The city of Irving, Texas has officially withdrawn its membership from ICLEI — the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.
This NGO was established in 1990 and is the action division of the policies laid out under the UN’s Agenda 21 plan — the globalist initiative to usher in a post-industrial world for the 21st century through the creation of local laws and requirements for city planning that essentially erase personal property rights and even steal land under a “sustainable” umbrella.
On ICLEI’s own website (under the “Programs” section), they state, “Our campaigns, programs, and projects promote Local Agenda 21 as a participatory, long-term, strategic planning process that addresses local sustainability while protecting global common goods.” Cities pay dues in order to obtain direction from ICLEI in establishing local policy and law. This is a violation of the Constitution, Article 1, Section 10: “No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance or Confederation…” ICLEI receives funding by the David Rockefeller Fund, United States EPA, etc. ICLEI targets mayors — in the ‘Cool Mayor‘ program, and other local officials to implement Agenda 21. (Source)
The Achilles Heel of ICLEI is exactly what has been targeted by Tommy Gonzalez, the Irving City Manager, and Mayor Beth Van Duyne; namely that local implementation is susceptible to public pressure and principled local officials who can resist the globalist march into their communities.
The resistance must spread, for the world that is planned under the co-opted term of sustainabilityis nothing short of a futuristic dystopia of people herded into high-density living spaces, rationing of infrastructure and services, removal of personal property rights, and strict government monitoring and control over every aspect of the lives of individuals. It is a collectivist model that is distinctly anti-American, as the Planned-opolis video below demonstrates:
One can immediately sense the anti-entrepreneurial, anti-free market rhetoric that sets up a class warfare argument for proposing solutions that have historically led to a serf-lord relationship under bureaucratic totalitarian regimes. This is, in fact, neo-feudalism.