Thread: Global Citizenship

Global Citizenship

Herbert London — February 25, 2014










When President Obama visited Berlin a couple of years ago he raised the prospect of an idea that circulated throughout the twentieth century: world citizenship. Eminentos such as H.G. Wells and Bertrand Russell contended that unless humanity embraced this notion, it is doomed.


Whether this idea has veracity or not is beside the point since the president believes that trans-national progressivism, a form of world government, is the impetus for his foreign policy positions. It explains in part why he has channeled key foreign policy matters through the United Nations and why he maintains the U.S. is neither more nor less exceptional than any other nation.


Universities have climbed aboard this ideological bandwagon arguing that the world’s great challenges demand a global perspective (read: world citizenship). What these programs do not answer is the obvious question: As a global citizen, to whom do I pledge allegiance? Moreover, as a global citizen what entity protects my rights? From whom do I obtain a passport? And on whose laws should I depend?


If a national allegiance is eliminated, how is one identified in this global melting pot? Clearly this is one of those utopian ideas that only a group of scholars can take seriously. However, in Washington circles it has gained traction through the voices of Dean Koh, Amy Gutman, Ann Marie Slaughter, among others. There is a well entrenched belief that American interest should be subordinate to an abstract international interest. The discussion of the Treaty of The Seas, to cite one example, falls into this category since our rivals, in this case Russia and China, pursue their national goals and the U.S. reiterates global goals.


This mind set reminds me of Samuel Butler’s novel Erehwon (Nowhere spelled backwards). It is the name of a country discovered by the novel’s protagonist. But in essence, it is a utopia – a place that exists solely in the human imagination. In most respects, it is very much like “the citizen of the world,” an idea that sounds reasonable but is utterly absurd and unworkable.


For advocates of this viewpoint, global citizenship is a way to transform America, to change the idiosyncratic idea of this republic into an amalgam of ideas borrowing from variegated sources. The curriculum in most colleges is moving in this direction. NYU, for example, contends that the “traditional state-to-state mindset may be at odds with the realities of our increasingly globalized planet.”


A case can be made for economic issues that transcend geographic boundaries. Pneumonia in Europe causes a cold in North America. However, social and political matters are largely national and those attempts at post-national enterprises such as the European Union, have a dubious history and uncertain future.


There is little doubt a world government will not soon be upon us unless, of course, Islam conquers the world or China’s notion of the Middle Kingdom gains ascendancy. But there is a valid concern about procedural policy issues that rely on global principles. To cite yet another example: A recent Supreme Court decision, presumably guided by the U.S. Constitution, relied on a precedent in Zimbabwe’s Courts. Even if the precedent is useful, this globalized viewpoint has serious implications for the future of American jurisprudence.


One need not be narrowly nationalistic to assume world government and its global citizens are a fantasy most likely realized as dystopia. Unfortunately the advocates of this notion have penetrated the porous walls of the Academy and have even influenced those in the corridors of influence and power.

Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.

http://www.aim.org/guest-column/glob...9243-224224701

1. World Passport - World Government of World Citizen
   
   www.worldservice.org/docpass.html‎
   The World Passport is a 30 page Machine Readable Travel Document (MRTD*) with alphanumeric code line, scanned-in passport photo and "ghost" security ...‎World Passport Application Form - ‎WSA Passport Acceptance- ‎Forms
   
   
2. Images for world passport
   
   - Report images
   
   • 
   • 
   • 
   • 
   • 
   • 
   
   
   
   
3. World Passport - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
   
   en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Passport‎
   
   Wikipedia
   The World Passport is a document issued by the World Service Authority, a non-profit organization founded by Garry Davis in 1954, citing Article 13, Section 2, ...‎Appearance and issuance fees - ‎As a travel document - ‎As an identity document

Monday, 24 February 2014 18:45 UN Plotting to “Dramatically Alter” Your Views and Behavior

Written by Alex Newman





The United Nations is currently working on a far-reaching plot, developed with radical Obama administration policy architect John Podesta, to “profoundly and dramatically” alter your "worldview" in the name of shackling humanity under a UN-managed “universal sustainable development agenda.” According to the controversial report produced for UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon by a team of establishment “eminent persons,” within the next six years, no realm of the human experience will escape the “profound transformation” toward “a new paradigm” demanded by globalist bureaucrats.

The UN document, while packed with contradictory machinations, essentially outlines what establishment proponents of global government have long described as a “New World Order.” In essence, the UN panel called for a top-down restructuring of human civilization under the guise of tackling poverty, “unsustainable” activities, and “climate change.” The international outfit and its mostly dictatorial member regimes will set the agenda, with regional, national, and sub-national governments expected to foist it on humanity.
Literally every person on Earth must submit and contribute, the planetary establishment claimed on multiple occasions in the radical document. It was not immediately clear what would happen with those who refuse.


The report on the “Post-2015 Development Agenda,” dubbed “A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies Through Sustainable Development,” was compiled and endorsed by a “High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons.” Under the plan, expected to be discussed later this year at a UN meeting in New York, a planetary treaty on “sustainable development” would drastically transform everything from government and the economy to society and even individuals’ beliefs.

“Perhaps the most important transformative shift is towards a new spirit of solidarity, cooperation, and mutual accountability that must underpin the post-2015 agenda,” the report says. “This partnership should involve governments but also include others: people living in poverty, those with disabilities, women, civil society and indigenous and local communities, traditionally marginalised groups, multilateral institutions, local and national government, the business community, academia and private philanthropy.” In other words, everyone and everything.

Even your own mind and beliefs are in UN crosshairs. “The new global partnership should encourage everyone to alter their worldview, profoundly and dramatically,” the report explains. Fox News editor George Russell, who first reported on the extreme effort, described it as “a colossal and sweeping form of global behavior modification.” In fact, the UN plan, which has been in the pipeline for decades, goes well beyond even what Russell described.

“A renewed global partnership will require a new spirit from national leaders, but also — no less important — it will require many others to adopt new mind-sets and change their behavior,” the report continues, adding that the shift must get all countries to move “willingly” toward the UN’s radical and “universal” agenda. “These changes will not happen overnight. But we must move beyond business-as-usual — and we must start today.”

Among the primary justifications for the radical schemes are fighting “poverty” and so-called “climate change,” which the UN continues to blame on humanity despite the total implosion of its theories and models. On poverty, meanwhile, the UN has openly announced its intentions to reduce standards of living worldwide — along with population levels — and implement totalitarian controls over the economy. Every credible economist knows such anti-market measures will drastically slash material prosperity.

A key section of the report goes under the headline “One World: One Sustainable Development Agenda.” Of course, the terms “sustainable development” and Agenda 21 will be very familiar to readers of The New American. Under the guise of so-called “sustainability” — a perpetually shifting scheme that at its core considers human beings, national sovereignty, liberty, and prosperity to be problems in need of solutions — the UN has long been seeking to expand and centralize coercive power at the global level.

As The New American reported from the 2012 UN Rio+20 “Conference on Sustainable Development” in Rio de Janeiro, chaired by a prominent Chinese communist, the real agenda behind “sustainability” is actually fairly transparent. The UN boasts about its plans at its summits and in official documents, and the Rio+20 summit is cited in the latest report as having established the “foundations” for steering the world toward the globalists’ agenda. In essence, the goal is to have an unaccountable planetary authority dictate everything from economic decisions and environmental regulation down to the thoughts of individuals.

Much like Soviet “five-year plans,” the UN document outlines a series of demands to be solidified by 2015, when its previous slate of radical “development goals” runs its course, and implemented by 2020. “In our view, business-as-usual is not an option,” the “eminent persons” decided for you, all Americans, and everybody else around the world. “We concluded that the post-2015 agenda is a universal agenda. It needs to be driven by … big, transformative shifts.”

Wealth redistribution under the guise of fighting “poverty” and “inequality” will be crucial, with Western taxpayers being fleeced to prop up Third World dictatorships and global bureaucracies. “We agreed to push developed countries to fulfill their side of the bargain — by honouring their aid commitments, but also reforming their trade, tax and transparency policies, by paying more attention to better regulating global financial and commodity markets and by leading the way towards sustainable development,” the report states.

The supposed “stresses” of “unsustainable production and consumption patterns,” the globalist document continues, have supposedly become “clear.” To respond to the alleged “stresses,” the UN panel agreed that the UN would have to start calling the shots and attacking freedom and free markets. “We also agreed on the need to manage the world’s consumption and production patterns in more sustainable and equitable ways [emphasis added],” the report says. “Above all, we agreed that a new vision must be universal: offering hope — but also responsibilities — to everyone in the world.”

Did you catch that? It is hardly the only time it is mentioned. “There can be no excuses,” the document adds. “This is a universal agenda, for which everyone must accept their proper share of responsibility.” In case you missed it again, the UN has a plan for your life, whether you agree with it or not. It will not be optional, as the report makes abundantly clear, adding that many of “the world’s largest companies are already leading this transformation to a green economy.” What happens with those who refuse to accept their “proper share of responsibility” remains unclear.

The latest UN report expands on the radical themes unveiled at the Rio+20 summit and plots a way forward for the draconian global transformation. Promising a “profound economic transformation,” for example, the high-level globalist report vows to restructure the world economy, which includes commandeering business to serve the agenda. “This means a rapid shift to sustainable patterns of consumption and production,” the report states. Top UN officials and reports, of course, have already made abundantly clear that American standards of living are not “sustainable” in their view.

Chaired by three foreign leaders, there was just one American on the global outfit’s “high-level panel” — John Podesta. The establishment “progressive” heavyweight, who founded the radical Big Business-funded “Center for American Progress” and served as chief of staff to disgraced former President Bill Clinton, is now considered one of the top players in the Obama administration and its lawless scheme to rule America by decree while subverting U.S. sovereignty.

“The ability of President Obama to accomplish important change through [executive] powers should not be underestimated,” Podesta opined in a 2010 Center for American Progress report calling on the administration to shred what remains of the Constitution and congressional authority. Indeed, Podesta and his cohorts have been among the key drivers behind the increasingly totalitarian executive-branch plot to bypass Congress using Obama’s “pen and phone.”

In recent years, for example, the administration has unilaterally and unconstitutionally foisted radical policies on Americans dealing with everything from “climate change” to gun control. Just last week, The New American reported on how far Obama is willing to go, including the imposition of radical UN “global warming” decrees on America without any sort of congressional approval or Senate ratification. Secretary of State John Kerry even announced a “climate” partnership with the murderous communist regime ruling mainland China, which the UN climate boss praises as a better model than the U.S. Constitution to fight "climate change."

The globalists have fanatical allies in the Obama administration including the president himself, of course, as well as Podesta and countless others. However, the American people have already expressed fierce resistance to the UN’s agenda. In Alabama, for example, the state government passed a law banning the UN Agenda 21 and its “sustainability” plots. Numerous other state legislatures and local bodies have passed similar measures.

As the UN takes off the deceitful mask and tightens the screws, opposition will undoubtedly continue to surge. One surefire way to break the back of the schemers is to elect members of Congress who will support legislation getting the U.S. government to de-fund and withdraw from the dictators’ club known as the United Nations. Whether American resistance to the globalist plot will be enough to stop it, however, depends largely on educating and activating the public.

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.
Related articles:
The Real Agenda Behind UN “Sustainability” Unmasked
UN Sustainability Summit Exposed: Big Business, Dictators, and NGOs
Despite Setbacks, UN “Sustainability” Agenda Marches on After Rio+20
Alabama Adopts First Official State Ban on UN Agenda 21
What are the UN's Agenda 21 and ICLEI?
Climate Alarmists Push Chinese Communism, Population Control
Obama Behavior Team to “Nudge” U.S. Toward Government Goals
UN vs. Vatican
Obama Unveils More Fascism by Decree in State of the Union
UN Demands Obama “Nullify” Stand Your Ground Laws
The United Nations: On the Brink of Becoming a World Government


http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-...s-and-behavior


Get America out of the United Nations and get the United Nations out of America

Monday, 24 February 2014 17:52 Obama Presses "North American Union" With Mexico, Canada

Written by William F. Jasper







President Obama’s February 19 meeting in Toluca, Mexico, with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper (right) and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto (center) did not produce any big, headline-grabbing breakthroughs, but that does not mean that it didn’t lay new ground for political and economic integration of the three nations. In fact, in their Joint Statement issued at the conclusion of the summit, the three leaders affirmed their commitment to a number of initiatives, many of which are already far developed, including approval of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the "trade” agreement that is stirring widespread opposition in all three countries.

The controversial TPP is evoking broad-spectrum hostility particularly because of the total secrecy under which it has been crafted; while the American public and even the U.S. Congress have been kept from seeing the text, privileged corporations and NGOs have been given full access to the negotiated documents. The portions of the agreement that have been publicly leaked have confirmed that it poses a serious threat to national sovereignty, both from international institutions (such as the United Nations and the WTO) as well as multi-national corporations. The Joint Statement unequivocally endorses the TPP, declaring:
We seek to set new standards for global trade through the prompt conclusion of a high standard, ambitious, and comprehensive Trans-Pacific Partnership.


This is similar to the language of the Joint Statement issued by Obama, Harper, and then-President of Mexico Felipe Calderon at the 2012 Summit of North American Leaders, which declared:
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) provides an opportunity to further deepen our trade relationship and create jobs. The United States welcomes Canada’s and Mexico’s interest in joining the TPP as ambitious partners.
The TPP is an attempt to forge a supranational government for the nations of the Pacific Rim modeled after the European Union. There are currently 12 members of the TPP: United States, Mexico, Canada Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia, and Japan.
The TPP represents the latest attempt of the globalists in the Washington ruling elite to greatly expand the power and reach of 20-year-old NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. Following the example of the European Union, they are pursuing a twin path of “broadening and deepening.” Broadening refers to the process of adding new member nations; deepening refers to the process of greater and greater “integration” and “harmonization,” the progressive convergence and intertwining of economic, political, and social sectors of the individual countries into a regional government, over which the citizens and their elected officials would have less and less control and accountability. Eventually, the various supranational regional governments would be merged into a world government under the United Nations, World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, and other UN-related agencies.
Following the establishment of NAFTA in 1994, under the Clinton administration, President George W. Bush attempted to deepen the U.S.-Canada-Mexico tri-national region with the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), but public opposition spearheaded by this publication, The John Birch Society, WorldNetDaily, Phyllis Schlafly’s Eagle Forum, and other pro-independence, pro-Constitution groups, forced the Bush administration to shelve the plan — temporarily — and drop the tainted SPP moniker. At the same time, the Bush administration was pushing the broadening agenda, under the banner of the Free Trade Area of the America’s (FTAA), an endeavor launched during the Clinton administration to expand NAFTA to include all the nations of North and South America. As with the SPP, an awakened electorate put sufficient heat on the U.S. Congress to torpedo the FTAA. The subversive integration/merger plans that The New American had been exposing for years were confirmed in 2011 with the release by WikiLeaks of U.S. State Department cables showing that U.S. officials had been colluding with their Canadian and Mexican counterparts to undermine our constitutional government through various “integration” schemes. (See here and here.)
CFR Handprints on Every Page — No Surprise There
As with NAFTA and all of the other myriad “free trade” agreements that have flooded out of the current Obama administration and the Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II administrations, the actual fountainhead for the texts continues to be the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and its allied think tanks and media spigots. Carla A. Hills, a top CFR insider, is but one of the brain trust’s key operatives promoting the TPP. In testimony on January 15, Hills laid out the CFR line on the TPP as a broadening-deepening upgrade to NAFTA. Her statement before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, entitled, “NAFTA at Twenty, Accomplishments, Challenges, and the Way Forward,” called for more U.S. integration with Canada and Mexico, while moving forward with the TPP (of which Mexico and Canada are already partners) and also bringing Canada and Mexico into the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) currently underway to merge the United States and EU into a super-regional bloc. Hills, a co-chair of the CFR board of directors, told the subcommittee:
In 2012 Mexico and Canada joined the United States and eight other nations to negotiate a Trans-Pacific Partnership (“TPP”) to link the Asia and Pacific regions. Having our two neighbors at the table will better enable us to take positions to maintain and advance the unique competitiveness of the North American Region. It also gives us an attractive opportunity to address issues that were not relevant when the NAFTA was negotiated.…
It also provides an opportunity to harmonize a number of conflicting trade rules.… Today there are eight existing bilateral trade agreements between the three NAFTA governments and other TPP participants that were negotiated after the NAFTA came into being…. These differences could be dealt with in the TPP agreement.
Then, on to the push for the TTIP. According to Hills:
Third and most importantly, a North American-European Union Trade Agreement. Last year the United States and the European Union’s 28 states launched a comprehensive Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (“T-TIP”). The third round of negotiations occurred this past December.
Without question the T-TIP is a very big deal…. Failure to include Canada and Mexico in T-TIP would erode the unique and hugely beneficial economic integration that we have achieved with our two neighbors as a result of the NAFTA.
Carla Hills is one of the big movers and shakers in globalist circles. Besides being a longtime CFR officer and current co-chair of the organization (along with Robert Rubin, former U.S. treasury secretary and former co-chair of Goldman Sachs), she is also chair and CEO of Hills & Company (her international consulting firm), a member of the executive committees of the Trilateral Commission and the International Crisis Group, and an attendee of the secretive Bilderberg Group meetings. The biography for Hills on the official U.S. Department of State website dated March 12, 2012 says:
Over the past 25 years Mrs. Hills has served on a number of corporate boards of directors. She currently serves on the International Boards of J.P. Morgan Chase, Rolls Royce, and the Coca-Cola Company and is a member of the Board of Gilead Sciences. Mrs. Hills is also actively involved with a number of eleemosynary organizations, serving as Co-Chair of the Council on Foreign Relations, of the Inter American Dialogue, and of the International Advisory Board of the Center for Strategic and International Studies; Chair of the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, … among others.
Hills was also a member of the CFR’s high-powered Independent Task Force that produced the 2005 report entitled Building a North American Community, a full-throated call for continental merger. Robert Pastor (CFR member), frequently cited as “the father of the North American Union,” was the principal co-chair of that task force; he is the author of the 2001 book, Toward a North American Community, and the 2011 book, The North American Idea: A Vision of a Continental Future, both of which promote the CFR program of hemispheric integration. Pastor, who passed away recently, gained infamy for subversive activities during the Carter administration, working under national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, and also working closely with the radical-Marxist Institute for Policy Studies (IPS).
Pastor and Carla Hills were also among the current and former U.S. officials that attended a secret conference in Banff, Alberta, in 2006 to discuss continental merger plans with foreign counterparts. The U.S. participants included Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of State George Shultz (CFR), former Central Intelligence Agency Director R. James Woolsey (CFR), former Immigration and Naturalization Services Director Doris Meissner (CFR), former Defense Secretary William Perry (CFR), and others. Exposure of that secret meeting and the SPP stealth agenda to surreptitiously carry forward the transnational merger in violation of the U.S. Constitution, and without the knowledge and consent of the American people, caused another firestorm that helped stop the SPP version of the NAU.
However, that did not mean "game over"; the globalists merely shifted gears, changed their game-plan labels, and rotated in some new players. As we reported concerning the Obama TTIP-TPP program:
Heading up Team Obama’s official TTIP effort is U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman (CFR), who is described in his official USTR bio as “President Obama’s principal advisor, negotiator and spokesperson on international trade and investment issues.” Froman’s chief deputy at USTR is Miriam Sapiro (CFR). Leading the effort with Froman is undersecretary of state for economic growth, energy, and the environment (and longtime Washington insider) Robert D. Hormats (CFR). Froman and Hormats have been busy for months lining up top-level support for TTIP in speeches before business, banking, and industry groups. They are both Wall Street insiders. Froman was a managing director at Citigroup, and also served as president and chief executive officer of CitiInsurance before joining the Obama administration. Hormats was vice chairman of Goldman Sachs International. Both men were principals in massive corruption scandals (Froman in the bailout of Citigroup, Hormats in PetroChina’s takeover of Sudan’s oil).
The late Admiral Chester Ward was a longtime CFR member who became one of its most notable critics. According to Adm. Ward, the goal of the CFR’s leaders is the “submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government.” James Perloff’s definitive book on the CFR, The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline, together with numerous articles in this magazine over the years, has shown Admiral Ward’s evaluation of the organization to be spot-on.
Related articles:
Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Assault on Our Sovereignty, Our Constitution, Our Liberty (Video)
The North American Union - The New American Magazine - Special Issue
Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Bigger and More Dangerous Than ObamaCare (Video)
Secretly Trading Away Our Independence
North American Union: From NAFTA to the NAU
Goal of TPP: Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific (FTAAP)
WikiLeaks Exposes North American Integration Plot
WikiLeaks Confirms North American Integration Scheme
North American Integration Continues After Robert Pastor
EU/U.S. — Transatlantic Convergence
CFR Applauds European Union’s “Real Subversion of Sovereignty”
Obama Pushing Trans-Atlantic Union with EU
Fast-track: Enabler of the “Free Trade” Agenda

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews...-mexico-canada



A wake yet????