What is Agenda 21?

Agenda 21 is a mechanism by which nations can "legitimately" centralize control of all resources (including people) in their nations in the name of combatting "man-made climate change."  It is a tool provided to them by the United Nations, an organization which will ultimately benefit from all worldly resources once they are collectivized on a global scale.

Agenda 21 is designed to dupe people into believing that this centralization of control (and their commensurate loss of control over their own lives and property) is necessary to save the planet.  It is a lie.

So people will either voluntarily give up their freedoms to "save the planet," or the government will use "saving the planet" as the excuse to take freedoms away from the people.

Collectivization in each nation is the first step.  Collectivization on a global government will be the next step.

In the process of all of this, the national leaders are protected and enriched, being part of the club of self-serving leaders called the United Nations.  Those leaders do not represent their people, they subjugate their people.  Agenda 21 is a means to the end of enslaving humans under a One World Government.

Agenda 21 and all schemes from the United Nations must be resisted.

Cross-posted from Against All Enemies

Connect to AAE
   Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
   Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies ("Follow")
   YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/AAEnemies ("Subscribe")

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More

America: Welcome to Serfdom

"Although we had been warned by some of the greatest political thinkers of the nineteenth century, by Tocqueville and Lord Acton, that socialism means slavery, we have steadily moved in the direction of socialism. And now that we have seen a new form of slavery arise before our eyes, we have so completely forgotten the warning that it scarcely occurs to us that the two things may be connected." --F.A. Hayek

America, welcome to Serfdom!  F.A. Hayek warned us about socialism in his 1944 book "The Road to Serfdom," and now here we are.  Follow the links below to see some past posts on Hayek's wisdom regarding our current socialist state of affairs in America.

Hayek on Individualism, Social Causes (4 Nov 12)
Hayek on Planning and Democracy (3 Nov 12)
Hayek on Policies that Foster Monopolies (8 Oct 12)
Hayek on Competition (4 Oct 12)
Hayek on the Meaning of Socialism (21 Sep 12)
Hayek on Hitlerism (8 Sep 12)
Hayek on Communism and Fascism (3 Sep 12)
Hayek on the Meaning of "Freedom" (20 Aug 12)
Hayek on the Decline of Classic Liberalism (18 Aug 12)
Hayek on Individualism (22 Jul 12)
Hayek's Warning: Socialism Means Slavery (18 Jul 12)
Hayek on National Socialism (16 Jul 12)
F.A. Hayek: The Road to Serfdom (7 Jul 12)

--Against All Enemies

Against All Enemies Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies (Click "Like")
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More

America Holds Its Breath

On this Election Day, America collectively holds its breath.

On one side, we have a segment of the populace who desire government to provide them with all their needs.  A segment who wants to be free from personal responsibility.  A segment who wants to be free from any presence of the Christian God in the fabric of our nation.  A segment who desires our nation to be more like the rest of the world.  A segment who believes that the ends justify the means, an ends that is nebulous and undefined, but just known as "hope."  A segment who justifies murder by claiming protection of individual privacy and right to personal choice.  A segment who believes that speech should only be free if it supports the desired ends.  A segment who deals with evil by legalizing and normalizing it.  A segment that believes truth comes from man and our rights come from the government.  A segment who sees a crisis as an opportunity to obtain more power

On the other side, we have a segment of the populace who desires limited government so that individual liberties are protected.  A segment who believes that each citizen is responsible for his/her actions.  A segment that believes that the Christian God is an essential requirement for the fabric of America. A segment that believes in the sovereignty of our nation.  A segment who believes that the way we do something is as important than the ends we seek to achieve.  A segment who believes that the right to life is not trumped by a right to privacy.    A segment who believes in the right to free speech, even if we may find that speech hateful or repulsive.  A segment who confronts evil.  A segment who believes that truth and rights come from our Creator.  A segment who sees a crisis as a call to do the right thing

These two positions are at their very core irreconcilable, and the emotions of both camps have been extensively whipped up by their respective leaders.  Opponents have been dehumanized and portrayed as "zombies" worthy of eradication.  Fear and hate are palpable in America.

How did we get here?

America failed to abide in our Constitution and in the Creator of heaven and earth.  We failed to safeguard the form of government and liberties it provides, having neglected our duty as citizens of this nation.  At our founding, We The People were sovereign.  But we have stood by while our government has steadily taken it away from us.  We have believed that through human effort our government can make a more perfect society.  We have convinced ourselves that America could not become like Nazi Germany or Rwanda where citizens commit mass murder and atrocities against their fellow citizens.  We have therefore sat idly by, sedated and distracted with music, movies, sports, and medication pretending that there is no problem, and if there is a problem, it will sort itself out.

As a result or our indifference, leaders of both parties have been guilty of taking us down a very dangerous path.  Both parties have involved us in unnecessary wars.  Both parties have bankrupted our nation by increasing our national debt to the point where it may be mathematically impossible to repay.  Both parties have passed legislation that infringe on our liberties.  Both parties have sought ways to circumvent the Constitution--and succeeded in doing so. Both parties have worked to undermine the sovereignty of our nation in favor of globalism.

Is our government doing things to us, or for us?

If We The People do not change the course of our nation quickly and restore our sovereignty, we may never be able to.

But are we already be too late?  George Washington instructed us that our nation depends upon morals and religion to function properly.  Without these two elements, it is doubtful that our Constitutional Republic can survive.  Have our morals already become so debased, and God removed so completely from our thoughts and actions, that our republic can no longer function as designed?  Perhaps we should just accept that our debauched culture now needs a dictator to keep it in line.  Perhaps we should rejoin the culture of the rest of the world, the very same world that many of our forefathers rejected by leaving everything behind and coming to an America where they could be more free.

After America, there is nowhere left to go.  Once America's freedom is gone, that's it.

We Americans, as every people of the world, get the government we deserve.  What kind of government do you think we deserve?  If it's not what you see now, then get out there and work to change it.  Wake up, pull your head out of the sand, contemplate our situation as a nation, and act.  Your life and your children's lives depend upon what you do this day, and every day after.

The bottom line is this: the battle for the future of America is not in Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen or Libya.  The battle is in America.  Put on the full armor of God and march to the sounds of the guns.

--Against All Enemies

Against All Enemies Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More

Hayek on Individualism, Social Causes

"...within these spheres the individual’s system of ends should be supreme and not subject to any dictation by others. It is this recognition of the individual as the ultimate judge of his ends, the belief that as far as possible his own views ought to govern his actions, that forms the essence of the individualist position." -- F.A. Hayek

In the following passage, F.A. Hayek first touches on why centralized planning will never work--no central body could ever hope to truly understand the economic situation enough to effectively control it.  (In the current age it is thought possible with the help of information technology.  However, it still falls far short.)  Hayek then explains why individualism is a better approach to the economic relations between the people of a nation, and how it does not completely dismiss those pursuits for social ends.

"...it would be impossible for any mind to comprehend the infinite variety of different needs of different people which compete for the available resources and to attach a definite weight to each.

...it is impossible for any man to survey more than a limited field, to be aware of the urgency of more than a limited number of needs.

This is the fundamental fact on which the whole philosophy of individualism is based. It does not assume, as is often asserted, that man is egoistic or selfish or ought to be. It merely starts from the indisputable fact that the limits of our powers of imagination make it impossible to include in our scale of values more than a sector of the needs of the whole society, and that, since, strictly speaking, scales of value can exist only in individual minds, nothing but partial scales of values exist—scales which are inevitably different and often inconsistent with each other. From this the individualist concludes that the individuals should be allowed, within defined limits, to follow their own values and preferences rather than somebody else’s; that within these spheres the individual’s system of ends should be supreme and not subject to any dictation by others. It is this recognition of the individual as the ultimate judge of his ends, the belief that as far as possible his own views ought to govern his actions, that forms the essence of the individualist position.

This view does not, of course, exclude the recognition of social ends, or rather of a coincidence of individual ends which makes it advisable for men to combine for their pursuit. But it limits such common action to the instances where individual views coincide..."

Hayek, F. A. (2010-10-22). The Road to Serfdom (p. 102). University of Chicago Press - A. Kindle Edition.

Against All Enemies Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More

Hayek on Planning and Democracy

The statesman who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted to no council and senate whatever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it. —Adam Smith

"The common features of all collectivist systems may be described, in a phrase ever dear to socialists of all schools, as the deliberate organization of the labors of society for a definite social goal....

...The various kinds of collectivism, communism, fascism, etc., differ among themselves in the nature of the goal toward which they want to direct the efforts of society. But they all differ from liberalism and individualism in wanting to organize the whole of society and all its resources for this unitary end and in refusing to recognize autonomous spheres in which the ends of the individuals are supreme. In short, they are totalitarian in the true sense of this new word which we have adopted to describe the unexpected but nevertheless inseparable manifestations of what in theory we call collectivism.

The “social goal,” or “common purpose,” for which society is to be organized is usually vaguely described as the “common good,” the “general welfare,” or the “general interest.”

...It cannot be adequately expressed as a single end, but only as a hierarchy of ends, a comprehensive scale of values in which every need of every person is given its place. To direct all our activities according to a single plan presupposes that every one of our needs is given its rank in an order of values which must be complete enough to make it possible to decide among all the different courses which the planner has to choose. It presupposes, in short, the existence of a complete ethical code in which all the different human values are allotted their due place."

Hayek, F. A. (2010-10-22). The Road to Serfdom (pp. 100-101). University of Chicago Press - A. Kindle Edition.

Against All Enemies Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More

The Six Trillion Dollar Man (Obama)

"You didn't build that!"

Link to "The Six Trillion Dollar Man" video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEjnyMyJYTI

Read More

Hayek on Policies that Foster Monopolies

We were the first to assert that the more complicated the forms assumed by civilization, the more restricted the freedom of the individual must become. —Benito Mussolini

What follows is F.A. Hayek commenting on how, in most cases, governmental economic policy creates the conditions for monopolies to form.  He then goes on to explain how centralized planning cannot conceivably understand and reasonably control all the variables in a complex economy.  Only in a free market system of competition can a complex economic system function effectively.

"Of the various arguments employed to demonstrate the inevitability of planning, the one most frequently heard is that technological changes have made competition impossible in a constantly increasing number of fields and that the only choice left to us is between control of production by private monopolies and direction by the government. This belief derives mainly from the Marxist doctrine of the “concentration of industry...” 

The conclusions that the advantage of large-scale production must lead inevitably to the abolition of competition cannot be accepted. It should be noted, moreover, that monopoly is frequently the product of factors other than the lower costs of greater size. It is attained through collusive agreement and promoted by public policies. When these agreements are invalidated and when these policies are reversed, competitive conditions can be restored....” 

In [Germany] especially, which came to be regarded as the model country typifying the necessary evolution of capitalism, the growth of cartels and syndicates has since 1878 been systematically fostered by deliberate policy. Not only the instrument of protection but direct inducements and ultimately compulsion were used by the governments to further the creation of monopolies for the regulation of prices and sales.... 

That [in Germany] the suppression of competition was a matter of deliberate policy, that it was undertaken in the service of the ideal which we now call planning, there can be no doubt. In the progressive advance toward a completely planned society the Germans, and all the people who are imitating their example, are merely following the course which nineteenth-century thinkers, particularly Germans, have mapped out for them.  The intellectual history of the last sixty or eighty years is indeed a perfect illustration of the truth that in social evolution nothing is inevitable but thinking makes it so....

What they generally suggest is that the increasing difficulty of obtaining a coherent picture of the complete economic process makes it indispensable that things should be coordinated by some central agency if social life is not to dissolve in chaos....

...it is the very complexity of the division of labor under modern conditions which makes competition the only method by which such coordination can be adequately brought about. There would be no difficulty about efficient control or planning were conditions so simple that a single person or board could effectively survey all the relevant facts. It is only as the factors which have to be taken into account become so numerous that it is impossible to gain a synoptic view of them that decentralization becomes imperative. But, once decentralization is necessary, the problem of coordination arises—a coordination which leaves the separate agencies free to adjust their activities to the facts which only they can know and yet brings about a mutual adjustment of their respective plans. As decentralization has become necessary because nobody can consciously balance all the considerations bearing on the decisions of so many individuals, the coordination can clearly be effected not by “conscious control” but only by arrangements which convey to each agent the information he must possess in order effectively to adjust his decisions to those of others."

Hayek, F. A. (2010-10-22). The Road to Serfdom (p. 91-95). University of Chicago Press - A. Kindle Edition.

AAE Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More

Hayek on Competition

Here is F.A. Hayek's rationale for why a reliance on the forces of competition is superior to centralized control and planning, as found in a collectivist (socialist) government.  (Remember that the term "liberal" is used in the classic sense and not in the modern sense where it is synonymous with "socialist.")

"The liberal argument is in favor of making the best possible use of the forces of competition as a means of coordinating human efforts, not an argument for leaving things just as they are. It is based on the conviction that, where effective competition can be created, it is a better way of guiding individual efforts than any other. It does not deny, but even emphasizes, that, in order that competition should work beneficially, a carefully thought-out legal framework is required and that neither the existing nor the past legal rules are free from grave defects. Nor does it deny that, where it is impossible to create the conditions necessary to make competition effective, we must resort to other methods of guiding economic activity. Economic liberalism is opposed, however, to competition’s being supplanted by inferior methods of coordinating individual efforts. And it regards competition as superior not only because it is in most circumstances the most efficient method known but even more because it is the only method by which our activities can be adjusted to each other without coercive or arbitrary intervention of authority. Indeed, one of the main arguments in favor of competition is that it dispenses with the need for “conscious social control” and that it gives the individuals a chance to decide whether the prospects of a particular occupation are sufficient to compensate for the disadvantages and risks connected with it."

Hayek, F. A. (2010-10-22). The Road to Serfdom (pp. 85-86). University of Chicago Press - A. Kindle Edition.

AAE Blog: http://aaenemies.blogspot.com
AAE on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/AgainstAllEnemies
AAE on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/@AAEnemies

Disclaimer: These opinions are solely my own, and do not reflect the opinions or official positions of any United States Government agency, organization or department.

Read More