'Sustainability': UN plot?

Posted June 18, 2012
Updated June 19, 2012

The most interesting debate of Monday night's House session was over a bill to extend the Local Food Advisory Council. Some GOP members say it's part of a UN plot to subvert US sovereignty.

The measure, Senate Bill 491, simply extends the Local Food Advisory Council's mandate for three years. It has the support of Republican Commissioner of Agriculture Steve Troxler.

Nonetheless, two GOP House members argued it's part of a United Nations conspiracy, because the board's charter includes the term "sustainable."  

Rep. Glen Bradley tried to amend the bill to remove the word from the panel's mission. He said the term "sustainable" is government doublespeak, intended to "lull the public into complacency."

Bradley warned his colleagues that "sustainability" is part of the UN's Agenda 21. 

"'Sustainability' is a term that was designated [by the UN] in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 that means 'social justice' more than 'sustainability,'" Bradley said on the House floor. 

Bradley found support from Cabarrus Republican Larry Pittman, appointed to replace retiring former Rep. Jeff Barnhart last fall. 

Sustainability "is the efforts of the UN to circumvent our constitution to have the government more and more in control of people," Pittman said. "It’s not about maintaining a resource. It’s about getting the people more under the control of the government."

Bradley is vice-chair of the House Agriculture committee. The committee chairman, Johnston Republican James Langdon, spoke against the amendment. 

"With all due respect to my colleague," Langdon said, "I think that the proper way to do this is to pass the bill as presented and continue to have confidence in Commissioner Troxler and those who are on the advisory council."

The amendment was narrowly defeated, 51-63, with most Republicans voting for it, along with Democrats Bill Faison and Dewey Hill.

Bradley then spoke against the bill itself, warning his House colleagues that mandating sustainability would be tantamount to endorsing the UN's Agenda 21. "It is a blatant violation of the US Constitution to become a party to international treaties that have not been approved by the US Senate," he cautioned.  

Nonetheless, the bill passed easily, 82-32. 

"Agenda 21," the UN's plan to respond to environmental change caused by human development, has become something of a bete noire among Tea Party and far-right conservatives, highlighted by luminaries like Glenn Beck and the John Birch Society. They argue it's a recipe for "depopulation and communitarianism."

The NCGOP passed a resolution against Agenda 21 at its state conference earlier this month.  GOP gubernatorial candidate Pat McCrory tweeted that he was "proud to support" the resolution. 

The left-leaning Southern Poverty Law Center calls the Agenda 21 controversy an anti-government conspiracy theory. 


This blog post is closed for comments.

Oldest First
View all
  • bossman54 Jun 22, 2012

    Despite your impassioned posts Mr. Miller, you still have not given any evidence of Agenda 21. The rantings of a disturbed liberal Rosa Koire, doesn't make it any more believable. Ms. Koire's "evidence" is usually a website that links back to her advertising her availability to give lectures at a price. Just because sustainability is being discussed at the Earth Summit is not evidence either. I see you lost the primary to Chad Barefoot. Take this as a lesson. Sometimes embracing the lunatic fringe can get you in office. Sometimes not, because they will eventually be taken to the doctor by their exasperated families and put on medication.

  • GlenBradley Jun 21, 2012

    In fact kmiller, this is not a dead 20 year old issue as you imply, because this same international group actually met yesterday, 20 June 2012, at Earth Summit 2012 in Rio de Janeiro with the expressed intent to continue the work of Agenda 21 and work to solidify the previous concepts into hard international law. You can examine their Earth Summit 2012 home page for yourself, hosted by the United nations, at http://earthsummit2012.org/

  • kmiller145 Jun 21, 2012

    Seriously, jacquesplace? First, your use of quotes with sustainable is absurd. Here's the standard definition from the Bruntland Commission: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” That's it. That's sustainability. Where can a conspiracy fit in that definition? Second, if you're concerned about someone taking your farm, don't blame Agenda 21 or sustainability - blame a much older governmental "conspiracy": eminent domain. The ability and power of the goverent to seize your land and property for the public good is much older than this 20 year old document, which does NOT give the government the right to take your property. I can't believe this discussion is even happening, and that so many of you actually think this is a legitimate problem. Stop listening to crazies like McCrory and Coble and actually READ something that's science-based, not crazy-based.

  • jacquesplace Jun 20, 2012

    Agenda 21 is real. Electric co-ops are required to pay monies as required by Agenda 21. Many people can not afford these high electric bills. These mandates are being passed on the the consumer by co-ops because they do not have the funds themselves. They are co-ops, not money making machines. Light rail is Agenda 21. Light rail will cut small communities in half. These light rails are not stopping in your community. There will be no crossings allowed in the communities. Taking property for "sustainable" greenways is Agenda 21. If they want my farm, they can just take it and required I live in a urban setting. Where have our Liberties and Freedom gone if we accept Agenda 21. Down the tubes.

  • GlenBradley Jun 20, 2012

    The two party system, as it is currently, is almost designed to be the most efficient means of tearing down the Constitution. Republicans like one half of the Constitution and ignore the other. Democrats like the other half of the Constitution and hate the first. Whenever the two parties compromise to agree on something, it is almost universally an abrogation of the Constitution.

    As a strict Constitutionalist, I am used to Democrats liking one half of what I do and hating the other half, while Republicans like the other half of what I do and hate the first half. America is on the brink of destruction and the only way back is to restore the Constitution. The WHOLE Constitution, not merely those bits I like. That's what the parties do, and that's why our country is in trouble.

    The level of Constitutional ignorance amongst the political class and the general public is obscene. Make no mistake, unless people learn the Constitution and choose to enforce it, America is headed for disaster.

  • GlenBradley Jun 20, 2012

    Well JF, my attempt to protect the citizens against the Federal takeover of food in S510 "Food Safety Modernization Act" (H65) was considered 'too controversial' to get a hearing, along with my effort to

    legalize medicinal cannabis in NC (H577),

    to shelter NC from a potential collapse of the US Dollar (H448),

    to protect NC from the issuance of a national ID Card (H445),

    to require labeling for GMO and rBGH foodstuffs sold in NC (H446),

    to say NC opposes the indefinite detention piece in the NDAA (H982),

    and to restore real job growth to NC the right way (H587).

    They were all "too controversial" to even be allowed a committee hearing, so they told me I should start with something little. H1093, H1094, and H1095 were "starting little." :-)

  • Cylon Jun 20, 2012

    Glen Bradley, Why don't you and your cohorts do something constructive for once this state instead of trotting out tin-foil hat one-world government theories that already have thousands of website dedicated to. Y'all are undoing everything great about this state. I guess you won't be happy until you drag us down to the level of Alabama.

  • kmiller145 Jun 20, 2012

    It's blowing my mind how many of you are stupid/ignorant enough to believe that one particular section of a 20-year-old document is now the greatest threat to our rights and sovereignty. Sustainability is not doublespeak meant to slowly strip your rights - it's simply using resources in such a way as to not affect future generations from having access to those same resources. Having public transportation does not at all affect your right to drive your Hummer 1,000 miles a day - it merely provides options to those who care about our planet or don't want to buy a car. That's all Agenda 21 SUGGESTS, as there are no teeth whatsoever in the document. There are no rules, no regulations, no directives, only suggestions as to how we, as environmentally-conscious humans, can live how we want while also ensuring that our children and grandchildren can do the same. To twist it into some UN conspiracy to strip your rights is nothing less than crazy. And you wonder why our country is such a mess.

  • grannybumpers Jun 20, 2012

    Thank you for your input. However, there are millions of conspiracies theories. A simple Google has also returned volumes of documents showing blue M&M are alien tracking devices as well American being under the control an Illuminati led shadow government. However, I have not seen one government document validating these fears of losing our property rights, et al. On the contrary, evidence points the entire Agenda 21 idea originated with the John Birch Society. I agree this is not a right/left issue. However, as a citizen of North Carolina, I do have a right to question why a Senator embarrasses the state, even if his intentions were good, with bring a conspiracy theory to the floor on the taxpayer's dime.

    @gkingthomas - I'm not a paid troll. The keeping kids from working on farms was a hoax,too; a proposal from DOL taken out of context. I've read the UN papers at your link, but still see no validation of the C.T.

  • PatriotWatchdog Jun 20, 2012

    @grannybumpers For those who want the truth, there is plenty of information about the origins of sustainable development and Agenda 21 available on official U.S. government sites, and United Nations websites. Being good stewards of the environment does not require surrendering personal property rights, individual rights, and governing authority to unelected boards and bureaucrats. If you don't want the truth or the facts, you can easily avoid them. A ten year old could find volumes of official government documents on Agenda 21 and sustainable development with a simple Google search in about thirty seconds. Agenda 21 isn't a GOP-Dem issue. When did this become a left-right issue? That's a cop-out. H.R. 982 and H.R. 983 deserve a recorded vote by the N.C. General Assembly. Protecting the sovereignty of our constitutional republic is the duty of all public servants, regardless of party.