Biotech lobbyists, the politicians on both sides of the aisle they donate to, and teams of company attorneys have many convinced that only genetically modified seeds will increase crop outputs and solve the world hunger and poverty problem.
One would think a program that focuses on sustainability and biodiversity would favor organic growing, but that is not the case. “End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.”įolks who do not support biotech giants’ (such as Monsanto and DuPont) patenting of seeds and increasing the amount of GMO crops and chemical pesticides around the planet will likely not be happy with this aspect of the Agenda 21 follow-up plan. And the fact that this agenda was created behind closed doors at the United Nations means that few lawmakers can offer answers when constituents do call to register their angst. With nearly zero media coverage about the Agenda 21 sequel, many constituents don’t even know about it. These are but a few of the questions those opposed to Agenda 2030 are asking. How would the United Nations end poverty for everyone everywhere? Who will pay for the social programs needed to complete such a monumental task? Exactly when did the United States of America allow another entity to dictate rules and policies to its citizens? “End poverty in all its forms everywhere.”
Opponents to the plan do not see the rules as being all warm and fuzzy instead they are viewed as yet a new set of freedom-infringing mandates to create a new world order. The plan claims that the guidelines and regulations it encompasses will have an altruistic result for future world citizens. The Agenda 2030 plan goes further in scope to include a “new universal agenda” for all of humanity. The first United Nations biodiversity plan focused mostly on the environment. Some have referred to the Agenda 2030 plan as “Agenda 21 on steroids.” “Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development” boasts essentially the same goals of the Agenda 21 plan, but digs even deeper with its intentions to control the way property is used. In September leaders from around the world gathered in New York City to present a new 15-year plan to oversee the use of land, both public and private, on a global scale. Advocates of Agenda 21 are deeming the program a success, but only one step in a master plan to create a global sustainable community. Now, 23 years later, Agenda 2030 has emerged.
But, hidden just slightly underneath all of the tree-hugging prose a property-grabbing and government-monitoring mindset may very well exist. Living in a manner that respects Earth and in harmony with the bounty of nature that God has provided appears to be a good idea on its face. The philosophies of the plan have already been integrated into many public school curriculums via the Common Core academic program. The United States is a signatory country to the Agenda 21 plan with more than 500 cities and towns already enacting some aspect of the international biodiversity plan on American soil. Agenda 21 and the regionalist movement geared to push rural and suburban residents into cities appears to many to be extremely closely related. The biodiversity plan includes steps that the United Nations feels should be taken to abolish poverty, “properly” manage municipalities, and protect fragile environments.
0 kommentar(er)
