're operating in Western Europe, or America, or Japan perhaps," said Fred Hicks, General Secretary of the International Confederation of Chemical, Energy, and Mineworkers, at the summit. "But where you are not expected to do it by law, are you going to be prepared to put the resources in to still apply those standards?"
Other signatories prefer the volunteer approach, believing that good corporate citizenship will spread because it is profitable in the long term. Social concern is a measure of "management quality," says Anthony Ling, managing director of Goldman Sachs.
Still others say that even if good citizenship does not increase long-term profits, the principles should become an integral part of doing business. The compact and similar initiatives can create "an enabling environment in which social responsibility pays," says Peter Eigen, chairman of Transparency International, an international nongovernmental organization devoted to fighting corruption.
But skeptics argue that good citizenship will take hold only among businesses that are already keen to be good citizens. Companies that do not heed existing regulations will not change to embrace the compact, says Alexandra Wrage, president of Transparent Agents and Contracting Entities, a nonprofit that certifies businesses' compliance with anticorruption laws. For example, one compact principle asks signatories to "work against" extortion and bribery. "If companies can be working against that on their own," Ms. Wrage adds, "it means they're already doing it."
You can say that, or you can do something.
It is time for the freedom loving people of the world to acknowledge the global threat the UN poses and stop funding it, and get the UN treaties out of US laws. We need to get the UN educational materials out of our schools and put an end to the idea of "global citizenship". If we don't do that, we will forever be in their thrall.
There are stories every day of the UN nullifying our sovereignty.
Its important to help Americans realize that the UN is not a benign organization, its corruption and ability to corrupt is apparently without bounds.
New World Order Rising? - Thoughts on the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development
At least you formatted it.
OK, you need to run for office!
Bowing to opposition on the UN Security Council, the United States dropped the word ''sanctions'' from a draft resolution on Sudan.
package of 34 treaties, all of which were ratified by a show of hands -- no recorded vote.
Annan in historic meeting with Supreme Court &Congress/is believed to be unprecedented.
I think the United Nations is getting too big of an ego. I think it is time an American was selected to lead the United Nations.
They need a good old injection of good old American come uppance and values.
Producers file lawsuit against U.S. Government
POSTED AT 12:20 PM Thursday, August 12
A group of Canadian cattlemen is launching a multi million dollar claim against the U.S. Government. Producers have filed a $150-million lawsuit against the U.S. for keeping the border closed.
The group claims it lost millions since the border closed in May of 2003 after a case of B-S-E was discovered in Alberta.
The Canadian Cattlemen for Fair Trade argue the U.S. is violating the North American Free Trade Agreement and plan to file more claims under NAFTA.
Sadly, under bogus treaties which are upheld and overseen by globalists...they have grounds to stand on. Mad Cow never tasted so yummy!
SHOULD be irrelevant. I agree 100% and haven't fallen into that trap!
Oh and do you live in a smart growth city? Do you have speed bumps, chicanes, roundabouts, bumpouts, hardscape medians, parking space reduction, ridesharing, mixed use high density housing, open spaces, wildlands, and sustainable development in your area, town, city or state? If you do, you have been affect by the United Nations.
Oh, and by the way, do you pay tax money to our federal goverment which funds the WTO, the World Bank,the IMF, infrastructure developement for least developed countries? AIDS programs for Africa? Did you help fund the Navy ships interdicting the smuggled oil out of Iraq, before the Iraq war?
Then you have been affected by the UN.
You may not be aware to the extent at which the UN and UN treaties have affected Americans and the American taxpayer.
United Nations 0
The United States was built on a free enterprise system, not Capitalism.
Free enterprise is stifled by overregulation and overtaxation.
To Kofi Annan with love,
So you do know how to make a link. My apologies.
I get 10 GB download bandwidth per month -- help me get my money's worth! $;-)
I was hoping you wouldn't mind my putting it up. Glad to know I was right.
I could never find it again and I have even searched online for it. I wonder what the book was about.
NGOs - The New World Order
By Peter and Helen Evans (06/20/2003)
When the dictator, Josef Stalin, first appeared at the brand-new United Nations accompanied by representatives of Soviet "labor unions," other delegates cried foul, asking, "How can there be labor unions in a government-run society?" Stalin explained, "Ah, but these are Non-Governmental Organizations," and the term "NGO" first came into the world's vocabulary.
Nowadays, most of us are likely to think of NGOs as large-scale charitable organizations who work all over the world providing medical care in disaster situations, food to famine sufferers or advocacy for political prisoners. One of the main reasons we even recognize the names of the well-known groups is that they often canvass door to door for donations to support their good works.
However, there is a growing number of less well-known NGOs who don't want to help the hungry feed themselves, rather, their aim is to "eradicate hunger." They don't want to help the poor become wealthy, rather, their goal is to "eliminate poverty." Do these distinctions sound picky? Well, they're not. Helping people means getting down to cases with the real people who are asking for help, finding out what they really need and helping them in ways that enable them to actually provide it for themselves. The much more abstract aims of "eliminating" hunger or poverty typically involve utopian plans that are to be imposed upon people "for their own good."
Consider the "elimination of poverty." This abstract notion breeds another: the "re-distribution of wealth." We see this in the United States when our own Congress takes more and more wealth (in the form of taxes) from those who create it and "re-distributes" it, in the form of entitlements, to those who don't create, or earn, it. This is bad enough when a democratic nation, essentially, "does it to itself" through government policy. The citizens have the option of changing policies through democratic means. But what happens when non-governmental organizations try the same thing?
Consider a recent, international case: the "Kyoto Protocol To The United Nations Framework Convention On Climate Change." If you think it's about controlling climate change, read it again. If it were implemented, its real function would be the "re-distribution of wealth" from the industrialized, developed nations to the less-industrialized, less-developed nations who, under Kyoto, will basically be paid not to develop. The important thing to notice though, is the composition of the United Nations. Although seats in the U.N. General Assembly are ostensibly held by 185 "sovereign nations" from around the world, they are outnumbered more than two-to-one by about 500 seat-holding NGO's who can submit papers, call for votes, exercise influence by lobbying 'real' members, etc. The only thing they can't do is vote. An additional 3,000 NGOs hold, not seats, but "consultant" status at the U.N.
Who the heck are all those NGOs and what are they doing at the UN? Well, they are self-appointed groups vying for government-sized budgets and global power, claiming a pseudo-governmental legitimacy while side-stepping the accountability that is the essential requirement of legitimate government. In short, these burgeoning elements of the global New-Left are "hijacking democracy."
This is the title of an analytical synthesis of studies conducted over the last decade by Marguerite Peeters, subtitled "the power shift to the un-elected. "http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.14879,filter./pub_detail.asp" Ms Peeters gave a brief overview of the trends indicated by her research at a recent conference at the American Enterprise Institute. She also told those assembled of a tentative meeting scheduled this fall for representatives of major NGO's, the European Union and the Democratic Party of the U.S. Do you know why Bill Clinton has hinted that he'd like to be Secretary-General of the UN? He would be the leader of the largest socialist organization in the world, while his wife... well, you know where her sights are aimed. We should "be afraid; be very afraid" of where this trend is taking us, but only if the fear mobilizes us to change its direction.
We should begin by learning more about the pervasive influence NGO's already have and would like to have on our lives. The American Enterprise Institute "http://www.aei.org" and the Federalist Society "http://www.fed-soc.org/" have collaborated on a new website, NGO Watch "http://www.ngowatch.org" Check it out. It's time for us to use our own influence.
"Recent years have seen an unprecedented growth in the power and influence of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). While it is true that many NGOs remain true to grassroots authenticity conjured up in images of protest and sacrifice, it is also true that non-governmental organizations are now serious business. NGO officials and their activities are widely cited in the media and relied upon in congressional testimony; corporations regularly consult with NGOs prior to major investments. Many groups have strayed beyond their original mandates and assumed quasi-governmental roles. Increasingly, non-governmental organizations are not just accredited observers at international organizations, they are full-fledged decision-makers." ~ NGO Watch.org