A Real Agenda, Not a Conspiracy Theory

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Dur­ing the week of Novem­ber 14, 2012, a sto­ry and video was released by Bet­ter Geor­gia of a pre­sen­ta­tion giv­en to GOP State Sen­a­tors from Geor­gia on Octo­ber 14, 2012.  The Bet­ter Geor­gia sto­ry was tak­en out of con­text and a dis­tort­ed sen­sa­tion­al­ized head­line was cre­at­ed for polit­i­cal pur­pos­es.  Sub­se­quent­ly, the sto­ry was picked up and repeat­ed by oth­er local media and then went viral in the nation­al media.  In all of this, not one print, TV, or Inter­net out­let both­ered to con­tact me direct­ly for my side of the sto­ry.  After per­son­al­ly reach­ing out to the Atlanta Jour­nal Con­sti­tu­tion, I was allowed to write the fol­low­ing op-ed piece.  Not to defend myself, but to bring into the fore­front of the dis­cus­sion, sub­stan­tive issues with regard to region­al­ism, pub­lic-pri­vate part­ner­ships, and rep­re­sen­ta­tive gov­ern­ment.

Post­ed Novem­ber 25, 2012, The Atlanta Jour­nal-Con­sti­tu­tion:

A real agen­da, not a con­spri­a­cy the­o­ry
By Field Searcy

When I read on Page 185 of the March 2011 Cobb Coun­ty Com­pre­hen­sive Plan that the coun­ty sup­ports the advance­ment of sus­tain­able devel­op­ment poli­cies as defined by the Unit­ed Nations Divi­sion of Sus­tain­able Devel­op­ment, I could no longer ignore that the U.N. Agen­da 21 (A21) poli­cies were real and thriv­ing in Amer­i­ca.

The U.N. poli­cies are detailed in a 300-page doc­u­ment along with the Local Agen­da 21 Plan­ning Guide. Sold as pro­tect­ing the envi­ron­ment, sus­tain­able devel­op­ment poli­cies are more far-reach­ing than our fields and streams. A21 out­lines plans for the con­trol of land use, hous­ing, trans­porta­tion, food pro­duc­tion, con­sump­tion pat­terns, water, ener­gy, edu­ca­tion, the role of indus­try and health care. Sound­ing famil­iar? We have been bom­bard­ed with these glob­al plans of change.

Warm and fuzzy words like “com­pre­hen­sive plan­ning,” “smart growth,” “pub­lic-pri­vate part­ner­ships” and “out­come-based edu­ca­tion” were cho­sen by cen­tral plan­ners to cam­ou­flage a desired alter­nate out­come. As adults, we are famil­iar with mar­keters using pos­i­tive labels to encour­age us to act in ways not always in our best inter­est. These words in the A21 plan were care­ful­ly cho­sen to make us feel bet­ter about giv­ing up our sov­er­eign rights. Con­verse­ly, neg­a­tive label­ing and hate speech are used when cit­i­zens dis­agree.

This is not a Repub­li­can or Demo­c­ra­t­ic issue. Elect­ed ser­vants in both par­ties have worked to imple­ment region­al­ism and pub­lic-pri­vate part­ner­ships to fun­da­men­tal­ly trans­form Amer­i­ca. Eco­nom­ic mod­els endors­ing pub­lic-pri­vate part­ner­ships vio­late free mar­ket prin­ci­ples by ben­e­fit­ing favored cor­po­ra­tions, pro­tect­ing pri­vate gains and leav­ing tax­pay­ers oblig­at­ed for loss­es. It pro­pos­es a “Com­mu­ni­tar­i­an” mod­el of gov­er­nance that is dia­met­ri­cal­ly opposed to the Amer­i­can way.

In real­i­ty, the U.N. poli­cies include plans to re-engi­neer human soci­ety through region­al equi­ty schemes to spread the wealth. Region­al­ism as a sub­set of A21 gives appoint­ed region­al coun­cils con­trol of vast sums of tax­pay­er dol­lars while work­ing unchecked. Once appoint­ed, the tax­pay­ers are unable to remove these coun­cils through elec­tions. It threat­ens our rep­re­sen­ta­tive form of gov­ern­ment. It vio­lates our one-per­son, one-vote prin­ci­ple to equal leg­isla­tive rep­re­sen­ta­tion.

The goals of pro­tect­ing our nat­ur­al resources are wor­thy. We can embrace the need to con­serve the air, water and land as well as edu­cate our chil­dren in a pos­i­tive way. The real issue is the need for deep­er research and hon­est dia­logue into the ulti­mate goals of U.N. Sus­tain­able Devel­op­ment while pre­serv­ing the Amer­i­can prin­ci­ples of respect for pri­vate prop­er­ty rights, free enter­prise and rep­re­sen­ta­tive gov­ern­ment. We need to root out who real­ly ben­e­fits from the sweep­ing changes, as it is not the Amer­i­can peo­ple. It is no acci­dent cit­i­zens across the U.S., includ­ing Geor­gians, are reject­ing U.N. Agen­da 21 poli­cies.

Field Searcy, of Cobb Coun­ty, led a pre­sen­ta­tion on region­al­ism and Agen­da 21 for Geor­gia Sen­ate GOP mem­bers last month.

Source:  http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-forward/2012/11/25/a-real-agenda-not-a-conspiracy-theory/

About Field Searcy