How Homesteading Dies
I know. What a title!
Is it clickbait? No, sadly. I am sure you asked yourself this before you decided to click on this article.
This will be a longer article that is filled with a lot of information so I want you to buckle up. If you are sensitive to having international and national policies critiqued, you may want to stop reading now.
Author’s Note: When it comes to the recent political election in the United States, my approach is and has always been policies over personality. In that, I do not believe in voting against my own best interests. Given that, I principally do not want government in every aspect of my life, I do not desire increased government power or regulations on individual liberties. I fully endorse individualism, freedom, liberty, self-reliance and our rights, in full, as outlined in the Constitution of the United States of America. I state this to be transparent and identify my bias concerning this topic.
None of the information below is based on emotion. However, domestic events in America that occurred in early November did induce me to write this. Admittedly, this is not something I wanted to write. I’ll elaborate a bit.
It is my opinion that most people no longer want to be informed. They want to be entertained. And while they are being entertained, they want to be told something they already agree with and to feel good about it. Because of this, we are left with the News, information, and education system we have today.
The product is an adult-age cadre of people that don’t think objectively; everything is about how they feel. And our academic institutions now decree that our feelings are facts. The vast majority of people no longer have their own thoughts, they are told what to think by what we call media outlets, according to Mika Brzenziski of MSNBC. Gone are the days of real thinkers, real intellectuals. Now we have pseudo-intellectuals that only parrot what they have heard on the news or read in the newspapers.
Before I begin, I’d like to share something with you that my father used to say to my brothers and me when I was growing up. “A fact is not wrong because you don’t know it.” He would say this another way when in the company of my aunts and uncles, “The truth, like rain, doesn’t give a damn who it falls on.” I offer these to you because, for some, this article may be uncomfortable. Some may find it insulting. Others will not finish reading it.
“Truth and facts do not require your belief or acknowledgement to stand on their own.”
There is a phrase that is becoming more popular in our political and academic discourse, “You are entitled to your own opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.” It is odd to me that we even have to say something like this, but given what is becoming increasingly obvious about our educational institutions, we can probably understand why. A well known self-taught political commentator says, “Facts don’t care about your feelings.” With that, I will begin.
What Is A Conspiracy?
Oh God! Here we go, right? You will understand why I broach this question in a bit. I promise.
According to the online Oxford Dictionary, a conspiracy is defined as, “a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.” I cite this because its important to establish the meaning of terms so we can prevent the perversion of them to undermine an argument.
Have you ever wondered why it is that this is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear ‘Conspiracy?’
Although many may not know it, quite a lot of criminals are charged with “conspiracy to commit.” According to Cornell Law School, conspiracy, as a criminal charge, falls under 18 U.S. Code. The following is an excerpt from the U.S. Code:
If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.
Let us now address the term ‘Conspiracy Theory.’ What is this and where did it come from?
Conspiracy Theory is a term that has become a commonly accepted way to discredit or undermine an idea. Depending on what media outlets you follow, you may hear the term on a daily basis. Objectively speaking, the term is now almost synonymous with anything you don’t believe in or agree with. Does your political adversary say something happened that you don’t like? Conspiracy Theory! And like magic, no intellectual debate is required to address the merits of their points.
Historically, the term originated in the 1960s after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. At the time, the government struggled with countering arguments that proposed alternative theories about how JFK was killed and why. The Central Intelligence Agency devised a way, working through media outlets, to counter alternative ideas that opposed the government official story while never actually addressing the alternative points at all.
Only crazies would repeat what a sexual predator would say… who cares if the source of the claim is unknown…
I can hear your cognitive dissonance kicking in. “NO WAY,” “This is BS.” As the kids say today, “bring the receipts.”
In 1976, the New York Times submitted a Freedom of Information Act request and received the documents that proved it. The documents were called, “CIA Document 1035-960,” and details how the CIA was concerned about potential damage to the reputation of the United States and the Warren Commission after the assassination of JFK.
In 2013, James F. Tracy wrote the following summation:
“[CIA Document 1035-960] delineates specific techniques for countering “conspiratorial” arguments centering on the Warren Commission’s findings. Such responses and their coupling with the pejorative label have been routinely wheeled out in various guises by corporate media outlets, commentators and political leaders to this day against those demanding truth and accountability about momentous public events.”
Now, does this mean that every time the term conspiracy theory is used its designed to counter an inconvenient truth for the government? No. But you will soon understand why I wanted to address the origins of that term and its purpose.
The finer point here is that conspiracies do exist and it is intellectually dishonest to simply consider something a conspiracy theory in order to discredit it.
The U.N. to your Local Planning Committee
The United Nations is credited with serving as the forum for, and spring board for, international proposals. There are several that are pertinent to this topic, but I don’t want to assume you are aware of the policy agendas.
Have you ever heard of United Nations Agenda 21? What about United Nations Agenda 2030? How about the United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda? What about United Nations Smart Growth and Smart Cities initiatives? Maybe you have heard of the United Nations Rewilding Project?
If you have heard of these aforementioned plans, you are in the minority. If you have read the plans, you are in the one percent. If you are troubled by these plans, you are in the .01 percent.
On their face, the United Nations plans sound good. Who doesn’t want a cleaner planet, with cleaner air, cleaner water, less trash, healthier soil, etc.? You would have to be crazy to not want a better world for the next generation. I think we can all agree with that.
The question is, how do we get to this international green utopia? What are the finer details?
A ton of credit goes to Ms. Rosa Koire, an ardent democrat from California and author of the book ‘Behind the Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21,’ who has done a lot of the leg work to discover how these international plans are being implemented. To paraphrase her research, this is one of the greatest public relations operations ever conducted on the world.
At the international level, the ideas are framed and proposed as a ‘win-win’ for everyone and a brighter future for the world. A world with less pollution and a greener world. It is typically during the meeting of international organizations that we are collectively told that we are the sole reason for which the world is dying, and overgeneralized proposals to create a ‘greener’ world are made.
At the national level, the plans are more refined and focus on the supposed culprits of making our world a dirty place. These, according to these national level proponents, are everything from industries to individuals. In the last two years, this was put on full display in what is called the ‘Green New Deal.’
At the State and local level, these plans are being implemented as laws, codes, ordinances, and taxes. Specifically, as Rosa Koire states, local planning committees are being used as the vehicles by which these international plans are manifesting in our communities. However, in title, they are careful not to connect them with the United Nations plans.
What does this look like? In our article ‘Can Homesteading Survive Another 50 Years of Restrictive Policies?’ we document how cities and towns are seeing more and more laws that are essentially outlawing self-sustainability.
How? I’ll be snarky but factual as in, there are examples a-plenty behind these published sentiments.
Your car is bad because it contributes to pollution.
Your house that is over 1000 square feet is bad because it consumes too many resources. Use air conditioning? Bad. Use a wood stove to heat your home? Bad.
Your big yard (more than a 1/4 acre) is bad because it consumes resources to maintain. Mow your yard? Bad. Water your grass? Bad.
Your livestock are bad because they emit greenhouse gases.
You are bad because you consume meat.
Living outside the city is bad because you are dislocating wildlife and mismanaging land.
You owning acres of land is bad because the property is not benefiting the State.
Farming is bad because it reinforces the use of fossil fuels and contributes to pollution.
All fossil fuels are bad. Period.
Nearly all major industries are bad.
The list goes on…
Do you understand now? Do you get the point? You living is bad for the earth.
But… That’s insane, right? Well… how do they want us to live? I thought you would never ask…
Welcome to the Green Utopia!
The United Nations Green Utopia is a world were 100% of our energy is from renewable sources. Our vehicles, if you have one, are not only electric but also self-driving. The vast majority of all property outside of major cities is now restricted from human use and has been reclaimed by nature. The vast majority of all industry has been eliminated except for corporate ownership of solar, wind, tidal, and geothermal energy production.
Major population centers, now Megacities, are densely-packed “smart cities.” They are smart in that they are concrete jungles where everything is connected via the ‘internet of things.’ Your phone is connected to your car, your car to your home, everything in your home is connected, your car is connected to other cars, all the cars are connected to a road-based smart navigation network, buildings connect to each other, etc. Dominated by public transportation, these vehicles are entirely electric and there are zero carbon emissions.
The people are now packed into megaplexes, and these (you guessed it!) are green; powered by solar, wind, and geothermal. Personal domiciles are… modest, likely between 500 and 1000 square feet. The first and/or potentially the second floors of the buildings are shopping centers, grocery stores and other amenities such as clinics, security offices, and jobs. It’s perfect, no need for a car when everything you need is within the building you live in or within walking distance. And if you need to take a long trip, the trains and buses are all green too!
Trips outside of the megacities, which will be extremely rare and restricted, will enable you to see an American landscape with limited human use. America has been successfully reclaimed by nature. No more suburbs, no more rural communities, no more farms. The human infestation has been eliminated from non-urban areas.
The Green New Deal has been fully instituted. No dirty polluting airplanes or cars. There is absolutely no use of fossil fuels. Plastics have been entirely phased out because plastic is a product created from fossil fuel production processes. Our food, especially that food formally known as ‘meat,’ is now grown entirely in a lab, and vegetables, now grown in high-tech vertical farms, are genetically-modified to resist the negative effects of pests and harmful bacteria. No more need for large farms or livestock businesses.
You have arrived at perfection!
If you are a homesteader, you have realized something about this perfect world: there is no self-reliance or self-sufficiency. There is no private property ownership. There is no growing your own food. There is no having your own vehicle or the freedom of movement.
You have realized that homesteading, in this idea of utopia, cannot exist.
“Conspiracy!” You say?
Of course. This has to be false, right? There is no way in the world an international organization could plan and pull something like this off! The author is completely crazy! I accounted for this and the potential for you to think that. So now I am going to show you how these international plans are being enacted in the United States of America.
SOURCE: U.S. Senate graphical representation of the United Nations Biological Diversity project. Cited at the website ProtectTheHarvest.
Let’s do an experiment. Go to Google, Yahoo, DuckDuckGo, or Bing. Type this in: Sustainable Development Plan [insert an American State].
I randomly selected some and here is what I found.
The following is from the State of Hawaii Government Office of Planning website: “In 2015, all United Nation member states adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future. This 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development focuses on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which are an urgent call for action by all countries to end poverty, and other deprivations must go hand in hand with strategies that improve health and education, reduce inequality, and spur economic growth – all while tackling climate change and working to preserve our natural resources.”
New York: “Comprehensive planning is the essential process of defining a community’s goals and directing resources, over time, to achieve them. Through comprehensive planning, public, private, and non-profit sectors can work together to promote sustainable development.”
Florida: “The goal of the Sustainable Initiatives Programs is to promote sustainability in Florida businesses, schools and homes. Sustainability is meeting the needs of the present population without compromising the ability of future populations to meet its needs. Sustainable Initiatives Programs are the Florida Green Lodging Program and the Florida Green School Designation Program.”
Iowa: “Sustainable Development Goals Online was built to help those who want to teach courses mapped to the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The site features an online library of over 12,000 articles and chapters — covering some of the world’s biggest ongoing challenges, corresponding to the 17 United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) — as well as a selection of materials to help lecturers teach sustainability and enhance students’ satisfaction with their institutions.”
“But those are just some States!” Okay. Replicate the experiment and enter a major city.
Seattle, Washington: “Seattle's citizenry and home-grown companies are well-known internationally for its innovation and technological know-how. In that spirit, the Community Technology Advisory Board (CTAB) is committed to helping the City tackle urban challenges like traffic congestion, fostering economic growth, and improving the delivery of government services through Seattle's Smart City initiatives. The CTAB seeks to support the emerging work stemming from Seattle IT and other departments within the City that are working on technological solutions to improve systems and the day-to-day life of Seattleites.”
Charleston, South Carolina: “Sustainability is understood to mean the ability of current generations to meet its needs while not diminishing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The goal of the Charleston Green Plan is to continue Charleston’s shift to a more sustainable and profitable future for both current and future generations.”
Columbus. Ohio: “Columbus, Ohio, beat out 77 other U.S. cities to become the winner of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Smart City Challenge. The $50 million prize was awarded to Columbus to revolutionize its transportation infrastructure and transform it into the first “smart city” in the country.”
Omaha, Nebraska: “Omaha is the perfect location for America’s first Smart City because we have a vision that embodies the goals and objectives of the Smart City Challenge. Omaha possesses the characteristics necessary to make it the ideal city to demonstrate how advanced data, ITS technologies, and applications can be used to reduce congestion, keep travelers safe, and protect the environment.”
When you keep looking, you keep finding that nearly every State in America, every State Capitol, and large metropolitan areas have sustainable development plans and efforts to enact smart city programs. It’s not conspiracy. It’s fact.
As I stated above, “A fact is not wrong because you don’t know it.”
In the words of Ms. Rosa Korie, when you take a closer look at these green initiatives, you begin to wonder why they are being pushed so quietly. You wonder why it is that you have never heard of them. Let’s talk about that…
Behind the Green Plans…
Let’s address some obvious questions that I know you have.
How do these people plan to force me off my land and into a city apartment? By instituting policies, codes, ordinances, and laws that make it untenable to own property, specifically via environmental protection regulations and increased taxes.
How do these people plan to take my vehicle? With the passage of National and State policies that make owning a vehicle financially difficult. It is not the price of the vehicle that will increase, it will be increased registration fees, mandatory carbon emissions tests, the implementation of carbon taxes, and other fees. These will be designed to phase out gasoline-dependent vehicles and induce the purchase of electric vehicles that will not be subject to the same aforementioned fees and taxes. However, once in the city, congestion, taxes, and fees will be implemented in order to reduce vehicle ownership.
How do they plan to eliminate farms and livestock businesses? Through the passage of laws that enact taxes, fees and other regulatory measures on property and animal ownership. Property will come under increasingly protective regulatory measures, making most activity subject to fines. Animal ownership will be reduced via punitive carbon taxes per animal and expensive inspection fees that will bankrupt the farmer.
The reality is that this is here. The last domino to fall is U.S. national legislation that makes these United Nations plans enforceable. After decades of planning, legislation at the U.S. government level has been proposed, The Green New Deal… or as it is known in Congress, House Resolution 109.
How This Ends…
If we were to claim to be completely politically agnostic, we would be lying. We are participants in the political process and seek to be informed, so our opinions are based on the research we’ve done. However, we focus more on policies than personality. These policies represent the death blow to us as homesteaders. If you find yourself mentally looking for holes in my argument, I understand. I did the same thing when I learned about these plans and policies.
On 11 November 2016, the World Economic Forum penned an article titled ‘Welcome to 2030. I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better’, that framed how the world looks in 2030. Notably, 2030 is framed as I have documented in this article, however, the World Economic Forum is oddly candid about life after the aforementioned initiatives are implemented. Although the author states the intent is to garner discussion about this potential future, her words are very closely aligned with the plans laid out in the cited United Nations plans.
The reality is that the policy change that is coming will bring the United States more in alignment with the aforementioned international agendas and plans. Without being alarmist, this is it. It will not be overnight because there is an understanding that incremental policy changes against people is as effective as slowly boiling a frog in water.
This is not about a person being elected into the White House, this is about the acceptance of policy ideas that are counter to the founding ideas of America: Life, Liberty and Property (ref. John Locke).
