Updated: 11:58 PM, May 14, 2012

Related sites:

Rio+20: United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development

It is now “38 Days to the Future We Want” whoever “WE” are supposed to be: “Rio+20, 20 – 22 June 2012”. Actually the future THEY want.

Also:
International Institute for Sustainable Development
IISD Reporting Services
The Earth Charter Initiative

May 11, 2012 press conference about Rio+20

The exchange between Brice Lalonde and the U.S. reporter about “living legend” Maurice Strong is interesting. The question makes no dent.

He mentions the participatory forum people can sign up with. This actually should emphasize in our minds that there is no genuine democratic process that legitimizes the activities of these essentially corporate UN Sustainable Development conferences.

The public is not even informed, not even slightly, about Agenda 21 and the other treaties that our own government signs.

These are not constitutional as far as Canada goes, they are not legitimate democratically, and they are effectively secret because the public is in the dark since the media and government portrays a certain political structure to us as if it’s real.

It IS rule by NGOs, councils and foundations, not one person one vote. People who work for NGOs should rethink what they are involved in.

Most importantly, these UN treaties are the greatest ongoing long-term attack on property rights and personal freedoms. It’s called planning.

You like “zoning”? You like “planning”? Yes, that’s what I said – same thing – I said no property rights, no freedoms. PLANNING. But not you planning your own life. It’s the “future” “we” want, not what you want.

But even if you agree with fascist planning – literally Agenda 21 public-private governance on a global scale with a communist style lifestyle for the people down below – even if you agree with taking away your neighbour’s rights and freedoms when some strange tax-absorbing “authority” makes a declaration in the name of protecting a piece of dirt, or a tree or an owl – why do you pretend this process is democratic and legitimate?

Is this actually how your bread is buttered? Or is sacrificing human rights to supposedly “protect” ecological systems your religion? Granting that excuse to a government or institution gives them more power to abuse ordinary people who have limited resources! Where do you get the right to let someone else decide what happens to our resources, to local land, to local water, to our property? Where do you get that right to hand those decisions over to any kind of institution, especially one that doesn’t even have a show of democracy?

In any case, here is a detailed article that lists the history of the process from decades ago, including Agenda 21, signed by governments in 1992, and then it summarizes the status (at the time this was published) of the Rio+20 document negotiations, and expectations about the conference, as well as some inside information:

SUMMARY OF THE UNCSD INFORMAL INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS 23 APRIL – 4 MAY 2012 (pdf)
Earth Negotiations Bulletin:

“UN CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT: UNCED, also known as the Earth Summit, was held from 3-14 June 1992, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, and involved over 100 Heads of State and Government, representatives from 178 countries, and some 17,000 participants. The principal outputs of UNCED were the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, Agenda 21 (a 40-chapter programme of action) and the Statement of Forest Principles. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Convention on Biological Diversity were also opened for signature during the Earth Summit. Agenda 21 called for the creation of a Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) as a functional commission of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), to ensure effective follow-up of UNCED, enhance international cooperation, and examine progress in implementing Agenda 21 at the local, national, regional and international levels.”

There’s a lot in this document that people might find strange. For example, “Major Groups”, like “Farmers” seem to be represented by individuals! I don’t know which God chose them but I’m sure we weren’t informed. Also there was a proposal to create a position that represented “future generations”. I think that’s kind of amazing, although not democratic. Some kind of time travel plus plenty of imagination would be involved in such a position.

At the end, just to single out one point, population control:

“Many Major Groups and international organizations are using the Rio process as a way to get a hearing for ideas and policies. Epistemic communities of development and environment practitioners and policy makers have drawn attention to relevant ideas such as “beyond GDP” approaches, planetary boundaries, and sustainability accounting, through seminars and presentations. Even if the related proposals do not leap over the final hurdle and into the text, they were intensely discussed in the corridors. Observers point to the return of “limits to growth” arguments, discussion of resource scarcity, and references to population limits. “Issues that for some time were off the table are getting an airing again,” said one, noting that not all ideas were warmly received. Discussion of population limits, for example, should not occur outside the framework of sexual and reproductive rights, warned one delegate from a Major Group.”

The idea of restrictions on population is always hiding behind the phrase “Sustainable Development”. Kicking people off the land by telling them to tear down structures or fining them, or not allowing them to build, that also is hiding behind the phrase “Sustainable Development”. That goes along with urbanization and Smart Growth, stacking and packing, transportation corridors, etc. And it has already been happening. People should insist on freedom and control over their own lives and property, and oppose the system, instead of just letting themselves be brainwashed and going along.