Social justice is in the eye of the beholder. It will have entirely different meanings for a well-to-do metropolitan-type city dweller compared to a subsistence farmer in the middle of anywhere.
The Rio+20 gathering, officially the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, turned sour. The Guardian reports that one thousand NGOs (Non-Government organizations), institutions and individuals are upset with the official Rio+20 communiqué “The Future We Want.” To show their resolve, the NGOs signed a petition “The Future We Don’t Want.”[1]
I don’t know who the “We” really are in either group, other than some of the estimated 45,000 attendees at the Rio+20 junket. Unless you work for a government, or a tax-credit-funded NGO, or a corporation trying to make money from the ‘green, organic, sustainable, carbon-dioxide-opposed dreams’ of the Sorosians and Suzukians, etc., your opinion rarely counts. If your opinion is not shared by the UN, no need to apply. Facts don’t matter either.
Lord Christopher Monckton said “It’s all about extending the power and reach of the global-government wannabes.” “Of course, there are real environmental problems,” he added, “but they should be addressed at the local and national level — and by the free market — not by out-of-control planetary bureaucrats seeking to create a world socialist.” [2]
The Rio Agenda
The Rio agenda involved a lot of unrelated things. The official website [3] called it “Peoples Summit for Social and Environmental Justice in defense of the commons.” The Brazilian Civil Society’s Facilitator Committee stated “The global civil society, organizations, collectives and social movements will occupy the landfill to propose a new way of living on the planet, in solidarity against the commodification of nature and in defense of the commons.” [3]
The same site [3] lists the key actors:
“Three key actors will be present at Rio:
Governments and heads of state gathered in the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (commonly called the “Earth Summit”).
Non-Governmental Organisations of the UN system, grouped in 9 socio-professional groups within an informal Stakeholder Forum: women, children and youth, indigenous peoples, local authorities, NGOs, workers and unions, businesses and industries, scientific and technological communities, farmers and peasants (the groups have their own 2 (or more) Organising Partners (OP).
Citizens and organisations of civil society, i.e. social movements, multiple networks and thematic or socio-professional organisations, among them migrants, religious and spiritual leaders, social leaders, artists, journalists, urban planners, fishermen, lawyers, elected politicians and parliamentarians, the military, unions, educators and teachers, municipalities and cities… to name a few. They will form a “Peoples Summit” that will not be a parallel summit nor a counter summit, but rather a fundamental actor for Rio+20.”
The Agenda Shift
The agenda shift from the original Eco-92 gathering in Rio (1992), i.e. “global warming” to “climate change” to “environmental justice” to “social justice” happened slowly, but it was a long-term goal by its ideologists all along. By now it’s all about “social justice” with “collectives” that will tell you what you want or should do. The former buzz words ‘environment’ and ‘climate change’ have disappeared too. While “biodiversity” is still a valid buzz word, the fact that habitat loss is its major enemy is not mentioned, or understood.
Moreover, with the previously touted “Global Warming” scare, supposedly due to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, rapidly being exposed as the greatest scientific hoax since “Piltdown Man” certainly does not help its cause either. However, the new deity, “social justice” also comes with its own set of conundrums.
Social Justice
Social justice is in the eye of the beholder. It will have entirely different meanings for a well-to-do metropolitan-type city dweller compared to a subsistence farmer in the middle of anywhere. For the former, reliable on-demand electric power, 24/7, is an accustomed and vital necessity. For the subsistence farmer, having ANY power, other than his own, is progress already.
Not surprisingly then, what was previously seen as “green”, such as renewable energy from hydro-electric power plants (all of which need water-level-raising dams) are no longer all that “green.” The Rio+20 summit had a variety of protests against new hydro-electric power dams [4].
In the end, it all boils down to a simple question: What would you rather have, the subsistence lifestyle of the peasant farmer or the conveniences of the modern city dweller? The answer is obvious from a simple fact:
The majority of the 45,000 activists attending Rio+20 had not gone there by dug-out canoe!
[1] [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/rio-20-earth-summit-diary-21-june?newsfeed=true]http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/rio-20-earth-summit-diary-21-june?newsfeed=true[/url]
[2] [url=http://blackkettle.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/ord-monckton-rio20-hypocrisy-and-uneco-fascist-psychological-warfare-against-children/]http://blackkettle.wordpress.com/2012/06/23/ord-monckton-rio20-hypocrisy-and-uneco-fascist-psychological-warfare-against-children/[/url]
[3] [url=http://rio20.net/en/]http://rio20.net/en/[/url]
[4] [url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/06/15/as-rio20-gets-underway-brazils-pandora-dam-swarmed-by-activists/]http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2012/06/15/as-rio20-gets-underway-brazils-pandora-dam-swarmed-by-activists/[/url]
