« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Do We Really Need Local Offices of Sustainabilty?

Disclaimer: I am trying to be sensitive to the expressed wishes of the management of Red State in how I am presenting this information. In connection with other site links provided with this diary, there could be information interpreted as “conspiratorial”.

This afternoon, I came across this article about recent actions on the part of the commission of Carroll County, Maryland, to abolish the country’s Office of Sustainability. The commission then unanimously voted to drop out of the UN’s International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). There are approximately 600 local Sustainability Offices located through our nation.

Richard Rothschild, a member of the Carroll Country commission, campaigned and won on this issue, framing it as a matter of private property rights. In an American Thinker article he co-wrote last summer with Scott Strzelczyk, he explained that: “Sustainability has less to do with the environment, and everything to do with economics.  It is an attack on capitalism, and an attack on America’s middle class lifestyle.” In a recent defense of his positions, Mr. Rothschild stated:

“Sustainability invokes government power to enforce activists’ views of environmentalism. They want to replace farmers’, ranchers’ and other landowners’ concept of stewardship with government-centric control. It merges environmentalism and socialism to expand government into every aspect of our lives, including land use, food production, housing, transportation, manufacturing, energy rationing and even health care.”

Further down in the article is linked this video below reveals how it was pushed in rural Richland County, South Carolina, sold as a “Comprehensive Plan” called “Vision 20/20”.  Explained by state legislator Joe Neal – a Democrat – the video provides a diagram that displays how development would be limited to small urban centers and leaving rural communities to die on the vine. The video is only four minutes long and well worth the time.

“The commissioners have already been challenged to a debate on their decision and the other side wants to bring in heavy hitters from the EPA and the Maryland Department of the Environment in an attempt to discredit the commission’s earth shattering (figuratively) move.” Yeah, I can believe the environmentalists would be a bit irritated on this matter. /sarc

I hope that we will have an increasing number of local governments who will begin to review the operations, costs and functions of their own Offices of Sustainability. Even if we the people genuinely wanted these types of policies put into place, the truth of the matter is that if these offices are being funded by the taxpayers it should be reviewed as to whether those expenditures are a luxury or a necessity given our current economic situation.

COMMENTS

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    is the issue of what “conspiratorial” means to different people and why it should or should not be important. Could you define what you mean by the word and what you perceive those that you deem to be too broad in their aversion to same mean by the word.

    • lineholder

      Man, I really wanted to take this and run with it, because the approach that the Carroll County commission is taking on this issue is dead on the money.

      But there wasn’t much way to get into discussing the topic without mentioning Agenda21/UN/ICLEI/Millenium Project and half a dozen other things that play into the situation. They are all factually-based, but one person’s “underlying truth” can be another person’s “conspiracy theory”.

      Still, if one of the moderators would look this over, I think it is worth mentioning in full and drawing more attention to the fact that we could have more of these kinds of opportunities locally.

      • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

        on behalf of the Brits to create a government that they thought would self-destruct. Would we discard their policies that obviously work just because of their motives? No

        In the world of conspiracies, the only time it matters is if iit is criminal.

        You made out at least 3 strong substantive arguments against these offices and the policies they impose. That’s the ticket to victory, not who advocates them and why.

        • lineholder
  • http://vladenblog.tumblr.com Steve Maley

    I think most here are a little uncomfortable with ceding control to the U.N. I had not heard about sustainability or the ICLEI, so it’s not like the issue has been beat like a dead horse.

    Besides, the point of my recent diary on energy conspiracies was not so much “There’s not one” but “Why go there if we don’t have to?”

    To clarify, a diarist should expect to be booted if they base their diaries on explanations of events that involve the Illuminati, Freemasons, the New World Order, the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, the International Zionist Conspiracy, etc.

    Deification of Dr. Paul the Elder is not advised, nor is calling Mormonism a cult (esp. in reference to a particular candidate), or (worst of all) quoting Democrat talking points.

    Other than that, have at it!

    • lineholder

      I’m going to try to this one again. Lot of good info in this that I wasn’t aware of before reading these articles. Good opportunity for conservatives to take a few chinks out of the walls that have been built around us as well.

      Fair enough, and thanks.