Global governance is global socialism
By Henry Lamb
Global governance is a creation of the International Socialist Party, and particularly, of Willy Brandt, former Chair of Socialist International. Brandt invited 30 world leaders to a meeting in Stockholm, Sweden on April 22, 1991. Among the guests were Ingvar Carlsson, then Prime Minister of Sweden, and Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime Minister of Norway, and Chair of the 1987 U.N. Commission on Environment and Development.
The meeting was reported in the EcoSocialist Review, Summer 1991, a publication of the Democratic Socialists of America. The meeting report says:
"The 28 proposals concurred upon represent a shot-across-the-bow of George Bush's New World Order, and [makes] clear that now is the time to press for the subordination of national sovereignty to democratic transnationalism."
The final recommendation in this report called for the creation of an Independent Commission on Global Governance. Willy Brandt first secured the blessing of, and funding from, Butrous- Butrous Ghali, then U.N. Secretary General, and proceeded to appoint 28 members to his Commission on Global Governance (CGG). Ignvar Carlsson and Shridath Ramphal, past president of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, where named co-chairs.
The CGG worked for three years and published its 410-page report in 1995. Titled Our Global Neighborhood, the report set forth very specific recommendations to achieve the socialists' vision of global governance.
As is now common practice, a network of NGOs (non-government organizations) was created to advance the report's agenda. The NGOs fashioned the CGG recommendations into a smaller, easy-to-read "Charter for Global Democracy." The Charter consolidated the CGG recommendations into 12 principles for restructuring and empowering the United Nations to implement global governance.
Simultaneously, Maurice Strong, a member of the Commission on Global Governance, was named Executive Coordinator for U.N. Reform, and put in charge of restructuring the U.N. in preparation for the new role the U.N. expects to perform in the 21st century.
To make legal this transformation from "...national sovereignty to democratic transnationalism," the U.N. has scheduled a series of meetings under the banner "Millennium Assembly and Summit," which will take place September 6-9, 2000, in New York. The Assembly is the regular meeting of the 55thsession of the U.N. General Assembly. A part of this session will be devoted to what is called the "Millennium Summit." In addition to the official delegates to the U.N., the heads of state from as many as 160 nations are expected to be in attendance.
The U.N. delegates and heads of state will receive mountains of documents, including a report from the newly created NGO Millennium Forum, an assembly of representatives from "civil society," which will urge the delegates and heads of state to adopt the recommendations their report contains. Not surprisingly, their report contains essentially the same principles advanced in the Charter for Global Democracy, albeit, with more words, and in "kinder, gentler" language.
The delegates and heads of state will also receive a report from the Secretary General which, in even more words, says the same things advanced by the NGO report. Kofi Annan's report discusses why the U.N. must have independent sources of revenue, why there must be a U.N. standing army, why there must be changes within the U.N. Security Council, and why each of the CGG's recommendations must be implemented.
The delegates and heads of state are most likely to be asked to adopt a declaration which sets forth all these recommendations as goals to be achieved in order to improve global governance. The declaration is also likely to call for the creation of a new, official, Commission to implement the recommendations they have adopted.
When all the official delegates to the U.N., and the heads of state from 160 nations adopt such a declaration, the U.N. will have a mandate to move forward rapidly with the plans that have been under development for many years. This document does not have to be reviewed or approved by Congress. America can be committed to support the document by the signature of a bureaucrat appointed by the President.
No, the U.N. will not suddenly be in control of all national governments when the declaration is adopted. In fact, the world will appear pretty much the same for some time after the Millennium Assembly adjourns. But it will not be the same. The U.N. will have the authority to move forward with the implementation of global governance. It will take several years to implement most of the elements, but the Millennium Assembly is seen to be the point beyond which there is no turning back.
The declaration and authorities which are expected to flow from this meeting will set the U.N. on a direct course to continue consolidating its power into a central bureaucracy, while claiming to reform, decentralize, democratize, and put decision-making closer to the people.
Americans are often misled by terms such as "democratic transnationalism." In America, the "democratic" process means that any American may advance any policy proposal to any appropriate body of elected officials, and advocate for that policy as widely as possible, until,. ultimately, the elected officials vote publicly on the proposal, which will be adopted or rejected.
At the United Nations, the "democratic" process has an entirely different meaning. To "democratize" at the U.N., means that government has decided to allow certain individuals to participate in some of the discussions relating to a particular policy proposal. Only those individuals known to be in support of the government's position are allowed to participate, and only to the extent the government believes necessary to support its claim of expanded democratic participation.
To be accredited by the U.N., which is the first requirement for participation, an NGO must declare allegiance to the aims of the U.N. and have at least two years of activity which demonstrates that allegiance. Once NGOs are accredited, they are allotted only limited time, if any, to address the delegates at a particular meeting. Not all NGOs are allotted time. The U.N. chooses which NGOs may speak, and the U.N. chooses which NGOs' reports will be submitted to the delegates.
Literature which opposes the U.N. position is often not allowed to be distributed at U.N. meetings. This is what the U.N. calls expanding democracy. At the U.N., policy decisions are made by non-elected bureaucrats - official delegates designated by member governments. The vast majority of these member governments depend upon the U.N. for financial assistance in one form or another, and the expenses of their delegates to the U.N. meetings are paid by the U.N. It is not reasonable to expect that these delegates will oppose the policies recommended by the U.N.
The policy recommendations developed by the socialist-dominated Commission on Global Governance, which now have evolved into the declaration to be adopted by the world leaders, are nothing short of classic socialist policy. For example, one recommendation calls for centralized control of environmental policy by declaring the "global commons" to be under the "trusteeship" of the U.N. Trusteeship Council.
Incidentally, the "global commons" is defined to be "outer space, the atmosphere, non-territorial seas, and the related environment that supports human life." The concept of "sustainable development," is a product of Gro Harlem Brundtland's 1987 Commission on Environment and Development, and is the cornerstone of the economic recommendations to be adopted in New York.
Sustainable development, is government- managed development - a socialist principle. Sustainable communities are government-managed communities - a socialist principle. Sustainable forests means government-managed forests - a socialist principle.
The objectives of global governance are no different from the objectives of Stalin's Soviet Union; the methods of achievement, however, are quite different. Stalin tried to enforce his principles of global governance with force; the U.N. is using a whole new strategy to accomplish the same thing.
The favorite new technique is to create the perception that a crisis, such as global warming, exists which can only be solved by "international cooperation." The U.N. then creates a control mechanism - which it controls - to bring about a solution to the problem. Whether or not the problem is real is of little consequence to the U.N., it is the control mechanism that is important.
Another favorite new technique is to create the perception that a particular policy proposal has overwhelming public support. By funding NGOs and charging them with the responsibility of "elevating public awareness," NGOs litter newspaper op-ed pages, protest in the streets, and conduct public meetings in neighborhoods around the country, all singing the same, well- orchestrated song. The Sierra Club has been particularly effective in promoting the no-logging policy that is largely responsible for the wildfires sweeping the West.
NGOs, too, have been engaged to promote the socialist idea of global governance. The NGO Millennium Forum is an excellent example of how only carefully selected individuals from carefully selected NGOs were allowed to participate in the Forum and in the development of the document that the delegates to the U.N. Millennium Assembly will see.
The delegates will be told that this document represents the wishes of "civil society" - the democratic process in action. Sadly, few Americans will even know that the Millennium Assembly and Summit occurred. A similar event took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Few American were even aware of it. Today, however, they are feeling the consequences through policies adopted in 1992, now being implemented by the agencies of the federal government, often without Congressional approval or even awareness.
It will take a few years for Americans to begin to feel the consequences of the policies being adopted by the Millennium Assembly. When rolling blackouts occur across the country as the result of the U.N. management of energy, Americans will wonder how this happened. As more and more industries close shop in America and move to China, Mexico and Brazil - Americans will wonder why this is happening. As the U.N. takes control of the global economic throttle, and America's wealth is deliberately redistributed to the developing nations - Americans then, may wake up and demand that somebody do something. By then, it may be too late.
© 1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.