Agenda 21: impending danger or mass hysteria?

Benjamin Gohs opines on a recent column penned by Representative Greg MacMaster

By: Benjamin J. Gohs, News Editor
(231) 222-2119 

I love Science Fiction.

Fahrenheit 451, 1984, Invasion of the Body Snatchers … I’ve read and watched more dystopian tales than I can remember. As a result of my decades-long love affair with Orwell and Serling, Bradbury and Burroughs I became an accidental student of human nature, especially with regards to how we govern one another.

I’ll never forget Charlton Heston saying, “They’ve been breeding us like cattle—for food.” Moments later he screams, “You gotta tell ’em: Soylent Green is people!”

As one with a healthy distrust for secretive government operations I keenly read 105th District Representative Greg MacMaster’s column “Agenda 21: The Road Map to Global Governance.”

MacMaster wrote of his July introduction of House Bill 5785 which would “prohibit any Michigan governmental entity from adopting, or implementing policy recommendations originating in, or traceable to, the United Nations’ Agenda 21 or any other international laws that would infringe or restrict private property rights without due process.”

MacMaster said he understands the importance of “responsible stewardship” but fears Agenda 21’s policies will “adversely affect” the rights of Americans.

He goes on to discuss Bill Clinton’s Presidential Council on Sustainable Development (1993) which MacMaster claims was intended to implement Agenda 21 into American public policy.

MacMaster highlighted two of the suggestions made by the council: a need to reduce the rate of population growth worldwide; and a desire to include information about sustainable growth in public school education.

What he doesn’t mention are the suggestions that include the decrease of preventable deaths, increasing quality of life, protecting endangered lands and species, working to protect natural resources like air, water and preventing soil erosion, decreasing violent crime rates and increasing income equality for women—will even good measures be vetoed if they seem too similar to those of Agenda 21?

“Sustainable development,” the phrase arousing all the ire here, is defined as the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

I highly doubt the good civic leaders of Boyne City have world domination in mind when they promote public boons like non-motorized trails, public parks and rehabilitation of dilapidated structures—examples of sustainable growth, all.

As a land owner it was disconcerting that the U.N. would write the following in its 1976 conference on Human Settlements: “Land … cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also the principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, and therefore, contributes to social injustice.”

But then I remembered I am not under the purview of the U.N.

Without sustainable growth initiatives there would be no public parks or campgrounds and future infrastructure needs would go unmet; lakes would become over-fished and deer population could spiral out of control.

After all, conservation has no place in the much-lauded unfettered market fantasy which dwells in the respective imaginations of anarcho-capitalist pretenders.

MacMaster continues, “Agenda 21 will eventually affect our lives in other ways like the relocation of people from rural areas into cities, limiting the type of vehicles we drive, higher gas prices, changing routes of transportation, banning human access to land, seizure of private property, restrictions on water usage, quotas on harvesting, prohibitions on plowing the soil, limitations on raising animals for meat, regulations on what we eat and drink, control of home energy usage, increased taxation, and even forced community involvement.”

Stirring segments of the population to near hysteria is an age old political maneuver, though I’m not sure if the representative is engaging in demagoguery or if he is an unwitting dupe in an ongoing propaganda war intended to shift attention from real issues.

Considering recent history I am apt to fear my so-called representatives at the state and federal level who do not act at the behest of Agenda 21.

Agenda 21 wasn’t to blame when the city of New London used eminent domain to steal a citizen’s house so drug giant Pfizer could build a new manufacturing facility.

Agenda 21 wasn’t to blame when Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette decided to wage war on medical marijuana outlets who were simply trying to serve suffering patients.

Was Agenda 21 conspiring when MacMaster voted to restrict the private use of sand dunes (SB1130)? Or was he simply working toward sustainable growth?

I’m not saying you shouldn’t be afraid of government agents coming for what little rights you have, but it won’t be Agenda 21 that puts the shackles on your wrists and ankles.

If you wish to support the fight against Plan 9 From Outer Space, send your comments to

If you want to do something constructive I suggest you attend your next local planning commission meeting because they are the front-line for either imposing heavy-handed regulations or implementing responsible initiatives for future growth. Times, dates and locations can be found at

See Representative MacMaster’s full opinion column here:

What is Agenda 21? The truth about agenda 21. Agenda 21 is revealed. How obama is using agenda 21 to take over the world. Is agenda 21 the key to global governance and one world government?

Leave a Reply