Is Agenda 21 A Good Or Bad Idea?
By James Donahue
It
has been common knowledge that the world as we know it is in the midst of extreme change, nations are locked in unrest, and
we are facing racial, environmental, and overpopulation issues that threaten to push us all into violent confrontation.
World leaders have been watching this develop for decades and have
been looking for solutions. In 1992, during a United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, a 300-page document known as
Agenda 21 was signed by then President George H. W Bush and 177 other world leaders.
At the time the document was hailed as a voluntary blueprint for cities, regions and nations to follow on a voluntary
basis to promote sustainable development in the face of a rapidly expanding global population.
Agenda 21 was best accepted and implemented in many parts of Europe,
Australia and Africa but the United States has been blocked by the conservative political movement. The rejection is coming
from mostly the Tea Baggers powered by conspiracy warnings by radical FOX News personality Glenn Beck, who claims it is a
movement to take away American freedoms and seize property.
So should we be listening to Beck and his followers, or should we be taking a serious look at Agenda 21 as a plan
for solving global issues that are growing like a storm cloud looming over our heads?
From what we understand about the document, there are four important parts to the plan that would deal with social,
environmental, education and research issues. The overall document appears to take a socialistic approach to building world-wide
equality among all nations. And if we can learn to do away with warfare and start working together as one large family, it
may still be possible to stop the destructive forces and start building a grand future for everyone.
Agenda 21 appears to be an excellent plan, offering a good start for
humanity to begin healing the woes of the world. We should all take time to study this document and give it some serious thought
rather than listen to the insane and banal arguments being voiced by Mr. Beck, his Tea Party followers and a segment of the
Republican Party.
In more detail, the
four parts to the document are:
--Social
and Economic Dimensions: dealing with world poverty, changing patterns of consuming resources, promoting health, achieving
better population control and building moderate housing for everybody.
--Conservation and Management of Resources: a plan for dealing with deforestation, atmospheric, land and water
pollution, conserving biological diversity, protecting fragile environments and managing radioactive waste.
--Strengthening the Role of Major Groups: improving the roles of children,
women, minorities and indigenous people, workers for business and industry and farmers.
--Means of Implementation: supporting research in science, technology, education, financial mechanisms and international
institutions.
All of these areas offer
broad spectrums of interpretation, some of which may be twisted to levels deemed unpopular by some people if not a majority
of the population in certain areas. But the overall plan appears to be an honest effort to solve issues that have plagued
us all for generations.
