Posted on 08/30/2002 11:31:57 AM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
There is a crisis in the Conservative movement. It is a blind spot that threatens everything the movement stands for. It is Sustainable Development, the theme of the United Nations conference in Johannesburg.
However, the conservatives who have always been there to fight off such utopian, socialist nightmares now seem to slumber blissfully in their ignorance at the very moment when vigilance is most urgently needed.
Sustainable Development is the greatest threat ever perpetrated against the American ideal of liberty. Under Sustainable Development there can be no free enterprise, no individual liberty or private property.
As I attend traditional conservative meetings around the country where the defense of property rights should be paramount, Sustainable Development is rarely mentioned.
Speaker after speaker addresses the audience about issues like abortion, taxes, and national defense. They declare their dedication to the fight for limited government. I've even heard some of these speakers gleefully declare that we are in a "conservative era."
If they believe this then they are seriously deluded. There can be no hope of living in a nation of limited government with Sustainable Development as official government policy. The two are diametrically opposed.
Today, the Bush Administration is continuing to help entrench Sustainable Development policies that were started under the Clinton Administration.
Conservatives as a movement appear to be ignoring this threat. Indeed, many Conservative foundations and major donors are actually providing funds to proponents of Sustainable Development such as the Nature Conservancy and the Sierra Club.
By sharp contrast, proponents of property rights who are on the front lines to stop this massive expansion of government control receive few dollars of support from those who should be their champions.
Conservative donors are woefully ignorant of Sustainable Development. They think they are giving their money to help the environment or to preserve historic places. Instead they are only helping to murder the very freedoms they profess to uphold.
Conservatives would never concede their liberty to Swastikas or Hammer and Sickles, but tuck it in a Green blanket called "environmental protection" and they will toss those liberties on the fire like an old-fashioned book burning.
Conservatives must heed the warning now! Sustainable Development is anti-science, anti-knowledge, anti-human and anti-reason. It is the creed of the mindless savage who seeks brute force over liberty.
If conservatives don't learn of its evil now, if we don't heed the warning and rip Sustainable Development out of every level of government by its well-entrenched roots, then American life, indeed human existence as we know it, will enter a new dark ages of pain and misery unlike any ever experienced by the community of man.
The Conservative philosophy advocates limited government intrusion into the lives of individual citizens. The root of that philosophy goes back to the ideals of the Founding Fathers and particularly John Locke, who said, "Man creates value and therefore property out of his own labor." He said that no government could take the fruits of one's labor without a compelling public need and without just compensation and then only through the rule of law.
James Madison used that theory to write the Fifth Amendment. John Adams said, "The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God and there is not the force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence."
Under the guarantee that government's only real job is to protect the rights of individual Americans to engage in commerce and to protect their property and person from thieves and murderers, Americans set about creating the most prosperous and free nation on earth.
Today, these American ideals are under severe challenge from the international community under the banner of Sustainable Development.
Time and again, news reports indicate that sustainable development is an environmental issue. It is not. Sustainable Development is the driving force of what Al Gore called a "wrenching transformation" that society must endure to repair what he perceives as the damage of the 20th century's Industrial Revolution.
It is the same Industrial Revolution that gave us modern transportation, medicine, indoor plumbing, healthy drinking water, central heating, air conditioning, and electric light.
Sustainable Development is not about environmental clean up of rivers, air and litter. It is an all-encompassing socialist scheme to combine social welfare programs with government control of private business, socialized medicine, national zoning controls of private property and restructuring of school curriculum which serves to indoctrinate children into politically correct group think.
Sustainable Development advocates seek oppressive taxes to control and punish behavior of which they don't approve and there is much these advocates disapprove of, including air conditioning, fast foods, suburban housing and automobiles.
Every aspect of our lives is affected by Sustainable Development policies. It is top-down control from an all-powerful central government; specifically the United Nations, which seeks to assert such control. That is the true significance of the World Conference on Sustainable Development.
The question is whether conservatives will rally to American principles of freedom against the onslaught of Sustainable Development's socialist tyranny?
(Tom DeWeese is the publisher/editor of The DeWeese Report and president of the American Policy Center, an activist think tank headquartered in Warrenton, Va.)
Tom DeWeese
But soon after that "blossom," it is the banks which end up owning the properties, as loans default.
Banks become big real estate holders in poor times.
Probably, the federal government will step in, to establish local zoning controls befitting the nationalizing socialists' agenda ... but step in the name of helping folks by assuming the mortgages.
People will like it; until eventually the economy improves and then the other foot lands: the enforcment of federal laws about what you can and cannot do with your property.
See: Sustaining Nothing, Losing Everything, Sierra Times, June 20, 2002, by Tom DeWeese (posted June 21, 2002 by brityank).
"What is Sustainable Development? ...On June 29, 1993, former President Bill Clinton issued Executive Order #12852 to create the President's Council on Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development calls for changing the very infrastructure of the nation away from private ownership and control of property to nothing short of a national zoning system.
Locally elected officials will no longer be the single driving force in making decisions for their communities. Rules will be made behind the scenes in non-elected "sustainability councils" armed with truckloads of federal regulations, guidelines and money.
According to Sustainable Development policies, air conditioning, convenience foods, single-family housing and cars are among the products that have already been determined to be unsustainable. Under such a system, the federal government, backed by an army of private, non-governmental organizations.
(NGOs), like the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, and the National Education Association will influence, if not dictate, policy in state governments and in local communities...
...The Community Character Act (S.975), and its counterpart in the House of Representatives (H.R.1433), is the legislation that will legalize enforcement of Sustainable Development in every community in the nation. The bill requires local governments to implement land-management plans using guidelines outlined in a federal document called the "Smart Growth Legislative Guidebook." This publication was developed with $2 million provided by the Clinton Administration to "guide" counties, cities and towns on how to "update their local zoning."
The Community Character Act offers grants to communities that will pay up to 90% of the costs for localities to "update" their zoning, but only if they do it the way the federal government dictates. The Community Character Act requires localities to "conserve historic, scenic, natural and cultural resources." These are euphemisms that mean more land grabs and fewer places where people can freely go about their daily lives. It means planned economies, restricted housing, and diminished use of cars. It means government control of property. The bill contains not a single mention of private-property rights protection..."
None like Barry Goldwater. We will see his like no more. He could not get elected today. About half of our society is pro government. A third are receptive to governmental solutions, and a fifth are conservative. I consider myself in the latter fifth and don't believe the left will loose until they have won and failed.
We have become a "Matronized" country, run by old biddies like Hillary, Boxer, Feinstein along with their "Mamma's Boy" followers like Bill Clinton, Gray Davis and Al Gore. Even our President rides the range on is "ranch" in a pickup truck instead of horseback.
The Goldwater's and the Reagan's have all past on, not to be seen anymore. We are the richer for their having been here, but the poorer for not finding their worthy successors.
I guess it either this or becoming a fundamentalist Islamic State.
It is time for the USA to debunk this stuff. As Rush Limbaugh has always said, This movement is couched in a way that makes arguing against these force seem like we are against clean air and water.
I think that we need to face the issue squarely and admit that it is simply an anti-captilist movement(IE socialism) and use that arguement. Some how we need to get the main stream media to begin acting like media and questioning these idiots.
I don't know what the answers are, but I sure don't want to head down the path that we are going.
I grew up in the fifties, when we were encourage to use more electricity, etc. In the sixties, this movement took over and has been reinforced by the media and the NEA. It has now become the reason for the existence of the UN I believe. To destroy capitalism, that is.
You think JFK, with his commitment to tax cuts and strong national defense, could get elected today either? He would be a pretty far right conservative by today's mainstream standards.
It's worse than that. We now no longer have the "nerve" to say no to a bad idea if it came from a woman or women's group. We will be labeled "mean spirited", "Neanderthal" or worse, "insensitive".
I don't want to return to the "Bad Ol Days", but some standards of progress are a given. I don't believe non-conservative women, or their lefty men understand the fundamentals of Natural law. They believe the can "Posit" their way to progress and the future.
NO! He would have to change parties to remain true to his principles of 1960. If JFK ran as a Republican today, the Democrats in the press would...assassinate him.
Instead of lamenting flush toilets, those delegates in South Africa should concentrate on not flushing.
My father needs lots of support though. If you're interested in helping and/or contributing to his campaign, go to the Frank Creel for Congress campaign site.
Also, I've posted a couple of related threads:
Frank Creel vs. Tom Davis - VA 11th District, and
Frank Creel's Second Amendment Position.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.