Tag Archives: Kathleen Marquardt

Kathleen Marquardt: SNOWFLAKES OR REASONING ADULTS – IT’S THE PARENTS’ CHOICE

by Kathleen Marquardt

Our nineteenth-century legal theory (individual right, contract, ‘a man can do what he likes with his own,’ etc.) was based on the conception of the separate individual. Mary Parker Follett, The New State

What is more important to people than their children? If people aren’t willing to stand up and fight for their children, we cannot expect them to care enough to stand up for anything else. Anyone who is not homeschooling their children, or working with them daily to undo the brainwashing done at schools, is giving his or her children over to be, at best, useful idiots. You don’t believe this is being implemented now? UNESCO’s Education 2030, goal 4.7:  By 2030, ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development, including, among others, through education for sustainable development and sustainable lifestyles, . . and the promotion of global citizenship.[1]

All those who are complaining about what is wrong need to stand up and do something about it. They don’t have to do it alone; there are organizations out there fighting to get schools back to teaching instead of indoctrinating, others that are working to stop Agenda 21/2030, and those protecting property rights. Every issue has organizations working against the globalism being inculcated on every level of society. But parents must be parents; they must protect their children. Parents need to grow up and man up now, or they must accept the responsibility when their children become snowflakes, because that is the only product coming out of our schools (other than those addicted to the drugs prescribed them for ADD, ADHD, etc., brought on by the ‘teaching’ methods).

Our schools are the breeding ground for anti-individualism.

Throughout the whole cycle of public education the child’s relationship with his family complements and guides his relationship with his peers and school.

When the child is in preschool, his contact with his parents will be fairly intensive. The parents will actively participate in his education and spent considerable time in the institution itself. For this reason the institution should be close to the parents’ residence.

During that time of the child’s education in the general ‘s school community, the relationship with his parents changes in character. Contact becomes less frequent (only a few times a week) and is related to holidays. Hands the interaction of children and their parents make take place either with in the educational institution or in the parents’ home. In either case, it requires a specific and yet to be defined spatial organization. To some up: the first foundations of Communist personality are established in nurseries through the relationship of children with their peers and preschool groups the personality further develop some primary groups during the earliest grades. These are excellently suited to foster the unfolding of all aspects of a child’s potential.[2]

While millions of Americans now homeschool their children, too many more Americans have no idea why these parents are going to the trouble when there are ‘perfectly good schools in every neighborhood’. Twenty years ago Charlotte Iserbyt wrote The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, in hopes of waking up all of America to the mind controlling, morally relativistic, and bringing about radical change to the our educational system.

The system is working exactly as planned; the problem is that the American public has been fooled into thinking the plan is to educate our children. Oh, no. The plan is, as Iserbyt says, “. . . the gradual transformation of our once academically successful education system into one devoted to training children to become compliant human resources to be used by government and industry for their own purposes.”[3]

We are evolving now a systems of ethics which has three conceptions in regard to right, conscience and duty which are different from much of our former ethical teaching: (1) we do not follow right, we create right, (2) there is no private conscience, (3) my duty is never to ‘others’ but to the whole.

Man cannot live by taboos; that means stagnation. But as one taboo after another is disappearing, the call is upon us deliberately to build our own moral life. . . .. It is we by our acts who progressively construct the moral universe; to follow some preconceived body of law – that is not for responsible moral beings.

Teachers no long educate, they are now change agents teaching what the powers-that-be want our children to believe is reality when it is anything but. Again from Iserbyt, “The reason Americans do not understand this war is because it has been fought in secret—in the schools of our nation, targeting our children who are captive in classrooms. The wagers of this war are using very sophisticated and effective tools:

  • Hegelian Dialectic (common ground, consensus and compromise)
  • Gradualism (two steps forward; one step backward)
  • Semantic deception (redefining terms to get agreement without understanding).”[4]

Hegelian dialectic

an interpretive method, originally used to relate specific entities or events to the absolute idea, in which an assertable proposition (thesis) is necessarily opposed by its apparent contradiction (antithesis), and both reconciled on a higher level of truth by a third proposition (synthesis). from the Free Dictionary. Basically, it is like our Congress now – there are two ‘opposing’ sides who pretend to be bitter enemies looking for the best mediated answer. But that answer is where those two sides had decided to end up, but knew that it was not good for the citizens, just themselves, so they did this little dance to distract us from reality.

This war has been going on for over 150 years – talk about ‘gradualism’! From John Dewey, “Upon the ethical side, the tragic weakness of the present school is that it endeavors to prepare future members of the social order in a medium in which the conditions of the social spirit are eminently wanting.”

And John D. Rockefeller, “I don’t want a nation of thinkers. I want a nation of workers.”

As to semantic deception, I’m sure every thinking person can identify it every day as we listen to MSM. It is the NewSpeak of today.

[1] http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002456/245656E.pdf

[2] Baburov et al, The Ideal Communist City, pp. 63,64

[3] Iserbyt, Charlotte The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, p. xi, 1999

[4] Ibid, p. xvii

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Kathleen Marquardt: Political Correctness, just one tool in the arsenal of Sustainability

Political Correctness, just one tool in the arsenal of Sustainability- Besides that loss of free speech on college campuses, we have social justice dictating what can, can’t, and must be done.”

by Kathleen Marquardt

At its worst, political correctness is nothing different from Orwell’s Newspeak – an attempt to change the way people think by forcibly changing the way they speak.” Urban Dictionary

“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is mentally ill because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well by creating the international child of the future.”    Chester M. Pierce, Harvard psychiatrist, speaking as an expert in public education at the 1973 International Education Seminar.

The “Dear Hillary” letter, written on Nov. 11, 1992 by Marc Tucker, president of the National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE), lays out a plan “to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone,” coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program.”

Tucker’s plan would change the mission of the schools from teaching children academic basics and knowledge to training them to serve the global economy in jobs selected by workforce boards. Nothing in this comprehensive plan has anything to do with teaching schoolchildren how to read, write, or calculate.

Twenty-seven or eight years ago, I was interviewed by a reporter at the Sacramento Bee about my articles challenging the thinking of animal rights. The reporter said to me, “But they are politically correct and you are not.” I agreed, saying that if anyone ever called me politically correct, it would be time to slit my throat.

Why do I bring this up now? Back then I didn’t realize where p.c. was going; now it is full-force tyranny. Am I exaggerating? Few people who do not back socialist-leaning thought are allowed to speak on our campuses of ‘higher learning’, many sporting bumper stickers pro Trump or Christianity or pro life have their cars keyed or spray painted. You don’t hear about that happening when one has a coexist bumper sticker.

Political Correctness has become a tool, one of many in the arsenal of global tyranny. It is a tool that could not have been used 40 or 50 years ago; most people still had rational, thinking brains. Since my interview with the Sacramento Bee, the road to hell – or global government – or the death of Western Culture — has gotten so steep we may not be able to stop it or even slow it down.

Do I exaggerate? You tell me. Besides that loss of free speech on college campuses, we have social justice dictating what can, can’t, and must be done. Many campuses require you to intuit someone’s arbitrary choice of gender so that you may properly address them (it would take a perfect clairvoyant to achieve this). Let’s move on to the important stuff – academic learning, or the lack thereof.

College students used to take a liberal arts degree in their undergraduate work to give them a well-rounded base. Now that and most other true academic learning has been ditched for social justice studies, sustainable studies, gaming studies – anything that is anti Western Culture, anything that makes one unemployable, anything that dumbs down the next generations.

Textbooks are full of misinformation, propaganda and lies. Classic literature is banned for using outdated words. Books are ignored or shunned for promoting morality, literacy, reason, common sense, and civility. And while our institutes of higher learning preach, “question authority”, they don’t actually teach questioning anything but Western Culture and its values. They certainly don’t teach students to question the professors’ authority. No longer do students debate tough issues; no one wants to take the side of the non-politically correct.

How did we get from the Declaration of Independence to the State of Political Correctness? One major contributor was the book, The Ideal Communist City, (a design for No Child Left Behind, Common Core and all the other aliases of behavior modification of children) said here in public education, “The best opportunity for contact among children of preschool age occurs in the nursery, which is the best setting for developing the child’s imitative powers and individual activities. He expresses his inclinations most freely here, and his egocentricity is least harmfully repressed. The positive value of group activity, of course, is fully realized only when it is organized and directed by educators who have benefited from advanced social training.”

Or look at this from the BSTEP program our government (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) hired Michigan State University to design. “A small elite will carry society’s burdens. The resulting impersonal manipulation of most people’s life styles will be softened by provisions for pleasure seeking and guaranteed physical necessities. Participatory democracy in the American-ideal mold will mainly disappear. The worth and dignity of individuals will be endangered on every hand. Only exceptional individuals will be able to maintain a sense of worth and dignity.”

Let’s not overlook UNESCO, here, “As long as a child breathes the poisoned air of nationalism, education in world-mindedness (one-world order) can produce only precarious results. As we have pointed out, it is frequently the family that infects the child with extreme nationalism. The school should therefore use the means described earlier to combat family attitudes that favor jingoism (nationalism). We shall presently recognize in nationalism the major obstacle to development of world-mindedness.” UNESCO publication #356, “In the Classroom: Toward World Understanding”

It took only about half the lifetime of our country to get us here.

In 1918, Mary Parker Follett wrote, in The New State, group organization – the solution of popular government, “The training for the new democracy must be from the cradle – through nursery, school and play, and on and on through every activity of our life. Citizenship is not to be learned in good government classes or current events courses or lessons in civics. It is to be acquired through those modes of living and acting which shall teach us how to grow the social consciousness. This should be the object of all day school education, of all night school education, of all our supervised recreation, of all our family life, of our club life, of our civic life.

“When we change or ideas of the relation of the individual to society, our whole system of education changes. What we want to teach is interdependence, that efficiency waits on discipline, that discipline is obedience to the whole of which I am a part.. . . when we know how to teach social discipline, then we shall know how to ‘teach school.’ The object of education is to fit children into the life of the community.” P.363

So, according to Follett, our lives must focus completely on losing our individual rights and work to subordinate any freedoms we might consider to the cosmic one-ness, the group. The thought of that (if there are thinking minds left) would drive most of us to suicide.

John Dewey, the reformer of the education system, said, “I believe that the school is primarily a social institution. Education being a social process, the school is simply that form of community life in which all those agencies are concentrated that will be most effective in bringing the child to share in the inherited resources of the race, and to use his own powers for social ends. I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living.”

“Humanist Manifesto” (1933) co-author Dewey calls for a synthesizing of all religions and “a socialized and cooperative economic order.” [1]

America cannot last under this. Our country is based on Western Culture, Judeo/Christian Values, the Rule of Law, and other rational, reasoning social institutions. As we eradicate morality, common sense, values, attitudes, and beliefs, we become no different than the animals. Look at Venezuela. Do we want that at a magnitude of the nth degree? If not, now is the time to wake up, stand up, and speak out. We don’t have much time left. Look at the streets of San Francisco, Chicago, Nashville, New York, Los Angeles. Is this what we want to call our civilization?

[1] Deanna Spingola, The New World Order, Programming the Masses

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2018/09/10/political-correctness-just-one-tool-in-the-arsenal-of-sustainability/?mc_cid=8dfab2085a&mc_eid=210870cea5

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Kathleen Marquardt: THE DEFINITION OF “IS”

Kathleen Marquardt: THE DEFINITION OF “IS” – “I do not want to believe that Trump is just using blue smoke and mirrors…”

by Kathleen Marquardt

No, this has nothing (or very little) to do with Bill Clinton. My question is, ‘Is President Trump’ for or against Sustainable Development? He and his cabinet give mixed signals. Yes, Trump has done more positive things than any president in the last decade, that I can remember, anyway. But then there is this:

Oh, boy! Here we go. Actually, Zinke needs to go.

I emphasized the text in bold to indicate the usual farce of Agenda21/2030 that is going to be the destruction of Western Culture. Keep in mind that the usual disclaimer for A21/2030 is “strictly advisory” and “soft-law”, horse pocky! This piece brags that the Department of Interior will be blanketing all public lands with public/private partnerships, as if this is a good thing. They are painting with words so pretty to make you think Interior is the most patriotic of all departments, while what they are doing is so insidiously evil the devil will celebrate them if they pull this off. Zinke calls it Made in America, but instead it is the unmaking of America, the tearing apart of the Constitution. PPPs help SD destroy property rights – the bedrock of freedom.

As Tom describes PPPs in the link below this one: “It is little understood by the general public how Public/Private Partnerships are actually used, not as a way to diminish the size of government, but in fact, to increase government’s power. In truth, many PPPs are nothing more than government-sanctioned monopolies. These privileged few businesses are granted special favors like tax breaks, free use of eminent domain, non-compete clauses in government contracts, and specific guarantees of return on their investments. That means the companies, in partnership with the government, can fix their prices, charging beyond what the market demands. They can use their relationship with government to put competition out of business. This is not free enterprise, nor is it government controlled by the people.”

In other words, PPPs are fascism in disguise. And, hopefully, America has seen enough of Sustainable Development in any form – Public/Private/Partnerships, carbon footprints, Common Core, social justice, you name it. Let’s tell Zinke that we just say, NO to calling an Agenda 21/2030 scheme “Made in America” as if it were baseball or apple pie, instead of the anti-American pile of horse-pocky that it is.

Secretary Zinke announces Creation of the “Made in America” Recreation Advisory Committee

“ Today, U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke announced the establishment of the “Made in America” Recreation Advisory Committee. The Committee will advise the Secretary of the Interior on public-private partnerships across all public lands, with the goal of expanding access to and improving infrastructure on public lands and waterways.

The duties of the Committee are strictly advisory and will consist of, but not be limited to, providing recommendations including:

Policies and programs that:

  • Expand and improve visitor infrastructure developed through public-private partnerships;
  • Implement sustainable operations embracing fair, efficient and convenient fee collection and strategic use of the collected fees;
  • Improve interpretation using technology;
  • Create better tools and/or opportunities for Americans to discover their lands and waters.”

For more information on public/private partnerships

Which will also lead you to a 3-part primer on PPPs.

After reading the above, one must question whose idea was this?

THE BIGGER PICTURE HIDDEN IN TRUMP’S CUTS TO CLINTON AND OBAMA LAND GRABS

Following up on an April executive order to have Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke review 27 “National Monuments,” Trump on Monday signed an order to cut back the Dec. 2016 Obama-created Bears Ears National Monument in Utah by eight percent (1.35 million acres to 201,876 acres). He also signed an order to cut the 1996 Clinton-created Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument – also in Utah — by nearly 50 percent (1.7 million to 1 million). The remainder of Clinton’s giant plaything will be broken into three separate areas: Grand Staircase National Monument, Kaiparowits National Monument, and Escalante Canyons National Monument.”

All of that leads to something I have been pondering.

Trump has done quite a few things to undo onerous regs and executive orders put in place by Obama, Clinton and Bush. Just today I read in The New American, “One of the very first actions of my administration was to impose at two-for-one rule on new federal regulations. We ordered that for every one new regulation, two old regulations must be eliminated … as a result, the never-ending growth of red tape in America has come to a sudden screeching and beautiful halt….

Within our first 11 months, we cancelled or delayed over 1,500 planned regulatory actions — more than any previous President by far….

And instead of eliminating two old regulations, for everyone new regulation we have eliminated 22 — 22. That’s a big difference. We aimed for two-for-one and, in 2017, we hit twenty-two-for one.”

Woohoo. That is wonderful. A great start. But . . .. But there is a gaping hole. Nothing has been done to stop the onslaught of Sustainable Development (SD) on property rights and the indoctrination of our children in the schools.

Betsy DeVos, the queen of Common Core is Secretary of Education. Our children are being brainwashed, dumbed-down, and turned into useful idiots, at best. Common Core is still going strong, our children are learning the five pillars of Islam, and there isn’t a single right from the Bill of Rights taught in the classrooms.

AFFH, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing is still alive and destroying property rights through the Department of Housing and Urban Development. People’s life savings and very lives are being destroyed by this as well as neighborhoods are being uprooted, whole classes of people are being dumped in neighborhoods not of their choosing just because of their race or their financial status. What most people do not understand is that AFFH is being embedded into every town, city, county and state the same way Sustainable Development was. When, like SD, AFFH has been put in place everywhere in this country, the name Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing will be dropped (just like SD), and AFFH will be an unnamed cancer eating away at our lives.

Also thanks to Sustainable Development, cities and counties are notifying their residents that they cannot even maintain their properties without getting permission from the planning commissions and abiding by the International Building Codes. Our codes, the best in the world, no longer are acceptable – because every city, county, berg, state in the world must now obey the same standards and rules; it is far easier for the global elite to control us that way.

Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who loves Asset Forfeiture, is still the AG and is not reining in Asset Forfeiture. He has finally ordered an examination of the Bundy case, but should it have taken him the outrageous infractions exposed by the whistleblower to see there was malfeasance going on there?

There is a lot more, but I think the above shows that, unless things are in the works and will be unveiled soon, we might need to start putting pressure on Trump to do what he said he would do. A lot of the ‘Deplorables’ promised to keep his feet to the fire if he didn’t do the job he promised. If President Trump is to eliminate 20,000 more regulations, if they aren’t to stop Sustainable Development, they will be useless.

I do not want to believe that Trump is just using blue smoke and mirrors to keep us mollified by making all these other good moves while Sustainable Development continues on with no slow down, destroying the greatest country every built. And I am not exaggerating! Sustainable Development should be the first focus for the President right now. We are so close to the tipping point; in fact, we could already be there.

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2018/01/16/the-definition-of-is/

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

A mishmash of the mess the world is in thanks to technocrats, communitarians, and an uneducated electorate

A Mishmash of the Mess the World is in Thanks to Technocrats, Communitarians, and an Uneducated Electorate 

by Kathleen Marquardt

“Save the planet” by herding us into “EcoCities”

Summiteers seek to address “the way humanity builds its home” and focus on “key actions that cities and citizens can take to rebuild our human habitat in balance with living systems.”  Concerns include slowing down and reversing “global heating, biodiversity collapse, loss of wilderness habitat, agricultural lands and open space, and social and environmental injustices.”

At the ECOCITY session “Priorities and strategies for mobilizing the finance needed to create zero-carbon ECOCITIES” solutions included things like a vehicle mile travel tax, carbon tax, government subsidies, and dipping into pensions.  This is eerily similar to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI.org) where retirement system investors use Environmental Social Governance (ESG) as their “fiduciary responsibility” excuse to implement the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and force industrial and societal behavior change.

What is an ECOCITY?  According to those gathered in Melbourne:
An ECOCITY is a human settlement modeled on the self sustaining resilient structure and function of natural ecosystems. The ecocity provides healthy abundance to its inhabitants without consuming more (renewable) resources than it produces, without producing more waste than it can assimilate, and without being toxic to itself or neighboring ecosystems. Its inhabitants’ ecological impact reflect planetary supportive lifestyles; its social order reflects fundamental principles of fairness, justice and reasonable equity.
[Read more]

Left Blames Global Warming For Enormous Iceberg Breaking. There’s Just One Problem.

Talk about burying the lede. “An iceberg roughly the size of Delaware and 600 feet thick is about to break off from one of the largest floating ice shelves in Antarctica, and the prospect is precipitating fierce debate as to whether global warming is the cause. The iceberg is part of the Larsen C ice shelf in the Weddell Sea, south of the tip of South America. The calving has been expected; a crack in the ice shelf had grown to be over 100 miles long in recent months.”
[Read more]

UN Reports Urge Tackling Water Source Problems, WWC Publishes Annual Report

In its annual report, the WWC describes actions undertaken to make water a global priority. For instance, the Council has engaged with various international processes, including contributing as an observer in the UNFCCC, providing recommendations to the New Urban Agenda adopted at the UN Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) and convening a one-day seminar on financing water infrastructure at World Water Week in Stockholm, Sweden, in August 2017.

It has also undertaken preparations for the 8th World Water Forum, which will be held in Brasilia, Brazil, in March 2018. The WWC also describes its work with the High-Level Panel on Water (HLPW) to help deliver on the Sustainable Development Goal on clean water and sanitation (SDG 6). To this end, it has supported increased investment in water-related services and a globally-coordinated approach to water issues.”
[Read more]

Elon Musk: The World’s Population is Accelerating Toward Collapse and Nobody Cares

Demographic implosion has been well-known by sociologists for decades, but the Technocrats are just now acknowledging the facts. Contrary to statements by over-population alarmists, world population could literally be cut in half within 50 years. Sustainable Developers should be thrilled with the attendant reduction of resource usage.” Patrick Wood, Technocracy News & Trends
[Read more]

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Kathleen Marquardt: EXTREMELY EARLY ONSET OF SENILITY IN YOUTH

EXTREMELY EARLY ONSET OF SENILITY IN YOUTH –Individuals have no rights on campus.”

by Kathleen Marquardt

Tom asked me to put together a piece on the lunacy of today’s youth. Because I have no imagination, I am sticking with stories I have found showing what is going on in today’s world of those younger than maybe 35. As I see it, the schools have achieved (at least 75% or more) the goal of changing American children’s attitudes, values, and beliefs. To do that, they had to dumb them down severely.

One measure of this accomplishment, IMHO, is the extreme amount of political correctness in today’s world of youth – colleges, elhi, and media. Every time that I think p.c.ness has been taken as far as it can go, I am proven wrong by a new no-no, e.g., today I read where some school said you can change your gender of choice daily, if you so chose. With everything so amorphous, there is no base, no foundation upon which values, attitudes, and beliefs can be grounded. It is as if moral relativity has metastasized into every atom of life. Someone, please tell me I am wrong – and show me why.

SASSE: WE’VE CREATED ‘ENDLESS, PERPETUAL ADOLESCENCE’ LIKE ‘PETER PAN’

There has never been a civilization that’s had perpetual adolescence before. Adolescence itself is only about a 2,500 year old concept, and it’s a pretty special gift.” Taking a broad view of human history, Sasse spoke of adolescence as a relatively new phenomenon allowing young persons to develop mind and spirit beyond pubescent maturation.

Contemporary sociological phenomena, added Sasse, have extended the adolescent phase to unhealthy lengths; stultifying of both individual actualization and broader civilizational development.

MEME: DISGUSTING TRUTH OF MODERN FEMINISM WILL MAKE YOU WANT TO THROW UP

On the pedagogical front, Sasse critiqued the status quo of classrooms as the primary means of educating teenagers. “Progressive” educational approaches to “protect kids from work,” he said, interfered with education’s higher purpose of “freeing kids] up to find meaning in work:” “I think it’s highly dangerous to think that the main thing fourteen- to eighteen-year-olds should do is sit still and be in a classroom inside for the majority of their waking hours, Monday through Friday.”

Over the past couple years; the concept of privilege has grown to be a ubiquitous part of the public discourse. It’s moved from a topic confined in large part to the ivory towers of academia, to one that is a commonplace aspect of mainstream political and social commentary. Its propagation can be seen in the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement, perhaps the most visible (or at least most militant) force for racial identity politics.

MORE COLLEGE KIDS PLEDGE TO REMOVE TESTICLES IF TRUMP BUILDS WALL!: From USA Politics Today

Washington Sophomore Trent Griliphaen said he was inspired by the movement at The University of California, and that he “thinks that Trump’s construction of the wall is just an extension of his penis, and an expression of Patriarchal rape culture. Really, by building the wall, we are raping the Mexican people, and I am no longer willing to be a perpetrator of rape culture. If I remove my penis, I am making a statement that I reject this mentality.”

WHITES BANNED FROM CAFE DESIGNATED AS NONWHITE ‘SANCTUARY’

I heard about what was happening in California, and new that this kind of movement could gain traction up here – we are a progressive state. I kind of feel guilty, I’m removing my penis, but one of the other guys is going to castrate himself, and he’s even considering taking off a couple of fingers” stated Griliphaen.

ANTI-TRUMP ‘RESISTANCE’ WARN AMERICA: ‘BE AFRAID’

Town halls, protests, shouting matches and full-on riots are now commonplace throughout the country and now, leaders of the so-called “resistance” are using the firing of FBI Director James Comey to stoke the fire.
Speaking with reporter Sharyl Attkisson, North Carolina Rep. Mark Meadows that much of the funding behind the protests come from shadowy figures. “Well we do see some of that. I mean unfortunately we’ve seen a lot of that. They certainly have a name and they certainly have a face.”

UNIVERSITY STUDENTS REFUSE TO TAKE FINALS, DEMAND OTHER STUDENTS CELEBRATING CINCO DE MAYO BE ‘HELD ACCOUNTABLE’

For an institution that claims it encourages diversity, where were you yesterday when we needed you the most? Why do you encourage us to come here? Yet were forced to defend our existence every day on this campus.

I was utterly disgusted with students who chose to demean and appropriate Mexican culture. I walked on campus miserable as if I didn’t belong. As a black woman, I was forced to become the very thing society deemed me to be; angry.

Individuals have no rights on campus. Intersectional tribes do. The way that these tribes negotiate conflicting rights is a mix of Kafka and Orwell. In Orwell’s homeland, Oxford University’s Equality and Diversity Unit (a name that could easily have leaped from the pages of 1984) warned students that failing to make eye contact was a racist microaggression. The usual sensible responses accomplished nothing. Then autistic students complained that the microaggression guidelines were themselves a microaggression against students with disabilities. And the “Unit” quickly apologized and retreated.

The absurdity of the situation reeks of old Soviet anecdotes. But the same system exists in the United States.

THE COLLEGE BLUEPRINT FOR A TOTALITARIAN AMERICA

An individual’s right to free speech on campus derives from his membership in a group. What might be dangerously offensive  from a white man is fully legal when coming from a Latino woman or a Muslim man.
I am waiting (not with bated breath) for someone out there to show me there is hope for our future, that there are hordes of brilliant, hard-working, sincere, youth who will carry on Western Culture.

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2017/07/10/extremely-early-onset-of-senility-in-youth/

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Kathleen Marquardt: The Third E of Sustainable Development

The Third E of Sustainable Development – “It exposes the inception of this so-called economic order designed to transfer the wealth…”

by Kathleen Marquardt

On May 1, 1974, the United Nations adopted a resolution “. . . to study for the first time the problems of raw materials and development, devoted to the consideration of the most important economic problems facing the world community.

In June of 1976, The Vancouver Declaration on Human Settlements, the genesis of Agenda 21, was announced to the world and bring the 3Es to the fore. Rather than taking bureaucratic worded quotes from the UN document, I am going to let a far more learned person give you a taste of what the resolution proposed to do (and the UN is busy at work carrying through with it – to the extent that the UN carries anything through).

Harry G. Johnson, Professor of Economics at The University of Chicago, Professor of Economics at the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva; educated at Toronto, Cambridge, and Harvard; and Professor of Economics at The London School of Economics among many other prestige positions gave the Woodward Court Lecture at The University of Chicago on October 5, 1975, on the UN’s New International Economic Order.

Below are excerpts. I hope It will tempt you to read the entire speech, it is only 18 pages.

The New International Economic Order

The new international economic order, considered as a set of proposals for changing the present international economic order, can be evaluated most succinctly by remarking that it is not new; it is not international: it is not economic; and it is not an order. Let me develop these points in turn. Actually, the ideas and proposals are by no means new; they have been around a long time.

In broad essentials, they were the focus of the 1964 Geneva Conference on World Trade and Development, and specifically the background document for that meeting, Towards a New Trade Policy for Development, prepared by the Secretary-General of the Conference, Dr. Raùl Prebisch. Individually, the ideas had been around for much longer.

On the one hand, the idea that international trade is a zero-sum game by which the rich benefit at the expense of the poor goes back to the Marxist view of imperialism, and before that to the mercantilist idea that foreign trade is a means of transferring wealth from one’s customers to oneself and the main thrust of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and of classical economics was to refute mercantilism. p. 1,2.

The fourth demand evolved into the so-called “link proposal” for coupling the creation of new international reserves or liquidity with distribution of a substantial part of the new money as aid to the less-developed countries. Such is the attraction of the idea that the creation of money involves bringing into existence something for nothing that this scheme has both excited a great deal of expert discussion, and become a general operating principle of International Monetary Fund thinking about world monetary reform.

Nevertheless, the benefits to the developing countries are likely to be small, since the subsequent emergence of world inflation is a symptom of the fact that the world has too much international liquidity, not too little.

The idea of international agreements to stabilize and raise the prices of commodity exports of developing countries-crystallized at the First United Nations Conference on Trade and Development into the concept of “an integrated core of the current demands for a new international economic order. However, nothing much came of it in the decade or so after the first conference.  p. 4.

The demand for a new international economic order is therefore not new; nor are the proposals themselves new; what is new, if anything, is the idea of trying to make a system or order out of a collection of monopolistic and discriminating policies, and the arguments for doing so. For this reason, the new international economic order is not “international” either.

It is not a system of arrangements among nations, each of which participates by virtue of its being a nation. Instead, it proposes, politically, a system of confrontation between two groups of nations, a numerical minority of successfully developed nations and a preponderant majority of developing or less-developed nations, on the basis of a majority vote.

Moreover, the developing country group is based on no clear-cut criteria, there being blatant discrimination against certain poor countries which are excluded-most notably Israel. In this proposed system, the minority is expected to yield to the majority partly on the basis of acceptance of a false parallel with the idea of democracy, partly on the basis of presumed guilt, past and present, for the underdeveloped state of the underdeveloped.

Third, the proposed new international economic order is not economic, at least if economic means more than the truism that any international arrangement has economic effects. Economics as defined by the vast majority of its practitioners is concerned with the rationale and effects of trade through markets including by extension the rationale and effects of the replacement of competitive markets by central planning, which in this context entails replacing multifarious private decision takers by a centralized social decision-taking process, but does not alter the principle of using rational allocation procedures to maximize the extent to which planning objectives can be fulfilled. p. 5,6.

On the other side, the proposed system relies on the ability to create and enlist feelings of guilt sufficiently strong to support regular payments of blackmail, made in the form of artificially high commodity prices. Economists have, it is true, been working on the economics of crime, bribery, and (so far as I know) hush money and blackmail as well; but no one has yet suggested that these phenomena have ever been, of a viable economic system.

Fourth, the system that would result, namely one of developed-country toleration and support for developing-country use of every possibility of monopolistic exploitation they could devise, would not be an order, but an experiment in the rule of the jungle-a rule modified by the hope that the largest and most savage carnivores will be so ashamed of their present existence by virtue of the killing and eating successes of their ancestors that they will offer themselves up as willing sacrifices to the hunger of the smaller fry. No amount of repetition of the rhetoric of “an integrated commodity policy” can convert the rule of the jungle into a rule of law. p. 7,8

There is more, much more meat in this paper. Please take the time to read it. It exposes the inception of this so-called economic order designed to transfer the wealth, mostly of American wealth, to the UN and its NGOs through “aid” programs.

The UN resolution is below:
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly: 3201 (S-VI). Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

 

Kathleen Marquardt: SOCIAL ENGINEERING, CRONY CAPITALISM, REGIONALISM, URBANISM…

Social Engineering, Crony Capitalism, Regionalism, Urbanism are all happening in every state – “…Let’s look at Texas…”

by Kathleen Marquardt

Let’s look at Texas; these issues are not limited to Texas, but Texas’s population growth is higher than the U.S. as a whole and twice as fast sine the 1990s, so perhaps we can see some things better there.

A DEEPER LOOK AT THE PHONY “TEXAS MIRACLE”
“Moving a business to Texas also turns out to have tax consequences that are inconsistent with the conservative narrative of the Texas Miracle.

Yes, some businesses manage to strike lucrative tax breaks in Texas. As part of an industrial policy that dares not speak its name, the state government, for example, maintains the Texas Enterprise Fund (known to some as a slush fund and to others as a “deal-closing” fund), which the governor uses to lure favored businesses with special subsidies and incentives.

But most Texas businesses, especially small ones, don’t get such treatment. Instead, they face total effective tax rates that are, by bottom-line measures, greater than those in even the People’s Republic of California.” [Read more]

BREAKING NEWS! JANUARY 23, 2017

The people of Texas have a vital interest in water.  Yet, the Texas Water Development Board is, in essence, holding a secret meeting—what they call a “unique opportunity” available only to their invited presenters and those who pay $525 to attend–to set their course on water allocation issues.”  [Read more]

AUSTIN’S ‘COMPLETE STREETS’ POLICY A COMPLETE CONGESTION NIGHTMARE

If Austin planners have their way, they’ll impose a California-style ‘complete streets’ congestion-inducing nightmare. Complete streets policies seek to elevate non-auto modes of travel by using already scarce road funds to construct bike, bus, and pedestrian facilities while reducing capacity and access for autos. Voters in San Francisco just passed Proposition A, a $500 million bond measure, last November to impose a variety of traffic calming measures, which actually do anything but calm traffic. Rather they induce traffic.

The measure includes speed bumps, road diets, traffic circles, intersection islands, train upgrades, expanding bus stops, special boarding islands or ‘bulbs’ for buses (which undoubtedly take up road space needed for efficient auto travel), and transit-only lanes. [Read more]

The water issue is not specific to Texas, but be assured wherever you live, you are in the same metaphorical boat.

The Trans-Texas Corridor, aka the NAFTA Highway, was an early piece of social engineering. In 2006, Ron Paul said, “Proponents envision a ten-lane colossus the width of several football fields, with freight and rail lines, fiber-optic cable lines, and oil and natural gas pipelines running alongside. … The ultimate goal is not simply a superhighway, but an integrated North American Union – complete with a currency, a cross-national bureaucracy, and virtually borderless travel within the Union.”

By design, the corridor had few access ramps and bisected communities in order to shorten travel distances.  No additional border security was planned at the Mexico-Texas border.  Chinese-owned ports on the Mexican coast were to be offloaded in sealed containers, not to be opened until they reached their final destination.  The first upgraded security check was to take place at the corridor hub in Kansas City, Kansas where a “Smart Port” was to be installed that would allow the cargo to be scanned while moving through the facility.  Efficiency and expediency of goods was the stated mission of the NAFTA Superhighway.

The corridor itself was to hold six passenger lanes for commuter travel, four truck lanes for long hauls, freight rail and high speed rail. The right-of-way that would be condemned for the project was a quarter-of-a-mile wide, taking 146 acres per mile from Americans. The right-of-way was to be wide enough to not only house the transportation facilities, but also the hotels, gas stations and restaurants so that travelers would not need to leave the corridor.

The corridor was backed by international investors. They were to design and build the corridor and in return collect toll fees for the next 50 years.  In return, American’s land would be confiscated, their community and emergency services bisected, all for the privilege of paying a toll to drive their children to school.

In order to avoid national opposition to the facility, the corridor was not put forward as a project of the federal government; rather it was split into state segments, built by each state transportation department. The first critical leg of the corridor was the I-35 Trans-Texas Corridor which connected the Mexican border to Oklahoma.

In 2002, Governor Rick Perry unveiled the Trans-Texas Corridor concept as the new model for transportation in the state.  In 2003, his hand-picked House Transportation Chairman Mike Krusee held every transportation bill in committee until the final hour when he then unveiled a massive Omnibus Transportation package. The bill was voted on and passed without the time to closely examine its contents.  Included in this package was a 100-plus page Trans-Texas Corridor bill that gave Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) the green light to develop three separate TTC corridors in Texas.” [Read more]

The TransTexas Corridor was shot down in 2009, but it didn’t die. “In 2009, Perry scrapped the TTC plan after a series of combative town hall meetings throughout the state showed TxDOT it faced massive taxpayer resistance. “But now, the plan apparently is being implemented in small chunks, without the fanfare of divulging a statewide blueprint Perry and TxDOT may still have tucked away in their back pockets.” 
[Read more]

PUSH TO CONTINUE THE CROOKED RICK PERRY TRANS-TEXAS CORRIDOR QUIETLY

“Gridzilla, aka the California Water Model — is the ugly baby of State Rep. Lyle Larson (R-San Antonio) who is now the chair of the House Natural Resources Committee and Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock), who chairs the Senate Agricultural, Water and Rural Affairs Committee. This picture of his “water grid” from the 2015 session tells you exactly where Lyle’s head is — the IH-35 growth corridor. That’s where he wants to send massive supplies of groundwater for hyper-development. Though some movement of groundwater is necessary, this is the California Water Model that took only 50 years to cause a water crisis of historic proportion.” [Read more]

The Independent League of Texas has a list of bills that need to be voted against. Texans can go to their website to find those. For Texans to find their legislators they can go here. For others, search state name, then legislature and there will be a link to a list where you can find your city, county, and state representatives.

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

TAKING AMERICA AND THE WORLD TO IMPOSSIBLE LEVELS

Taking America and the World to Impossible Levels – “As reality takes over and these high speed trains don’t materialize, can you imagine the mess America will be in?”

by Kathleen Marquardt

ICLEI, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, is now called Local Governments for Sustainability so that people won’t know that this is an international organization pretending to be a local one. ICLEI just put out its USA 2016 Report calling for a reduction of global average temperature to just 1.5° Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Because the Industrial Revolution began around 1760, when the so-called Little Ice Age (LIA ) was just ending, ICLEI and the global elite would have the world reducing carbon output below zero; if we hadn’t had an Industrial Revolution, if we were still living at subsistence levels, we would still be warmer than what they want us to achieve. How do you think they expect to get there?

Toward 1.5

Spurred by calls from the communities most exposed to climate change impacts, the Paris Climate Agreement set the ambitious goal of limiting the end-of-century global average temperature increase to 1.5° Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels.

The Paris Agreement includes Nationally Determined Contributions, reductions in GHG emissions by country — which offer this reality: In 2030, global emissions will be 22 gigatons of CO2 equivalent (GT CO2e) higher than the level needed to stay on track towards the 1.5° target and 15 GT CO2e higher than the level needed for a 2.0° scenario (UNFCCC analysis, May 2016). This is roughly equivalent to the emissions produced by 4,400 coal-fired power plants in one year.

The global community must push to peak greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, eliminate the use of fossil fuels in the power sector by 2050, and deploy negative-emissions strategies by 2040 in order to protect the most vulnerable (Climate Analytics, October 2016).”

[ICLEI USA 2016 Annual Report]

How do ICLEI and the global elite propose to reach “1.5”? They have a blueprint for that – Agenda21/Sustainable Development, and tools to achieve their goals. The original tools are found in The Global Biodiversity Assessment, seven pounds of tools. As science advances more tools are added, but let me show you some of those tools.

To Win the War on Cars, San Francisco Weaponizes Real Estate

As Stephen Frank puts it, “The city is now given building permits for condo’s/apartments that do not have any parking spaces, but include bike racks instead.  Imagine the culture of this city if no one owned a car, and Ford/Chevy and Toyota were criminalized?

What San Francisco believes it can do, however, is improve life in the city by making it easier to get around without a car. This week, its Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance requiring developers to stock new residential or commercial projects with more alternative-transport perks than ever before. This is no all-out war on vehicles, but rather an attempt to cut down on the number and length of car trips the natives take each day.”

[Read more]

Wimps didn’t build California: the case for high speed rail

Our vision includes a national HSR Express system connecting cities and states into an integrated system, laid out in phases with an aggressive schedule for full system build out.  Our vision sets high standards for interoperable, state-of-the-art dedicated track, advanced control systems, elegant multi-modal train stations, and top-of-the-line 220 mph trains connecting major cities together.  Our plan calls for a support network of 110 mph trains connecting smaller cities and towns together with the high speed system.”

Their vision is beyond pie-in-the-sky. The first map shows their vision completed; the second, what is now. A very long — and expensive — way to go, yet cities are being restructured to remove cars now. As reality takes over and these high speed trains don’t materialize, can you imagine the mess America will be in?

In the maps of US High Speed Rail, is included this map below showing the plan for a Regional America. Regionalism is the key tool I spoke of above to be used to bring America down – down to 1.5.
The key tool is regionalism.

REGIONALISM IS COMMUNISM

In her article, Charlotte Iserbyt quotes from Dennis Cuddy: “In “The Globalists,The Power Elite Exposed”, page 304, Denis L. Cuddy, Ph.D, says “Most members of the European Union are already members of The Socialist International, and if other nations around the world can be moved toward socialism and regional economic arrangements, then these regional groupings can be more easily merged into a world socialistic government.

This scenario is quite similar to the three-stage plan outlined by Stalin at the 1936 Communist International. At that meeting, the official program proclaimed: “Dictatorship can be established only by a victory of socialism in different countries or groups of countries,” after which there would be federal unions of the various groupings of these socialist countries, and the third stage would be an amalgamation of these regional federal unions into a world union of socialist nations.”

Iserbyt goes on to note: “In socialist countries, metropolitan regions enjoy metropolitan regional government and comprehensive planning. Of the many regions on the vast territory of the Soviet Union the Moscow Region commands special attention, for it has been, since the 1917 Revolution, the country’s economic and political center.

The economic and functional efficiencies and the social benefits that comprehensive national, regional and city planning make possible in socialist society explain the Soviet Union’s enormous and rapid economic and social progress. Conversely, our profit-oriented ruling capitalist class makes comprehensive social and economic planning impossible, causing waste and chaos and dragging the entire nation into misery and suffering as its rule deteriorates and declines.”

[Read more]

To close, another bit of Iserbyt elucidation:

The power elite understood that it would be difficult to get the people of the world to accept a world government all at once, and so a gradualistic approach was suggested. Association of Helpers member and Canadian Rhodes scholar P.E. Corbett in Post-War Worlds (1942) wrote: “A world association binding together and coordinating regional groupings of states may evolve toward one universal federal government. World government is the ultimate aim, but there is more chance of attaining it by gradual development.” More recently, at Mikhail Gorbachev’s first State of the World Forum in 1995, Zbigniew Brzezinski (President Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor) announced that we “cannot leap into world government through one quick step, but rather via progressive regionalization.”

Wanting to get to global government faster, we are now being pressured to undo the modern world – that is, for us. The elite will keep all modern amenities. But we, who must live under their rules, regulations, fees, taxes, penalties, are now told we must go back to a subsistence living – to grow our own food, to live without air conditioning and modern appliances, to be as close to animals as they can manipulate us into being.

APC: https://americanpolicy.org/2017/04/03/taking-america-and-the-world-to-impossible-levels/?mc_cid=04575abac8&mc_eid=210870cea5

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Kathleen Marquardt: Freedom Cannot Exist In an Administrative Form of Government

Freedom Cannot Exist In an Administrative Form of Government “All of the aspects of central planning are scary, but the carbon neutral addition is really scary.”

by Kathleen Marquardt

Freedom cannot exist in an administrative form of government. -H. Lamb

Because so many of us who are trying to stop the theft of our private property and the destruction of local control of our communities have been in this battle for so long, we forget that it is only recently that many American citizens have begun learning of some of the tactics being used just for that.

A few months ago, I took over answering phone and email questions on policy for APC. One of the first emails I responded to was from a couple in Hermosa Beach, California. Hermosa Beach is in the process of finalizing their so-called unique community plan for 2031. I just skimmed over it at first because I am sick of looking at these ‘unique’ community plans that have all the same details, other than maybe one has a beach, one has mountains, and one is pretty much urban. But then I saw the words ‘carbon neutral.’ This is new, but should not have been unexpected.

From their website

You can read for yourself both about the new addition of carbon neutrality and also note that, while the Hermosa Beach plan is not a carbon copy (no pun intended) of every other ‘visioning plan’ across the nation, you’d have a hard time telling them apart if they didn’t put in the little idiosyncrasies of the local terrain.

Some of the goals:

Goal 2. Hermosa Beach is a Carbon Neutral Community by 2040. Climate change, often cited as the environmental crisis of our generation, poses a threat to the safety, health and welfare of the community. The City of Hermosa Beach is committed to being a leader of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and has engaged in a number of innovative efforts to move toward carbon neutrality.

Policies 2.1 State targets and goals. Reduce greenhouse gas emissions in alignment with State targets and goals, and achieve carbon neutrality as a community no later than 2040.

2.3 Diversify GHG reduction strategies. Pursue a diverse mixture of greenhouse gas reduction strategies across the transportation, energy, waste sectors, commensurate with their share of the community’s greenhouse gas emissions.

2.4 Land use and transportation investments. Promote land use and transportation investments that support greater transportation choice, greater local economic opportunity, and reduced number and length of automobile trips.

2.5 Carbon offsets as needed. When necessary, purchase carbon offsets to achieve the community carbon neutral goal.

2.7 Discretionary projects. Require discretionary projects to substantially mitigate all feasible greenhouse gas emissions, and offset the remainder of greenhouse gas emissions produced to meet annual thresholds.

2.8 Ministerial projects. Encourage ministerial projects to directly offset potential greenhouse gas emissions generated.

The City Council accepted the Municipal Carbon Neutral Plan and adopted a goal to be carbon neutral by 2020 for municipal facilities and operations. The Plan identifies a pathway to achieve this goal through a combination of implementation measures and offset purchases.

PLAN Hermosa will set the city on a trajectory for a more sustainable future. To do so, this Plan informs and is implemented by the City’s various ordinances, specific plans, programs, and ongoing activities. It sets the City’s overall policies and priorities for how to use and manage its physical, social, and economic resources.

Hermosa Beach residents will utilize the Plan to understand the predominant community consensus regarding how, when, and where the City should develop and change as a place to live, to work, and to invest. Current and potential business owners can utilize the Plan to understand economic development priorities and available resources, while developers use it to understand the City’s development needs, preferences, and desired physical parameters.  P 9

This is pretty much the same in every consensus plan devised today:
The community’s desire to advance sustainability, enhance economic vitality, and preserve the eclectic beach character, was further reinforced through the Community Dialogue process in 2013 and 2014. The community engaged in setting the vision and defining the unique qualities for Hermosa Beach.

The Community Dialogue process culminated in the creation of a Decision-Making tool that aims to: 1. Enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of our government. 2. Identify and optimize opportunities for residents and businesses to improve our quality of life in Hermosa Beach. 3. Create a culture of innovation, so that our challenges become our opportunities and our opportunities enhance our community brand. 4. Ensure the values and priorities of all residents and business owners are considered during the analysis and deliberation of actions. 5. Deliver transparency to the decision-making process so that the public can make informed decisions.

Thus, PLAN Hermosa was developed under a broad sustainability framework that aims to: • Link environmental performance with economic vitality; • Enhance coastal protection and sea level rise best practices; • Leverage collaborative partnerships; and • Advance implementation of sustainability and greenhouse gas reduction legislation. Once adopted by the City Council, PLAN Hermosa will form the City’s overarching framework for decisionmaking, with subsequent plans, programs, and activities designed to carry out the community’s vision, goals and policies.

The updated Plan will guide how the City should develop and change, and where funds and resources for infrastructure, services and programs should be directed in a manner that most effectively achieves the community vision.  P 16

I used the Hermosa Beach plan as an example because it has the added carbon neutral aspect. All of the aspects of central planning are scary, but the carbon neutral addition is really scary. You cannot legislate invention, yet government keeps trying. What Hermosa Beach is doing is getting rid of gas before there are viable, economical replacements. This is insane. Given time, this might work; when this is feasible, communities can move forward with this kind of planning.
An important thing to understand about these ‘visioning’ plans for our communities is that they encompass numerous counties in the plan. Perhaps, like here in Knoxville, TN (planET), they started out with a small number of counties, here 5 Counties, One Vision. After the plan was presented and then supposedly it went away, the powers that be added 11 counties that never had a say-so in the visioning (perhaps I should say, they never had a ‘blue smoke and mirrors’ audition). This is the precursor to declaring the regional planning in the area. What’s wrong with regional planning? Wouldn’t it save money and add benefits to areas?

Let the late Henry Lamb explain it succinctly:

So what’s wrong with regional governance? Nothing – unless you value the republican form of government and individual freedom – and detest autocracy in all its forms. Regional governance evolved as a way to get around the obstacles presented by multiple local governments, all of which may have a stake in the region, but often disagree on what the region needs.

Regional governments, and their initiatives, are driven by government, not by the people. Government, by its very nature, seeks to increase its power and overcome any obstacle of disagreement. Once successful method is Regional Governance, which diminishes the power of local governments by conferring increasing levels of authority on the executive branch, which implements its authority through appointed bureaucrats.
In very short order, it is the unelected bureaucrats who wield the power; elected officials become little more than a rubber stamp whose approval provides “official” respectability to the bureaucracy.

(Citizens) . . . across the nation, should realize that once these regional (plans) are in place, there will be no way to return to the republican form of government that allows citizens to expect their city councilman or county commissioner to consider their wishes. The consent of the governed will no longer be a factor in public policy. Virtually all human activity will be subject to the approval of a professional bureaucracy that first creates a plan it thinks is a utopian community, and then requires every person to live when the plan dictates; to travel in a vehicle approved by the plan, to a job allowed by the plan – whether you like it or not. From Sustainable Development Manual (DeWeese).

To watch an enjoyable and elucidating video on how Hermosa Beach residents responded and how other communities might want to respond: https://youtu.be/Isa5HyLiHwk

APC: http://americanpolicy.org/2017/03/06/freedom-cannot-exist-in-an-administrative-form-of-government/

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

THE NOT SO COLD WAR OF URBAN RENEWAL AND SOCIAL ENGINEERING

The Not So Cold War of Urban Renewal and Social Engineering – “Our government has been corrupted for many decades… ”

by Kathleen Marquardt

Tom DeWeese, founder and president to the American Policy Center, has been telling you all the latest with AFFH, HUD, DOT, and the rest of the swamp. That is, the recent part of the swamp that is our federal government. But the swamp is far deeper, far murkier, and far more sinister in its aims than most people are willing to believe. And it is being promoted by the Pope, Mark Zuckerberg, the UN, and the world’s elite.

I am trying to keep this somewhat short, but there is so much background that needs to be exposed to the light of day. If you can’t read it all, scan it; things will pop out and you will be surprised at the evil in our swamp. I was always told that before air conditioning, foreign governments paid their US embassy staff hazardous duty pay above their regular salaries for working in DC because it was built on a swamp. Now I wonder if there was a second reason, a second swamp to be negotiated.

Communitarians suggest a series of measures that would significantly enhance public safety and public health, without endangering basic individual rights and constitutional protections. Often these modifications entail no mare than limited reinterpretations of legal traditions – for instance, of what constitutes reasonable search and seizure, which, of course, the Constitution allows. Such reinterpretations have been taking place continuously over the past two hundred years.

There are those who openly admit that the courts, especially the US Supreme Court, treat the Constitution as a living document that may be modified to respond to the changing times and changes in our moral values. Others argue that the Constitution is to be treated as a sacred text that is unalterable. The latter group of legal scholars does its adjusting of the Constitution by interpreting what they see as the Founding Fathers’ intent. In either case, we are not irrevocably bound by what was written two hundred years ago. Amitai Etzioni, The Spirit of Community – the Reinvention of American Society.

Our changing moral values” and “we are not irrevocably bound by what was written two hundred years ago.” Unless one believes in moral relativity, morality is not readily mutable. But in order to move from individual rights and freedom to socialism/communitarianism, communism and, as Mary Parker Follett says, the ‘state (UN) ‘. . .must be a coordinating agency. It must appear as the great moral leader. Its supreme function is moral ordering,” and individuals be damned.

Urban Renewal

Jo Hindman wrote the following in1966; the only difference today is that there is no international cold war.
Much is written about the international cold war, but little about the incognito warfare on United States soil which public officials and their accomplices are waging to wrest private property from landowners.
The strategy is to make property ownership so unbearable by harassment through building inspections, remodeling orders, fines and jailings, that owners give up in despair and sell to land developers at cut-rate prices. Punitive municipal codes are the weapons in the warfare.

Hindman also wrote, “Planning assistance subsidized by Federal money leads small cities and counties into direct obedience under a regional master plan. Land use rights are literally stolen from landowners when zoning is applied to land.”

Now you might think, so what, there is no cold war and Trump says he is going to rid our country of anything that is evil. Hold on to your hats and your tongues. I want to show you some things from our not too distant history. Our government has been corrupted for many decades; we are not going to get rid of the rot and poison with 500 executive orders. This was written 32 years before the Rio Accord gave us Agenda 21. It is from the Constitution of the American Institute of Planners, the forerunner of the American Planning Association.

The 60s’ American Institute of Planners makes no bones about its socialist stance regarding land; its constitution states AIP’s ‘particular sphere of activity shall be the planning of the unified development of urban communities and their environs and of states, regions, and the nation as expressed through determination of the comprehensive arrangement of land uses and land occupancy and the regulation thereof.’  (AIP {forerunner of APA} Constitution, 1960) The next step – Amatai Etzioni is not hiding what is going on. To make our physical environment more community-friendly, our homes, places of work, streets, and public spaces – whole developments, suburbs, and even whole cities – need to be designed to enhance the Communitarian nexus. Etzioni, p.127

Is that spelled out clear enough? The next texts are from The Ideal Communist City by Alexei Gutnov, et al, published in 1968. It’s a lot, but it is also spelled out clearly with no ambiguity as to how much planning is being done of every aspect of life.

This book was initiated by the architecture-faculty of the University of Moscow in the late fifties. For the Italian edition in 1968 the material was enlarged and revised by the authors, a group of young urbanists, architects, and sociologists, who represent a renewal of ideas and men that is taking place in Soviet Russia, especially in fields concerned with the organization of the physical environment.

Their work is particularly original in its general assumptions, method of inquiry, and choice of models. The authors turn away from the proposition that the city should attempt to restore the habits and appearance of the countryside. This proposition adapted from the bourgeois naturalism of the nineteenth century, contradicted the ideological foundations of communism. Read More

APC: http://americanpolicy.org/2017/02/22/the-not-so-cold-war-of-urban-renewal-and-social-engineering/?mc_cid=8b66a59204&mc_eid=210870cea5

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

 

Kathleen Marquardt: Incrementalism, Regionalism and Revolution

Incrementalism, Regionalism and Revolution – “We, America and the UN, are fighting wars around the world. None of them legitimate… ”

by Kathleen Marquardt

This is an article I wrote in 2012, and I am running it now in hopes that those who think Trump is our knight in shining armor and is going to wipe out all the evil/anti-western culture things that are now in our government policies. Even if he tries, he can’t. These policies are embedded in every level of local, state, and federal government. We can hope that he is able to steer the ship of state away from the far left it has been going in. But, we the people will still have the job of getting these policies out of our local governments, some of which have been part of our laws and regulations for over 100 years.

revolution(rev-loo-sh-n)
 1 a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system.
 • ( the Revolution) the American Revolution.
 • (often the Revolution) (in Marxism) the class struggle that is expected to lead to political change and the triumph of communism.

How many times have you heard someone say, “They (government) will only get my guns over my dead body.” Or, “Don’t worry, we patriots are locked, loaded and ready; we will save the Republic,”? Or “I HAVE MY GUNS AND AMMO, WHEN THEY COME TO GET THEM WITHOUT “CAUSE” THEY SHOULD PACK A LUNCH AND BRING BODY BAGS!” I spent some time wondering when all this was going to be sparked; what was going to be the incident that would bring about an uprising of the people.

To all those who carry that sentiment in their hearts, sorry, you are way too late. The globalists have been taking away our rights and conditioning us for slavery over the past hundred years. They bypassed the revolution and have co-opted us with barely a whimper. The sparks are many but way too small to be noticed by the naked eye.

Oh, there are plenty who can see exactly what is going on and can see who are the perpetrators of this take-over of America. But most of America is just wondering what hit them. If it could be explained in sound bites, we might get somewhere but the answer is not terribly complicated — just long.

So how did we get co-opted, and how did it start so long ago? I won’t go to the beginning. To know the early history of the American road to serfdom, read Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 1884-1966 by Rose L. Martin (Jan 1, 1966), or The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve by G. Edward Griffin (May 1998). There are many more books and also videos that expose the early foundations of our downfall.

The result of Fabian planning, or better put, scheming is something called Communitarianism. This is the version of Collectivism or Socialism that is being foisted on the entire world. A simple definition is that the rights of the individual must be balanced against the interests of society as a whole. Where have we heard that before? We have been pummeled with the social justice notion of promoting the common good over that of the individual; that we must think of the community, the earth, our global neighbors, everything but us and our individual freedoms and rights.

But as Tibor Machan pointed out in 1991, “Communitarians wish to place community and individual on a collision course, saying there is some kind of balance that is needed between the rights of individuals and the rights of the community. But if we consider that “community” means simply a lot of other people than oneself, this makes for majority rule. If we consider that such other people usually leave it to a few who will speak out in their behalf, we will have a few community representatives dictating to the rest of us what we must do and what our “responsibilities” are. Communitarians are interested in diminishing the decision-making power of people as individuals. Yet, it is just such power that is required for a morally responsible life, including one that does full justice to our moral responsibilities to others.”

But that presupposes those in power care whether their form of governance promotes responsible behavior. The globalists or Communitarians are saddled with having a desired outcome (the reduction of 85% of the people on the planet, making slaves of the rest and taking all the land in the world for themselves {nothing about responsible behavior}) but, because that outcome might enrage most of the populace, they must disguise their desired end in touchy, feel-good doublespeak so that the people will not only accept it but use it as their guiding light. So far they have achieved their aims far better and easier than one would hope by using the environment as the club to beat us with: if you don’t quit using air conditioning . . . if you don’t quit building fences . . . if you don’t quit making dust you are going to destroy the earth. (At least they have quit with the global warming scare for the most part.) Read More

APC: http://americanpolicy.org/2016/12/15/incrementalism-regionalism-and-revolution/

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

Kathleen Marquardt: Are you ready for the globalist world?

Are you ready for the globalist world? – “…Technocracy as the sole global economic system while destroying capitalism and free enterprise. ”

by Kathleen Marquardt

Now the powers that be want to get rid of fake news. I think it is because the fake news has accomplished its task: to get the general public to believe in sustainable development, global warming, and global government while also believing that global warming is real and will destroy our world within several decades. I kid you not. You have all seen those videos of people asking students, and even adults, questions like, do you think incest is okay? Or showing a picture of Biden and asking can you name him. They obviously don’t know what incest is, but don’t want to look stupid, so they agree. And they can’t identify the Vice President, but they all can identify a Kardashian. Are they dumbed down enough yet to be able to read real news and not ‘get’ it?

This comes to you straight from the World Economic Forum, The Fourth Industrial Revolution. Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better!

It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.

First communication became digitized and free to everyone. Then, when clean energy became free, things started to move quickly. Transportation dropped dramatically in price. It made no sense for us to own cars anymore, because we could call a driverless vehicle or a flying car for longer journeys within minutes. We started transporting ourselves in a much more organized and coordinated way when public transport became easier, quicker and more convenient than the car.

“My biggest concern is all the people who do not live in our city. Those we lost on the way. Those who decided that it became too much, all this technology. Those who felt obsolete and useless when robots and AI took over big parts of our jobs. Those who got upset with the political system and turned against it. They live different kind of lives outside of the city. Some have formed little self-supplying communities. Others just stayed in the empty and abandoned houses in small 19th century villages.” –World Economic Forum

Yep, many have been brainwashed to believe in Smart Cities/stack-em and pack-em housing. In college I took a course on ecology and one of the things we studied was overcrowding – of rats and people. The consequences of overcrowding on both make them crazy. One has to assume that the powers that be know this, so are we to surmise that they want us to go crazy? Another tool in their kit to help reduce world population by 90%?

How will the globalists be certain that the future goes the ‘correct’ way, their way? But legislating everything. The Fourth Industrial Revolution is here. What laws do we need to make sure we all benefit from it?

Why does governance matter for the Fourth Industrial Revolution?

“Because if we don’t govern it, it doesn’t happen. There’s a common assumption that economic progress happens regardless of what the governance environment looks like. The thinking goes: the Fourth Industrial Revolution will happen anyway. And if we can figure out how to govern it, it’ll happen better. Governance is seen as the icing on the cake. I think that’s the wrong perspective.

“The Fourth Industrial Revolution is upon us, but if we don’t govern it properly then its full economic and social potential will not be realised. So how do we create legal infrastructure for something that is so new and complex, asks Gillian K Hadfield, professor of law and economics at the University of Southern California and author of Rules for a Flat World: Why Humans Invented Law and How to Reinvent It for a Complex Global Economy.” –World Economic Forum

Because the voters of America didn’t vote as the powers that be had expected, they will now have to find other ways to achieve their goals of instituting a devastating carbon tax. I think they should back off now that California has decided to control cow farts; that should take care of everything.

World Mayors Gather To Plot Against Trump On Climate Change

“Mayors from scores of the world’s biggest cities gathered in Mexico Wednesday to plot their strategy for fighting climate change in the face of skepticism from U.S. President-elect Donald Trump.
“As leaders of busy, polluted cities home to millions of people, they want countries to push on with adopting the so-called Paris Agreement to limit harmful emissions – an accord that Trump has cast doubt on.

“In the aftermath of this election there’s never been a more important time for those city leaders to stay on course – the whole world is counting on them,” said Clover Moore, mayor of Sydney, Australia.
“Hidalgo has vowed to push “for the world’s biggest and most influential cities to mobilize to make sure the Paris Agreement is fulfilled.” –Technocracy News & Trends

And, because new useless eaters are born everyday, indoctrination must be on-going in order to keep the children dumbed-down.

Universal Design for Learning or Microcosm for Destruction?
“Those from groups like Teach for America and Relay Graduate School of Education are at this moment learning how to plug kids in. They will be facilitators making sure the computer is working and that students sit in their chairs straight.
It all makes sense now. It’s the universal design for privatization, and it’s created by corporate America to replace democratic public schools.” –Nancy Bailey’s Education Website

Read Kathleen Marquardt’s Biography

 

« Older Entries