
The all-seeing eye is more malevolent than we thought. Still from the video “Agenda 21 for Dummies”.
Belief in a shadowy conspiracy of powerful men and women who are trying to take over the world is a meme that won’t die. My first experience with this brand of political belief was in a men’s bathroom stall in the Norlin Library at the University of Colorado, Boulder. There, I first learned of the Trilateral Commission’s plan to vaporize my cherished American freedoms.
Fear of the Trilateral Commission peaked 30 years ago, and now it’s mostly a quasi-historical oddity, but that doesn’t mean they’ve given up trying to control you.
The latest version of this evergreen meme is the current brouhaha over Agenda 21 which has inflamed the Republican National Committee and several state parties, including Georgia’s.
Agenda 21 is a non-binding toothless statement of fairly general principles for sustainable development adopted by the United Nations in 1992. The “21” in the title refers to the 21st century.
The people who wrote Agenda 21 are tricky. This may sound like the usual administrative pablum to you, but buddy, it’s packed with all sorts of action items:
Scientific knowledge should be applied to articulate and support the goals of sustainable development, through scientific assessments of current conditions and future prospects for the Earth system. Such assessments, based on existing and emerging innovations within the sciences, should be used in the decision-making process and in the interactive processes between the sciences and policy-making. There needs to be an increased output from the sciences in order to enhance understanding and facilitate interaction between science and society.
A stirring call to arms, reminiscent of Shakespeare channeling Henry V’s St. Crispin’s day speech to the troops at Agincourt. “Should be! Needs to be!” Makes the pulse race, doesn’t it?
That’s because you’re not seeing the larger picture. From the first linked video:
Sustainable development is the philosophy designed to bring human beings across the globe under the full control of a narrow human élite.
Or take this quote, from a resolution adopted by the Republican National Committee in January and to be introduced as a platform plank at the Republican National Convention:
WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is a comprehensive plan of extreme environmentalism, social engineering, and global political control that was initiated at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the United Nations Agenda 21 is being covertly pushed into local communities throughout the United States of America through the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) through local “sustainable development” policies such as Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, and other “Green” or “Alternative” projects; and
WHEREAS, this United Nations Agenda 21 plan of radical so-called “sustainable development” views the American way of life of private property ownership, single family homes, private car ownership and individual travel choices, and privately owned farms; all as destructive to the environment…
It’s like the shadowy attempt to impose sharia law. The brave citizen-legislators of Oklahoma tried to fight it, but the Federal courts overturned that measure and sided with the Muslims trying to take over the domain of civil law in this country.
Like the brave legislature of Oklahoma, fighting an implacable foe, lawmakers of the State of Alabama have recognized this threat and begun the fight against it. Senate Bill 477, passed through a Republican legislature and signed into law by Republican Governor Robert Bentley, states:
The State of Alabama and all political subdivisions may not adopt or implement policy recommendations that deliberately or inadvertently infringe or restrict private property rights without due process, as may be required by policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to “Agenda 21″…
(And note that the words “Agenda 21″ fall on the 21st line of the bill. Puzzling evidence.)
As The Economist’s “Democracy in America” blog puts it,
Agenda 21 was rousingly condemned at the state Republican conference last month as “an encroachment on our sovereignty” (which it might be if it were enforceable, binding, or actually did anything). And [Bill Byrne], a former candidate for governor now running for commissioner of Cobb County, just north of Atlanta, condemned plans to build a jogging and biking trail alongside a highway because, “That’s Agenda 21. Bicycles and pedestrian traffic as an alternative form of transportation to the automobile.” Hear that, hippies? Every time you walk or bike somewhere instead of driving your car, U Thant wins.
The Agenda 21 meme gained its popularity in mid-2011, according to a graph of Google searches. It’s also interesting to speculate on the geographic distribution: Sterling, VA and Milpitas, CA are the #1 and #2 cities searching for Agenda 21.
The #1 state for “Agenda 21″ searches is Montana, by a wide margin. Tennessee is #2, but states ranking 2 through 10 are in a virtual tie.
The Agenda 21 conspiracy meme is really not much different that the Trilateral Commission meme, which is not much different than the Bilderberg/Illuminati meme which is not much different than the Protocols of the Elders of Zion meme.
Agenda 21 fears (eikosieinophobia?) seem to be a smooth continuation of this evergreen idea, consistently promoted by the John Birch Society and other groups, warning us of impending doom.
This graph compares the number of “Agenda 21″ searches to the number of “Trilateral Commission”, “Bilderberg” and “Illuminati” searches.
The Illuminati win. So far, it has been the only thing they’ve won. Since these supposedly powerful groups have been at it for so long, you think they’d have achieved their desired objective, The One World Order, long before now.
Cecil Adams said about the Trilateral Commission conspiracy theory in his “Straight Dope” column:
Among true believers, opinions about what the Trilateral Commission is up to fall roughly into two categories: the merely dubious and the totally insane.
It reminds me of my father’s favorite joke. A man is standing on a street corner in a busy U.S. city, screaming at the top of his lungs. A policeman asks him, “Why are you standing on a street corner in this busy U.S. city, screaming at the top of your lungs?” The man says, “To keep the tigers away.” The policeman replies, “That’s silly, sir. There are no tigers for thousands of miles.” To which the screaming man replies, gleefully, “See what a good job I’m doing!”
I, for one, appreciate the wonderful job the John Birch Society is doing at keeping the tigers (and sharia law and Agenda 21) at bay.
Related articles
- Exposing the Influence Behind the Anti-Agenda 21 Anti-Sustainability Agenda (treehugger.com)
- Inside Agenda 21: The International Tyranny of Bike Lanes (theatlanticwire.com)
- Agenda 21 population control map for USA (fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com)
- U.N. Out of Alabama! (washingtonmonthly.com)
- Agenda 21 for Lower Living Standards (pathwaytoascension.wordpress.com)
- The Dangers of Agenda 21: The Plans of the N.W.O. (panoffolin.wordpress.com)
- Alabama Leads the Rebellion Against UN Agenda 21 (aquariuschannelings.com)
- Alabama Becomes First State To Officially Adopt Anti-Agenda 21 Legislation (treehugger.com)
- Agenda 21 and Confederate Heritage (revisedhistory.wordpress.com)
- Agenda 21: How Globalist Domination Happens on a Local Level (theintelhub.com)
- Federal Horse Rustlers and the Agenda 21 Hustle (insomniacanonymous.wordpress.com)
- The New America Under Agenda 21 with Activist Rosa Koire — YouTube (2012indyinfo.com)
- Benjamin Fulford — Reader Update — 4 July 2012 (lucas2012infos.wordpress.com)
- Maurice Strong, Father of Agenda 21 (hwnsurf.me)
- Agenda 21: How Globalist Domination Happens on a Local Level (blacklistednews.com)



@Monotreme
Just reading the New American article about the new Atlanta law made my head hurt. I can understand the paranoia about “one world order” as isolationism becomes less and less tenable in our more globalized society, especially for businesses. People don’t like change, and they don’t like admitting that what happens in other countries affects us here. However, I fail to see how an initiative aimed at making sure we still exist in the future amounts to a world takeover by anyone.
It’s like these people are saying that we must maintain our extreme dependence on foreign oil, because reducing our oil deficit would risk the takeover of our nation by foreigners, especially those Agenda 21 globalists from the UN. So, making ourselves less dependent on other nations would make us part of the Agenda 21 World Order. It makes no sense.
But internal logical consistency has never been a particular hallmark of conspiracy theories.
Conspiracy theories simply fascinate me. I think maybe they are proof that everybody is at heart a novelist, and we all just want to create a narrative more complex and compelling than the the simple truth of any matter. Or maybe we want to salve our egos by believing our failures are because of vastly powerful sinister forces arrayed against us, and not because our own position is weak, unpopular, screwed-up. etc.
You should see the manic proliferation of conspiracy theories at Freeperville these days. They spend their days spinning convoluted webs of global takeover, double-dealing, deep machinations and Manchurian candidates.
And (not all that promising for Republican hopes this year) they firmly believe their own party is “in on it” and profiting from the deceptions, which is why all the high-ups in the GOP refuse to expose Obama for the lying, illegitimate, non-citizen fraud that he really is and “take their country back.”
Here is yesterday’s thread on the various conspiracy issues surrounding the birther issue. If your stomach isn’t strong enough to read right to the end, the most current theory is that Ann Dunham’s father (Barack’s grandfather) consorted with black prostitutes, and fathered Barack Obama with one of them on a secret trip to Kenya. He returned to Kenya when the child was born, brought it home and foisted the mulatto baby on his daughter to claim as her own so the family would not be shamed or blackmailed.
His wife Madelyn, Obama’s grandmother, who worked in a mid-level government position in Hawaii, was obviously in on the plot and forged the birth documents, then planted them in the state archives and sent birth announcements to the newspapers.
Conservatives hating/despising Barack Hussein Obama = ad nauseam Obama misinformation aside, it comes down to low information voters, as always.
The problem for Reps, after (4) years as president, Obama is already clearly defined to independent swing voters.
>
Before the 2008 election there was a DVD in most national newspapers:
Obsession ~ Radical Islam’s War Against The West hoping to link Hussein Obama to radical Islam.
Also working against Republicans/turdblossom et al, true then as it is now, American voters have the attention span of a peanut!
Did I mention Obama has been president for four years, whereas mittens and his Mormon magic underwhere is still a mystery lol.
that is all
I am curious what caused the relatively large spike in “Agenda 21″ interest in early June 2011. I have searched for some proximal cause, and can’t find any. It doesn’t appear to have been a FOXNews report or a blog post that Google can find.
@Monotreme
It probably started with Mike Opelka of The Blaze who published an article insinuating that UN Agenda 21 is a Soros plot for World Government on June 14. I’m guessing that the conspiracy heated up when Mr. Opelka’s June 21 article linked Agenda 21 to Obama’s June 9th signing of Executive Order # 13575 which created the White House Rural Council (WHRC).
The comments under the articles are particularly entertaining for those with strong stomachs for “anti-socialist” paranoia.
@mclever,
@fili
My guess is that as soon as someone linked Agenda 21 to WHRC on June
9th, that that triggered the ensuing interest. The Blaze might not have
been the absolute start of the Agenda 21 furor, but it shows that it was
propagating through the conservative blogosphere by mid-June as a
reaction to Obama’s EO #13575.
@mclever,
It always amazes me that George Soros is considered to be so frighteningly rich, when the Koch brothers could own a couple hundred Soroses. Seems to me the Kochs would be much better candidates for being Secret Overlords. But maybe that’s just me.
Rothschild, hmmm. Clearly the Illuminati agenda is to undermine the UN for their own purposes in attaining a New World Order for themselves.
“I think maybe they are proof that everybody is at heart a [little paranoid].…”
There, fixed it for ya.
“It always amazes me that George Soros is considered to be so frighteningly rich, when the Koch brothers could own a couple hundred Soroses.”
Umm, no.
http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/#p_1_s_a0_All%20industries_All%20countries_All%20states_
Among the world’s wealthiest individuals, Charles and David Koch are tied at 12th with $25 billion apiece. George Soros is 22nd at $20 billion. Looking at them individually, they are virtually indistinguishable, though if you combine the Koch brothers’ wealth, they would have about 2.5 times what Soros has.
Mule,
Perhaps. The human mind is well-suited to fill in gaps with one’s own imagination. Some gaps come from inability to know, while others come from unwillingness to know. Regardless, what we fill those gaps with comes from our own view of the world. Coupled with the Lake Wobegon effect, conspiracy theories and a degree of paranoia are pretty much inevitable.
At that point, what’s the real difference between “novelist” and “little paranoid”? Both come from the creations of fictions. They merely serve different purposes.
Mule, thanks for the correction. Okay, $50 billion total for the two Kochs, $20 B for Soros. Poking at the Internets for a bit, I agree, these are the numbers I am also finding.
On a side note, the Koch “job creators” increased their net worth from 2007 to 2011, from about $34 B to about $50 B. During the same period, according to publications from Koch Industries, they shrank the number of people they employed from about 80,000 to around 67,000. Not really so much about “job creation” I guess. But that’s way off-topic, unless we can tie to it the Rothchild conspiracy to undo the U.N.…
But Michael, just yesterday you said “none is so blind as he who will not see.” I understand that “a foolish consistency is …” but I would have thought you’d be a bit more consistent.
shortchain,
I’m afraid you’ll need to spell it out for me. I don’t understand in which way I’m being inconsistent.
Michael,
One person’s wishful thinking is another person’s imagination filling in the gaps in their knowledge. One person’s paranoia is another person’s obvious and incontrovertible pattern. One person doesn’t want to see something — and another person sees something they want to see, even when it isn’t there. Does that clear things up for you? It’s all the same phenomenon, just turned this way or that.
Yesterday you directed “none is so blind as he who will not see” at my comments. Today you are basically arguing that the human mind fills in a pattern where none is there.
shortchain,
Two sides of the same coin. Part of the same phenomenon, as you pointed out. How is that inconsistent?
Michael,
Since you seem to want to know, do you consider it consistent to say one day to someone, “none is so blind as he who will not see” (evidently implying they cannot see something) and the next day to point out how — and why — people see things that aren’t there? If you do, then I can say no more.
“Mule, thanks for the correction. Okay, $50 billion total for the two Kochs, $20 B for Soros. Poking at the Internets for a bit, I agree, these are the numbers I am also finding.”
To be perfectly honest, I didn’t realize the Kochs were that wealthy. But I knew that Soros was somewhere in that 11-figure range, behind guys like Slim/Gates/Buffet, but more than enough spare change lying around. And for them to have even a “hundred times” what Soros has, that would put their combined net worth at more than $1 trillion, and I knew that wasn’r right .
Shortchain,
Yes, I do. Both involve people’s perceptions differing from reality. Sometimes it’s out of desire, others out of need.
shortchain,
I believe I understand the source of confusion. I wrote
yet you interpreted it as
What I wrote, and what I meant with that, is that one chooses not to see it, not that they are incapable of doing so.
Michael,
No, I interpreted it as “will not see” — as in, doesn’t want to. That is, I was wishfully not wanting to see … something…for reasons that were not clearly explained. Today you are saying, and I quote: “what we fill those gaps with comes from our own view of the world”. In other words, people are prone to see what they want to see.
So — fine, people are prone to see things they want to see that aren’t there, and people are also prone to not see things that are there (and some of us are sadly unable to see things that aren’t there–no doubt a personal shortcoming, no need to rub it in). Which raises the question: how do we determine which is the case? How do we establish ground truth? Or is there no ground truth?
After all, for all we know, there are scheming UN officials just itching to take over the world (and let us not discount The Brain). In fact, given that there are thousands of UN officials, it surpasses believability that all are humble, democratic, and honest.
shortchain,
Not to be flip, but it depends on who “we” is. There’s a reason that juries have 12 people on them, instead of merely one. Certainly a preponderance of evidence can help, but look at how many people still disbelieve in the existence of global climate change, let alone the anthropogenic nature of it. Look at how many people still believe Obama was born in Kenya, or Indonesia, or anywhere-but-the-US. Look at how many people believe that raising taxes by x percent will generate x percent more tax revenues. The evidence to the contrary on all of these is pretty substantial.
So it really does depend on who “we” is.
There probably are. But the UN is so incapable of actually doing much that, absent some amazing coördination among many people whose interests diverge, they won’t be able to achieve those goals. At least, not within the structure of the UN. So, really, it doesn’t matter if there are such people.
Michael,
Juries don’t determine the “truth” except in fiction. In real life, they determine the outcome of a case, and perhaps guilt. The truth, unless it relates to whether people believe something or not, does not depend on whether people believe it.
Mule,
And my error was in the opposite direction, putting Soros under $10 B and roughly doubling the amount the Kochs have. Interesting to see preconceptions play out, and find the truth between them, eh? (Plus, you did actual math.)
shortchain,
Of course. That’s actually closely related to my article for tomorrow. But your observation there is the reason there is no truth that is absolute to everyone on earth. A skeptic can find a flaw in any evidence. So there may well be an absolute truth, but its existence is somewhat irrelevant except in an abstract sense; humans’ perception of the truth is all that can truly matter to humans…though some may be unable to discern the difference.
Existential enough for ya?
Existential notwithstanding, I took it at face value and since MW did not give any specifics re: what shilohbuster was “trying” to say, his biblical reference was just a deflection as to shilohbuster’s post. Basically meaningless jibberish from MW, unless he wants to expand on said discussion.
This of course applies to the previous thread.
>
btw, underwear, not underwhere lol as the emperor may have no clothes, but at least …
“Basically meaningless jibberish from MW.…”
Must be tough having to, at times, defend both your right and left flank?
That’s kind of what being a centrist is about.
Actually shilohbuster, MW’s biblical reference deflection was “trying” to defend you as he must have a soft spot, eh. Which is fine, again liberal empathy. My beef was he didn’t give any specifics.
And the obvious: MW, dc et al liberals are quite fair, indeed they bend over backwards trying to appease disgruntled children. Otherwise you would have been banned instantly (4) years ago by Nate, another moderate.
You should be eternally grateful for their impartiality and belief in giving peeps second, third, fourth etc. chances lol.
Yes, MW has infinite patience!
Shiloh said,
The other two co-moderators, not so much
Pingback: Logarchism » Beyond the Water’s Edge