U.N. Gets in Bed with “Mother Earth”

The United Nations has long been an institution of little true value; serving largely to spread statist ideals around the world, and which purports to act as the arbitrator of legitimacy in international affairs, despite its many scandals and failures. It is hard to foresee a scenario that would increase the worthlessness of this organization, but a recent proposal may do just that.

Bolivia, led by leftist President Evo Morales, and other socialist nations are pushing a treaty that would afford “Mother Earth” the same rights as humans. This proposal actually will be seriously considered by the UN; which two years ago encouraged such nonsense by passing a resolution establishing April 22nd as “International Mother Earth Day.”

According to an article at Canada.com, the treaty would give the Earth “a series of specific rights that include rights to life, water and clean air; the right to repair livelihoods affected by human activities; and the right to be free from pollution.”

Morales’ obsession with “Mother Earth” apparently stems also from a belief held by the Aymara, a native ethnic group in Bolivia – a heritage he claims. In fact, the South American country is currently pushing through a domestic law, called the “Law of the Rights of Mother Earth,” which gives those rights to insects and trees. Ecuador has joined this bizarre movement by enacting a similar law and incorporating it in its Constitution.

The US-based Pachamama Alliance, which boasts controversial former Obama Administration official Van Jones on its board and is headquartered in San Francisco, is one of the organizations responsible for pushing this initiative through the Global Alliance for the Right of Nature (GARN). According to its website, the movement behind this treaty is, “about balancing what is good for human beings against what is good for other species, what is good for the planet as a world. It is the holistic recognition that all life, all ecosystems on our planet are deeply intertwined.” The movement, in true collectivist fashion, denigrates the basis of economic liberty by claiming that laws recognizing property rights “actually legalize environmental harm.”

“Green” proposals such as this one frequently are offered in the context of harmless, feel-good rhetoric; stressing that well-meaning individuals or countries are simply trying to encourage conservation and bring recognition to global warming. But as Christopher Horner, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism, notes, proposals such as this may sound well-intentioned and appear “green on the outside,” but in reality are “red to the core.” Morales has closely aligned himself with dictators like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. Castro even penned a letter encouraging Morales to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for enacting socialist policies. The Bolivian leader’s true agenda was made clear when he stated that the “central enemy of Mother Earth is capitalism.”

Of course, this is just the latest in the outright bizarre views that have become common fodder for many environmentalists; including some who call for extreme population control measures, such as a worldwide one-child policy. These are the same people who admire dictators and mass murderers like Che Guevara and Castro. However, as Michael Prell notes in The Hill, “[t]hese anti-human humans make an important distinction: they do not think that all life should be reduced on Planet Earth, just the lives of Earth’s most powerful creatures—human beings. Why? So that less powerful life forms, like plants, animals and even ‘killer viruses’ might thrive.”

There is no question we need to protect our environment and guard against pollution. However, this can be accomplished through reasonable measures consistent with free-market principles; and without enacting downright silly treaties or costly, job-killing legislation.

If the UN proceeds with this “Mother Earth” absurdity, it will be simply another notch on its all too familiar, anti-capitalist and anti-American agenda.

by Bob Barr — The Barr Code

26 comments Add your comment

Karl Marx

May 16th, 2011
6:41 am

Why are we still supporting the UN? Isn’t it time it went the way of the failed League of Nations?

Mark

May 16th, 2011
7:10 am

Im sorry Bob, but i have to voice an appreciation of what they’re trying to accomplish. The whole Capitalism vs. Socialism debate is over. Obviously Capitalism makes for a stronger economy, which is why you love it so much; however, Capitalism is horrible for society as a whole and anyone or anything that doesn’t explicitly make money. While Socialism as a government doesn’t work due to human nature, the principle behind it is equality. The principle behind it is not allowing ruthless jerks sans consciences to exploit everyone and everything around them just because of greed. Therefore, trying to create an egalitarian world is not bad in and of itself, it merely depends on the means by which you do so. Thus a world body that does not have the authority in and of itself to force compliance, but is attempting to use influence to encourage our species to stop being so self-destructive, doesn’t seem like such a bad thing, at least to me.

Proletariat Prose

May 16th, 2011
7:31 am

“There is no question we need to protect our environment and guard against pollution. However, this can be accomplished through reasonable measures consistent with free-market principles; and without enacting downright silly treaties or costly, job-killing legislation. ”

This can be accomplished how? In a manner that hasn’t been discovered? But in which you dismiss as “reasonable measures?” You know, until now, I was only kidding about you being an idiot.

Pollution is unstoppable, unavoidable, and a growing threat to our future. But enter the uber-omsbudsman, Bob Barr, with a simple turn of the phrase, he’ll introduce, “reasonable measures” and solve the whole thing.

Idiot, people? Come on. Be honest. Idiot? (Yes? No?) Vote yes or no. But vote. You can’t expose a fool without voting.

carlosgvv

May 16th, 2011
8:21 am

Another way to describe Mother Earth is to use the word Nature. We humans are sujbect to the laws of Nature just as much as the Bears, Birds and Trees. If we keep ignoring Nature and keep poluting the air and water then Nature will stkike back. And, Nature can be VERY cruel.

carlosgvv

May 16th, 2011
8:22 am

Mark

I agree with everything you said. Unfortunately, what it really means is that we humans are not able to properly govern ourselves.

carlosgvv

May 16th, 2011
8:25 am

Another word for Mother Earth is Nature. We humans are subject to the same laws of Nature as the Bears, Birds and Trees. If we keep poluting the air and water then Nature will strike back. And, Nature can be VERY cruel.

Sanjay

May 16th, 2011
8:58 am

It is also worth noting that economic liberty should not be seen as the only valuable thing that is worth preserving. If all we focus is on that, we will inevitably sacrifice other liberties and values.

Chip in N GA

May 16th, 2011
9:07 am

Would someone please remind me again why we are sending billions of dollars to this hilariously pathetic and useless organization?

Oh, I remember — so useless American liberals can claim, with silly phony moral righteousness, that they support the “global progressive vision.”

I humbly submit that organizations such as the UN, along with the “progressive” attitudes entrenched there, are luxuries of an abundant civilization that such civilization, under current duress, can no longer afford. Cut them loose.

Mr. Spock

May 16th, 2011
9:30 am

The only logical purpose for the existence of the United Nations is to have a unified representative of the planet Earth to negotiate with aliens when they arrive. They should adjourn until that time.

Proletariat Prose

May 16th, 2011
9:38 am

The unspoken truth is that the planet heals itself, even if that means destroying all life on it’s surface. It’s just Mother Earth’s way. The planet can’t do anything that’s not “planet-like”. Just like an ant can’t do anything that’s not “ant-like”. Like have you ever been staked to a fire-ant hill by crazed Injuns?

Not Pretty.

‘muff said.

luangtom

May 16th, 2011
9:47 am

Time to de-fund the UN. The millions of dollars that we filter into its various programs can best be spent elsewhere. We have domestic programs in dire need of funding. What has the UN actually done for the USA in the past three decades? It is an impotent organization whose time has far been exceeded. Pull-out. All that it is now is a sounding-board for people like Qadaffhi, Chavez and others of their ilk. Pull-out.

DEA

May 16th, 2011
9:48 am

Mark,

Exactly how is capitalism “horrible” for society? You seem to forget (as all leftists do) your history: over the last century, the most murderous and destructive ideology has been socialism. The same people that think everyone needs to be made “equal”, often by force.

The Soviet Union, China, Germany, Vietnam, etc, etc, etc destroyed more life than any other system out there. They also happened to do far more damage to the environment, because their economic system was so pathetically awful and anti-competitive that they had nothing else to really sell.

freethinker

May 16th, 2011
10:17 am

Idiot, probably not. Ideologically bound, uncreative, and dedicated to an narrow zone of Washington consensus status quo, well, it seems yes. There are fundamental values that create different interpretations here. Rather that accuse someone of being greedy or committed or callous and unconcerned about the welfare of others or the planet, we need to start addressing the fundamental discrepancies in our worldviews. How is it that one person sees essential freedom as the right to use established concepts and laws regarding private property to increase capital earnings without restraint or outside restriction, and another regards such a thing as antagonistic to freedom, advocating democratically generated controls on economic systems as consistent with human liberty? These are the questions to ask. The answer may be as simple as the fact that some see an equal individual right to personal agency and input within the worlds affairs as inalienable, and independent of monetary or economic success, and others feel that each person should merely be protected on a fair playing field, where the comparative advantage generated on said field is in itself fair, as long as it was fairly gained. Or maybe (definitely) there’s a lot more to it than that. What do you all think?

onpatroll

May 16th, 2011
10:57 am

they do not think that all life should be reduced on Planet Earth, just the lives of Earth’s most powerful creatures—human beings. Why? So that less powerful life forms, like plants, animals and even ‘killer viruses’ might thrive.”

The lower the human population the lower the virus population. scare tactics. Canada is socialist. China is communist. You do know the difference? We will not have to reduce the human population, the planet will do it for us and it will be scary (famine, water shortages, and disease). Look at the human population growth from the beginning of the industrial revolution until now. That enormous peak will come crashing down at some point. inevitable. Just like the economy, constant human population growth can not be sustained.

Darwin

May 16th, 2011
11:57 am

Without UN resolutions, how would the U.S. justify invading oil rich Arab nations?

Peter

May 16th, 2011
4:38 pm

Seems like the American Corporation, and it’s ability to get rich, and destroy the earth all at the same time without a care is to blame.

Peter

May 16th, 2011
4:39 pm

Darwin…… Bush was going to invade because of the oil, and the presentation at the UN was really only a baloney and lied filled dog and pony show !

Peter

May 16th, 2011
4:40 pm

By the way why is all in an up roar ? God will cleanse all……

[...] towards environmentalism.” He complains that the strict environmentalist agenda i more… UN Gets in Bed with “Mother Earth” – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) – blogs.ajc.com 05/16/2011 UN Gets in Bed with “Mother Earth”Atlanta Journal Constitution [...]

O'Really?

May 17th, 2011
6:42 am

“…controversial former Obama Administration official Van Jones…” and this characterization has exactly what to do with your position?

O'Really?

May 17th, 2011
6:44 am

Perhaps Mother Earth should become a corporation. Then the Supreme Court would grant it all the rights of people.

DeborahinAthens

May 17th, 2011
6:59 am

Why does it ruffle the feathers of right-wing ding-a-lings that some of us would like to have clean air and water? My nephew did a project in school when he was about ten and was so serious when he said that we were destroying the Earth by pumping pesticides into the ground and water and pollutants into the air (here in Athens, we have the worst pollution in GA because we live downwind of one of SoCo’s coal fired plants. Some days you can actually TASTE the air–nasty!). I told him that humans can’t destroy the Earth. We are certainly killing ourselves, and once we’re gone, the Earth will quickly rebalance itself and thrive. Anyone who has ever seen a re-discoverd city in the jungle “gets” it. When I was a child, I had never, ever heard of asthma. Now it is common. Don’t have to be a creationist to understand that.

Proletariat Prose

May 17th, 2011
9:27 am

Now you listen good, Debrahinathens, the only reason there’s more asthma today is because folks stopped giving castor oil to young’uns. Instead we give ‘em Ritalin, which ain’t no good no how. And just because a forest can bury an abandoned city don’t mean diddle dang squiddle poo. Kudzu has practically buried Atlanta as we speak, and there’s still folks up and about. Maybe if your own parents had given you castor oil, your mind would be clearer and you woulda seen the kudzu through the pollen. (achoo!)

Guess you’re right about the asthma.

Blog Soup

May 17th, 2011
11:52 am

Over at Tucker’s. She’s still beautiful. Over at Wooten’s, he’s still antebellum. Over at Galloway’s, the oatmeal is still lumpy. (bwa).

But over at Bookman’s, he’s still coddling point-scoring trolls like the face-plant-in-the-crotch, hair toothed, butt-kisser-magnet he truly is. His screened vision is so narrow that he never sees the larger point of any topic he chooses. All he wants is the squirmy, cross-eyed hacks who steal material from the other AJC blogs so his own blog appears to be elevated above the manure pile it truly is: the steaming pile of maggot poo that festoons the Bookman plot.

Oh, and he plots. Bookman is the worst case scenario for discussion dead-ends. Imagine tombstones as bookends, and you can envision the Bookman library. He hasn’t advanced a single discussion in his unearned career, ever since he fell in love with his delusional self-image. His blog stinks so bad that fish actually spoil early and then joust for the priveledge of being wrapped up in it .

But it’s not so much about the chum as it is about the chump.

Witness this: “As his backers are quick to point out, Cain is more than a radio talker. He enjoyed a successful corporate career, rising to CEO of Godfather’s Pizza and serving as chair of the Federal Reserve Board in Kansas City. While that’s impressive, politics and business are very different fields. Michael Jordan was the best basketball player in history, but as athletic as he was, he couldn’t hit a curve ball. At the top echelons of any endeavor, skill sets don’t transfer easily.”

Bookman invents a racist metaphor, and then follows it up with a nod to the conservative race-card parry, (unquoted): the supreme projection of a racist idiot who surrounds himself with racist idiot yesmen who together try to foil the other AJC blogs with ridiculous ripostes against the ungloved and unmasked commenters who write for truth, justice and the American way.

hey bookman trolls: stay on the fence. It suits you.

bwa

Soup of the blogs

May 17th, 2011
11:56 am

Over at Tucker’s. She’s still beautiful. Over at Wooten’s, he’s still antebellum. Over at Galloway’s, the oatmeal is still lumpy. (bwa).

But over at Bookman’s, he’s still coddling point-scoring trolls like the hair toothed, rear-kisser-magnet he truly is. His screened vision is so narrow that he never sees the larger point of any topic he chooses. All he wants is the squirmy, cross-eyed hacks who steal material from the other AJC blogs so his own blog appears to be elevated above the manure pile it truly is: the steaming pile of maggot poo that festoons the Bookman plot.

Oh, and he plots. Bookman is the worst case scenario for discussion dead-ends. Imagine tombstones as bookends, and you can envision the Bookman library. He hasn’t advanced a single discussion in his unearned career, ever since he fell in love with his delusional self-image. His blog stinks so bad that fish actually spoil early and then joust for the priveledge of being wrapped up in it .

But it’s not so much about the chum as it is about the chump.

Witness this: “As his backers are quick to point out, Cain is more than a radio talker. He enjoyed a successful corporate career, rising to CEO of Godfather’s Pizza and serving as chair of the Federal Reserve Board in Kansas City. While that’s impressive, politics and business are very different fields. Michael Jordan was the best basketball player in history, but as athletic as he was, he couldn’t hit a curve ball. At the top echelons of any endeavor, skill sets don’t transfer easily.”

Bookman invents a racist metaphor, and then follows it up with a nod to the conservative race-card parry, (unquoted): the supreme projection of a racist idiot who surrounds himself with racist idiot yesmen who together try to foil the other AJC blogs with ridiculous ripostes against the ungloved and unmasked commenters who write for truth, justice and the American way.

hey bookman trolls: stay on the fence. It suits you.

bwa

Ben Zambrana

May 17th, 2011
4:15 pm

Bob Barr should keep on walking straight ahead and fall off the edge of Mother Earth down the polluted
abbis which he and his kind create.