Attacks on Personal Property Rights

Agency Tyranny page 6

In July of 1776, our ancestors signed the Declaration of Independence, which, with our Constitution, positioned the state as a servant to protect the life, liberty and property of the people. Little did the signers know that just 200 years later an event would occur that would begin the unraveling of all they had pledged their “lives, fortunes and sacred honor” to protect.

That story begins on October 24 of 1945. The United States’ Senate had just approved formation of The United Nations. Following the aftermath of WWII, President Franklin Roosevelt convinced a skeptical public to support the body by promising the UN was our country’s best means “to prevent future war”. However, less than a year later, while returning soldiers looked to the GI Bill for education, training and new home mortgages, the UN worked on an agenda, far different from preventing “future wars.”

Vancouver Action Plan

In 1946, the General Assembly adopted a resolution to promote and create research leading to standards for Housing and Town Planning. This new resolution was the precursor to the Vancouver Declaration on Human Rights and Vancouver Action Plan presented in June of 1976. The meeting in Vancouver, Canada established the UN’s definition of the relationship between man and property. The accompanying action plan represented what was at the time, the most extreme violation of individual property rights in US History.

Agency Tyranny Page | 7

The Preamble to land in the Action Plan began…1. Land, because of its unique nature and the crucial role it plays in human settlements, cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Social justice, urban renewal and development, the provision of decent dwellings-and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Under the United Nation’s proposal, land could not be “controlled by individuals,” instead; it had to benefit “society as a whole.” If there were any doubts as to the UN’s intentions, they were clarified in the next paragraph.

2. Instead, the pattern of land use should be determined by the long-term interests of the community, especially since decisions on location of activities and therefore of specific land uses have a long-lasting effect on the pattern and structure of human settlements. Land is also a primary element of the natural and man-made environment and a crucial link in an often delicate balance. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable to its protection as an asset and the achievement of the long-term objectives of human

settlement policies and strategies. “Public control of land use is therefore indispensable to its protection as an asset and the achievement of the long term objectives of human settlement policies and strategies.”

Agency Tyranny Page 8

The Vancouver Action Plan proposed that the world’s governments control the land for the purposes of “social justice”, “development schemes” and “society as a whole”.

UN’s Marxist Ideals Codified in US Regulatory Law One year after the Rio Earth Summit, President Bill Clinton, exasperated at the refusal of Congress to approve the UN’s programs, decided to go it alone. In 1993, he formed the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD). Its purpose was to advance the ideas of Agenda 21 and the Biodiversity Treaty and gain buy-in from stakeholders who would later implement the UN’s version of Sustainable Development in the United States.

To assure continuity with the UN’s program, the President formed a committee that seated the very people who wrote Agenda 21, at the same table with Federal Agency employees. EPA, HUD and the Department of Commerce members served side-by-side with directors of international groups like the World Resources Institute, Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council.21 Together, the committee created a 10-point list of National Goals that matched the anti-private property objectives of Agenda 21.

Agency Tyranny Page 17 

The PCSD reported its progress to the United Nations. It was not long before the committee’s ideas made their way into regulatory law. By 1998, the UN’s Sustainable Development goals from the 1992 Earth Summit were codified in the Federal Register and had become the law of the land. The EPA’s Sustainable Development Challenge Grant Program included the goals of advancing Agenda 21 and the ideas of the President’s Council on Sustainable Development. The formerly rejected “Wildlands Project,” designed to migrate Americans into controlled regions; and the Vancouver Action Plan’s goal to increase government’s control over private property, were jointly transformed into America’s “Regional Sustainable Development” movement. (Read this paragraph again!) Throughout the next decade sustainability, regionalism and Smart Growth planning flourished in every state. In 2002 HUD partially funded the American Planning Association to create boilerplate Smart Growth legislation that reflected the government’s plans.

The “Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook” recommended governments use ‘takings’ legislation to confiscate the property of individuals who failed to change their property to conform to government schemes. Planners consider the “amortization of non-conforming uses” clause an option that localities may or may not use. But, all of the options in the guidebook restrict rather than expand private property rights.

http://sustainablefreedomlab.us11.list-manage.com/track/ click?u=ec7f192a872c6e5829dbbc97e&id=2c865c1a5b&e=49a2c9e532